Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

May 14, 2013 - 8:09 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

Former UN Ambassador Thomas Pickering, who led the State Department’s Accountability Review Board investigating the Benghazi attack, said his interest is piqued by new information in the case but in the same breath said he’s seen nothing to alter his conclusions.

When asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer yesterday what he might have done differently in the review, Pickering called it “a very interesting question.”

“I hadn’t thought about it from that perspective,” he added.

“What I have been hearing is the promises of new startling developments. What I have been seeing is some of the questions we have reviewed. I’m very open to the idea that nobody can do in two months the absolutely perfect job, that nothing new will arise,” Pickering said.

“So far, I have, with all honesty, not seen any development related to the report and the mandated scope, which is in the law of that report, essentially, the security focus of the report, that would cause me to change my view on the conclusions we reached or the recommendations we made.”

When asked why then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was never interviewed on the report, Pickering said “we felt we had fully developed the answer to the question of where the decisions were made, where the failures and performance had taken place, where those decisions were reviewed.”

“And they did not touch on her,” he added.

“Now, with hindsight, don’t you think it would have been important to ask her about that conversation and other decisions she made that night? Because she was intimately involved,” Blitzer asked.

“We did. We did. We interviewed the senior staff members…”

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I suspect that the answer to the question "But why not her?" is "Because she told me not to".
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well at least Pickering didn't need to come out and admit there was any conflict of interest with his appointment to the board by his boss Hillary. He just let his pathetic answers to Wolf's questions get the point across just fine.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
In a rigged report, based upon intentional falsehoods and designed to be misleading...the fact that nothing would change after the lies and deceit are uncovered...is hardly surprising.

Of course not. That's the whole point of the whitewash/coverup in the first place.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (20)
All Comments   (20)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
As long as we argue about whether what happened in Ben-Ghazi was a terrorist attack or a demonstration against a video, we won't think that what happened was a kidnapping gone awry.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
If Pickering interviewed Gregory Hicks, then Pickering must have been informed about the 2 a.m. (Libya time) phone call between Hicks and Hillary. In that call, Hicks informed Hillary that Stevens had repeatedly called him (on someone's phone other than Stevens's) and that when Hicks eventually picked up the call, Stevens reported he was under attack and that it had happened quite suddenly. Yet, certainly Pickering was also aware that at the Transfer of Remains ceremony, Hillary characterized the attack as a protest related to the internet video and she promised the grieving loved ones of the dead that the administration would pursue its maker.

How can Pickering have thought he could resolve that disconnect from the truth without interviewing Hillary?

What exactly was the SCOPE of the Accountability Review Board's work?
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Pickering is a coward.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Look Wolf, I was hired to investigate, not ask a lot of questions! Can I go now?
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Pickering himself - like so many involved - is "a legend in his own mind." These people are above the law and certainly above the clearest of thinkers. How dare we question their integrity? Wolf actually asked some very revealing questions ... amazing!
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
"But what difference, at this point, does it make?!?!" - H. Clinton
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Thanks, I mean that....it just about sums up my disgust with the whole of this faux and very, very attitudinal "administration".

"Attitudinal" is applied here because a smarta-s "attitude" of these affirmative-actioned ill-equipped folks is all that they have indicated. It's all they are equipped to indicate. It's literally all they have.

This "Yes! I! Can!" thing started with Michelle grandstanding in a White House mammoth airplane loaded with her claque on a junket across to Spain. "Cool! Idea! Marbella!" .....Practically the hour after her husband was sworn in.

The Spaniards must've been rolling their eyes....."Now, what do we do with her?" Our career embassy people in Madrid must've thought,
"Why us?..why Spain?"

The really alarming thought behind all of this immediately attention getting "press" and "exposure"...no pun intended, but go ahead and apply it anyway....is that the Obama Circus was enabled by our new demographic revolutionistas who although ill-educated, are in fact the new majority of the revenge-seeking voters.

These new majority voters are only interested in "stickin' it to th' Man.", and their next entitlement checks.

So, here we are.....Holder, the ABC News people, Benghazi, Janet Napolitano, Valerie Jarrett, Susan Rice, .......and and a very, very agitated Miss Hillary. And, the circular Pickering adroitly evading those thrusting questions from Blitzer. "Blitz", indeed not.

I've lived through a lot of administrations....I've never seen anything quite like this. And, it ain't over yet.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
What angers me the most is she is being protected because they want her to run for president in 2016, provided the divider in chief hasn't figured out a way to circumvent the 22nd amendment. I'm sure the koolaid drinking, low information lemmings will vote for her because they are enjoying the current level of euphoria from this administration.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
“Well, if we had started down that line, where would it have ended?” Pickering asked.

If there was nothing new to be learned, then there should have been no problem. The only real reason not to involve the Secretary of State, for something this important, is because you're afraid -- afraid of what you'll find out, afraid the story will unravel around you, afraid the Clintons will land on you like a ton of bricks.

Four of her employees were murdered, on her watch, because they didn't have the security they begged her for. Let's not lose sight of that.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
I suspect that the answer to the question "But why not her?" is "Because she told me not to".
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well at least Pickering didn't need to come out and admit there was any conflict of interest with his appointment to the board by his boss Hillary. He just let his pathetic answers to Wolf's questions get the point across just fine.
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
PREJUDICE prej•u•dice [prej-uh-dis] noun,
Any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.

Ambassador Thomas Pickering is a prejudiced man.

He had a long career. It's too bad he chose to flush that down the toilet with a transparently political hack job. He and Admiral Mullen could have shown the same balls as DCM Hicks. They declined.

And why? Both had retired well. They didn't need to grub for their next meal or to put their kids through college. They knew their duty and they could have done it. Instead they chose a smarmy kiss-up to a political harridan. Are invitations to cocktail parties really that damn important?
49 weeks ago
49 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All