Ben Rhodes admits Iran Deal willful Deception
He admits he sold the false story to reporters and straw maned them, and now he is getting grilled by the Senate and refuses to go before the Senate to testify on his lies. And now they are calling for his job.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/congressmen-demand-obama-fire-top-aide-iran-deal-deception/
The liberal utopia they tried to pull on us is built on a lie.
As Vox explained last week, “Conservative media has enthusiastically embraced a handful of sensational lines from a New York Times article as proof of Obama’s duplicity, while stories in the Atlantic, Mother Jones, Politico, New York Magazine, and Slate have sliced and diced it as riddled with errors.”
Nevertheless, conservatives got themselves so worked up about this that the House Oversight Committee actually held a hearing yesterday to investigate the New York Times article. As Politico noted, the hearing didn’t go as well as Republicans hoped.
House Republicans are convinced the White House used bogus information to spin reporters, push bogus narratives, and sell the country on a misguided policy in the Middle East. And to that end, Jason Chaffetz and his Republican committee colleagues invited John Hannah to offer expert testimony.
As deputy national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, John Hannah passed false information about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction that was used to justify the invasion. He also played a key role in writing a speech that Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered in making a case for war to the United Nations, which Powell has since said will be a permanent ‘blot’ on his record.
Elijah Cummings, the committee’s ranking member, declared, “If our goal is to hear from an expert who actually promoted false White House narratives, then I think you picked the right person. This committee has basically created its own Republican echo chambe. That is not just ironic, it’s hypocritical.”
As Vox explained last week
Not to mention, you didn't even bother responding to what TI was saying (strange because this has never been hard for anyone). Rhodes DID admit lying to the public to make the Iran deal more attractive. This part is a fact.
http://nypost.com/2016/05/05/playing-the-press-and-the-public-for-chumps-to-sell-the-iran-deal/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/17/editorial-ben-rhodes-must-account-for-lies-about-i/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/6/l-todd-wood-obama-adviser-admits-lying-media-seal-/
Trying to find none right wing sources for this.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/09/politics/ben-rhodes-iran-deal/
He definitely tries to justify it in the CNN piece.
Originally posted by MS Warehouse
http://nypost.com/2016/05/05/playing-the-press-and-the-public-for-chumps-to-sell-the-iran-deal/http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/17/editorial-ben-rhodes-must-account-for-lies-about-i/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/6/l-todd-wood-obama-adviser-admits-lying-media-seal-/
Trying to find none right wing sources for this.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/09/politics/ben-rhodes-iran-deal/
He definitely tries to justify it in the CNN piece.
None of these state that Rhodes admitted that he lied.
Originally posted by Bardock42
None of these state that Rhodes admitted that he lied.
The very first paragraph
Ben Rhodes, President Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications, is highlighted in a recent piece by the New York Times which quotes Rhodes as admitting the Obama administration lied to the American people, Congress, and our allies in how they “spun” the Iran deal.
Third Paragraph of the 2nd WashingtonTimes link
Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser at the White House, tells how he led the White House campaign to mislead — i.e., lie to — Congress and the public about the negotiations to reach President Obama’s nuclear deal with the mullahs in Iran. Mr. Rhodes on Monday night declined an invitation to testify to the House Oversight Committee.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
As Vox explained last week, “Conservative media has enthusiastically embraced a handful of sensational lines from a New York Times article as proof of Obama’s duplicity, while stories in the Atlantic, Mother Jones, Politico, New York Magazine, and Slate have sliced and diced it as riddled with errors.”Nevertheless, conservatives got themselves so worked up about this that the House Oversight Committee actually held a hearing yesterday to investigate the New York Times article. As Politico noted, the hearing didn’t go as well as Republicans hoped.
House Republicans are convinced the White House used bogus information to spin reporters, push bogus narratives, and sell the country on a misguided policy in the Middle East. And to that end, Jason Chaffetz and his Republican committee colleagues invited John Hannah to offer expert testimony.
As deputy national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, John Hannah passed false information about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction that was used to justify the invasion. He also played a key role in writing a speech that Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered in making a case for war to the United Nations, which Powell has since said will be a permanent ‘blot’ on his record.
Elijah Cummings, the committee’s ranking member, declared, “If our goal is to hear from an expert who actually promoted false White House narratives, then I think you picked the right person. This committee has basically created its own Republican echo chambe. That is not just ironic, it’s hypocritical.”
After the shit they just pulled with Trump I definitely do not trust the NY Times at all.
Yes, I get that the articles change his statement into saying he lied. But there's no quoted or anything provided besides the opinion and redefining of "spin" to support that. So I'm sorry, but your claim that Ben Rhodes admitted that he lied is blatantly false. And he states the exact opposite on direct quotes.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, I get that the articles change his statement into saying he lied. But there's no quoted or anything provided besides the opinion and redefining of "spin" to support that. So I'm sorry, but your claim that Ben Rhodes admitted that he lied is blatantly false. And he states the exact opposite on direct quotes.
My claim that he lied is not blatantly false. It's not even close to that. DO you know what blatantly false is? According to multiple non right wing articles, he lied to the public. Now all of a sudden, the articles changed his statement? I think you're being intellectually dishonest here, and you definitely wouldn't afford this much latitude if it was a republican in question.
Originally posted by MS Warehouse
My claim that he lied is not blatantly false. It's not even close to that. DO you know what blatantly false is? According to multiple non right wing articles, he lied to the public. Now all of a sudden, the articles changed his statement? I think you're being intellectually dishonest here, and you definitely wouldn't afford this much latitude if it was a republican in question.
Even when the person admits they were lying the idiots here say "no he wasn't lying cause I said he wasn't."
Maybe this is in clearer English.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/5526/obama-administration-admits-they-lied-about-iran-ben-shapiro
I think you are being dishonest due to your conservative bias. He said very clearly he did not lie and everything they published is what they truly believed.
Basically the right wing is smearing him for doing PR. Which is ludicrous, and that you don't have the backbone to admit that this is another partisan witch hunt by Republicans is very telling.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
As Vox explained last week, “Conservative media has enthusiastically embraced a handful of sensational lines from a New York Times article as proof of Obama’s duplicity, while stories in the Atlantic, Mother Jones, Politico, New York Magazine, and Slate have sliced and diced it as riddled with errors.”Nevertheless, conservatives got themselves so worked up about this that the House Oversight Committee actually held a hearing yesterday to investigate the New York Times article. As Politico noted, the hearing didn’t go as well as Republicans hoped.
House Republicans are convinced the White House used bogus information to spin reporters, push bogus narratives, and sell the country on a misguided policy in the Middle East. And to that end, Jason Chaffetz and his Republican committee colleagues invited John Hannah to offer expert testimony.
As deputy national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, John Hannah passed false information about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction that was used to justify the invasion. He also played a key role in writing a speech that Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered in making a case for war to the United Nations, which Powell has since said will be a permanent ‘blot’ on his record.
Elijah Cummings, the committee’s ranking member, declared, “If our goal is to hear from an expert who actually promoted false White House narratives, then I think you picked the right person. This committee has basically created its own Republican echo chambe. That is not just ironic, it’s hypocritical.”
So you post from far far left sources to counter a more center left source like the WP?
Sorry wont work.
WP>VOX
I think you are being dishonest due to your conservative bias. He said very clearly he did not lie and everything they published is what they truly believed.
Basically the right wing is smearing him for doing PR. Which is ludicrous, and that you don't have the backbone to admit that this is another partisan witch hunt by Republicans is very telling.
Originally posted by Bardock42
None of these state that Rhodes admitted that he lied.
As usual you cant be taken more serious then a common troll.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/gop-lawmakers-call-top-white-house-adviser-ben/story?id=39167616
Originally posted by MS Warehouse
Hold on, all of a sudden you're accusing me of bias? You then basically said "well he said he didn't lie so that's that"? That's pretty hypocritical since you just showed a liberal bias. And if we're going to be accusing each other of bias, there's no point in any discussions.Yea honestly this is incredibly poor liberal biased rationalization. I don't have a dog in this race, you apparently do.
Yes, you said he admitted he lied, so showing that not only did he not admit it he is claiming the exact opposite is perfectly sufficient to put your lie to rest.
It's pathetic that you have basically turned into a slightly more articulate version of TI. Try to look at things more objectively, like you like to claim that you do.
Yes, you said he admitted he lied, so showing that not only did he not admit it he is claiming the exact opposite is perfectly sufficient to put your lie to rest.
It's pathetic that you have basically turned into a slightly more articulate version of TI. Try to look at things more objectively, like you like to claim that you do.
Ok, so in aggregate, he admitted to creating an "echo chamber" and putting a "spin" on something, both perfectly normal things that politicians of all parties everywhere do. Basically standard Public Relations work. And in this case, because Republicans are babies, they decided to pretend that is equivalent to lying, and you play along due to party affiliation. Got it.