How come even Fox News missed the obvious set-up CNN’s Candy Crowley had pre-planned to ambush Mitt Romney?
If you will recall the last presidential debate, when Mitt Romney challenged Barack Obama over Obama’s new claim to have branded the attack on our Libyan embassy as, “terror”, immediately, Obama looked right at Candy Crowley and told her to read the transcript. That transcript included a non-specific reference to terrorism Obama made in a speech in the Rose Garden on 9/12/12.
Now here’s the question of the day: How is it that Barack Obama knew Candy Crowley had that transcript handy — right on her desk??
By now we all know Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times compared to 9 interruptions of Obama, and that she allowed Obama to speak about 5 minutes more than Romney was allowed, but this obvious set-up climbs right over the top. What the hell is a so-called unbiased moderator doing with a transcript in the first place? The moderator is supposed to moderate the debate and nothing more. The only people entitled to have transcripts handy were the two debaters, and not the moderator. So here’s the question repeated: How did Barack Obama KNOW Candy Crowley had a copy of that transcript on her desk? Why did Candy Crowley have that transcript so very handy to help Obama rebut Mitt Romney when the question came up if that specific transcript had not been provided her? Who stood to benefit? It certainly was not Romney!
The fact that Crowley had that transcript and used it should be grounds for Crowley’s immediate firing from CNN and her being banned from ever moderating another debate. Obviously, Romney had no clue Crowley had that transcript because he was completely stunned and momentarily lost his grasp of words when she produced it. But did it surprise Obama? Not at all. In fact, you can clearly hear Obama tell Crowley to read the transcript he KNEW she had on her desk. That’s a tag-team, folks. That was a deliberate set-up, and Fox is particularly negligent for having missed it.
If Candy Crowley faced trial for her complicity in that debate, there is no way a jury would find her innocent. It was an ambush, and not even a good ambush, because the transcript clearly showed Obama was talking about general terror threats when he mentioned terror in his speech, and certainly not a specific, direct reference to the attack and murders committed in Libya. As Fox did point out, if Obama was so convinced on September 12th that it was a planned terror attack, why did Obama’s little liar Rice subsequently go on five television shows insisting it was a protest that got out of hand over an anti-Muslim video? Why did White House spokesman Jay Carney repeat the same bold-faced lie during a news conference? We now know there was NO protest or crowd milling around the embassy prior to the attack, and the attack itself was revealed in real time video to our intelligence community who certainly passed that information via the State Department to the White House and Obama himself.
Now President Obama claims he’ll find the perpetrators and punish them, as if that somehow makes up for the intentional lack of security that directly led to the deaths of four American embassy personnel including the ambassador himself.
Those lives should never have been lost in the first place.
Carl F. Worden
Southern Oregon Militia
October 18, 2012