What They Are Saying

ROMNEY HAS BETTER VISION FOR THE COUNTRY THAN OBAMA

CBS’s Charlie Kaye: “In the @CBSNews Instant Poll, 65% say Romney won on the issue of the economy. 34% say Obama won on the economy.” (Charlie Kaye, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “Look at this. 58%, 58% of debate watchers say Romney would better handle the economy, 40% say President Obama would. That’s issue number one.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/17/12)

• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “59% say Romney would do a better job on the deficit, 36% say President Obama would do a better job on the deficit.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/17/12)

• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “We also asked who would better handle the issue of taxes. 51% say Romney. 44% say president Obama.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/17/12)

• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “49% say Romney would better handle health care, compared to 46% for president Obama. 49-46.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/17/12)

• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “We also asked who seemed to be a stronger leader. 49% said Governor Romney, compared to 46% for President Obama.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/16/12)

• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “We also asked who spent more time attacking his opponent. 49% said President Obama. 35% said Governor Romney.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/16/12)

• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “45% say Romney answered the questions more directly, compared to 43% for President Obama.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/16/12)

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review’s Salena Zito: “I’m sorry but all day every reporter was talking about the Obama Team saying Obama would talk about his vision. Yet not once, not once did he.” (Salena Zito, Twitter Feed, 10/17/12)

CNBC’s Larry Kudlow: “You know I still don’t know what President Obama’s economic growth vision is, I don’t think he outlined it. You know I think Obama was a pretty good counterpuncher tonight. He had a lot more energy going, there’s no question about that. Both these guys had a lot of energy going but at the end of the day, I still don’t know what the president is intending if he’s reelected. I don’t think he made the case. I don’t think he provided a vision. I think he was mostly a counterpuncher and Mitt Romney wouldn’t let him have the counterpunch without the counter-counterpunch. So in that sense it’s a push but I still don’t see what the Obama case is for reelection. I just don’t see it; I didn’t hear it from him.” (CNBC, 10/16/12)

OBAMA’S DEBATE DEMEANOR NOTED

CNN’s Piers Morgan: “Obama’s new aggression may be over-played. I don’t think women voters, in particular, like this kind of thing.” (Piers Morgan, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

NBC’s Chuck Todd: “While that Q was a gift to Obama; Romney playing his best card on this front; his record on appointing women is impressive.” (Chuck Todd, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

NBC’s Chuck Todd: “But I would say the president was also pretty aggressive trying to run over Candy at times.” (MSNBC, 10/16/12)

CNN Situation Room: “Undecided voters didn’t like it when Obama interrupted Romney.” (The Situation Room, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

The Associated Press’ Ben Feller: “Fighting For His Political Life, President Barack Obama Re-Emerged In Blistering Form In An Interruption-Filled Debate Rematch, Trying To Diminish Mitt Romney’s Rising Stature By Accusing Him Of Dishonesty And Extremism.” (Ben Feller, “Analysis: In Blistering Form, Obama Rebounds,” The Associated Press, 10/16/12)

Reno Gazette-Journal’s Ray Hagar: “Obama sometimes comes off as an egotistical university professor.” (Ray Hager, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

Focus Group Mostly Made Up Of Former Obama Voters Praise Mitt Romney’s Debate Performance. FOX NEWS’ FRANK LUNTZ: “I want to know a word or phrase to describe Mitt Romney’s performance tonight.” VOTER: “Forceful, compassionate, presidential.” VOTER:”Confident and realistic.” VOTER: “Presidential.” VOTER:”Presidential and enthusiastic.” VOTER: “Our next president.” VOTER: “Knowledgeable and sincere.” VOTER: “Dynamo, winner.” (Fox News, 10/16/12)

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review’s Salena Zito: “Obama goes for the long long long long answer and he lost folks on lack of end of sentences[sic].” (Salena Zito, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

OBAMA GOT HIS FACTS WRONG AND IGNORED HIS OWN RECORD

Coal

Forbes’ John Dobosz: “Obama Had A Perfect Opportunity To Whip Out An Iphone And Ask Siri For Annual U.S. Coal Production, But That Would Not Have Helped His Case.” “Romney does have a case that coal production is in retreat. Obama had a perfect opportunity to whip out an iPhone and ask Siri for annual U.S. coal production, but that would not have helped his case. EIA figures show annual U.S. coal production in 2008 of 1.171 billion short tons, declining during Obama’s term to 1.095 billion tons in 2011.” (John Dobosz, “Romney Hits Obama With Dead Birds And Cheating China, President Pokes Back On Taxes,” Forbes, 10/16/12)

Budget And Deficits

The Detroit News’ Nolan Finley: “Obama hasn’t passed a budget in four years. That’s not leadership.” (Nolan Finley, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

New Hampshire Union Leader’s Drew Cline: “Obama: ‘If we’re serious about reducing the deficit…’ says the president who gave us four $1 trillion deficits in a row.” (Drew Cline, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

OBAMA STILL DODGED ON LIBYA

The Washington Post‘s Fact Checker: Obama “Did Not Say ‘Terrorism’-And It Took The Administration Days To Concede That That [sic] It An ‘Act Of Terrorism’ That Appears Unrelated To Initial Reports Of Anger At A Video That Defamed The Prophet Muhammad.” “What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ‘No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,’ he said. But he did not say ‘terrorism’-and it took the administration days to concede that that it an ‘act of terrorism’ that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Libya Attack,” The Washington Post‘s Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

Politico‘s Mike Allen: In The Rose Garden, Obama Said “Very Generally, We Will Not Let Acts Of Terror Go Unpunished.” POLITICO’s MIKE ALLEN: “There’s going to be a bunch of fact checks, but just to do a fact check here. When Governor Romney said that Obama had been slow in calling the Libya attack terrorism and the President said ‘oh wait a minute, in the Rose Garden, the day after, I referred to an act of terror’, Candy Crowley stepped in and said that he was right. It’s actually arguable. And I’m looking at the transcript of that White House event the day after and he started by referring to them as selfless acts, which is casted very differently than the sort of very planned action that we now have. Later toward the end, he makes a reference to 9/11 and he says, very generally, we will not let acts of terror go unpunished. So that’s going to be an arguable point.” (Presidential Debate Wrap-Up, Politico Live, 10/16/12)

Politico’s Byron Tau: “Obama’s Debate Night Comments Are In Stark Contrast To The Official White House Line On The Benghazi Attack.” “Obama’s debate night comments are in stark contrast to the official White House line on the Benghazi attack. White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a recent press briefing that no one at the White House was notified about requests for additional security – and that those things were handled at a lower level.” (Byron Tau, “Obama: Hillary Clinton ‘Works For Me,’” Politico, 10/16/12)
 
NBC’s Chuck Todd: “I Think That The Increased Coverage Of It Will Still Cause Questions, Right, The President Didn’t Answer Why Was The Film Being Used To Still , As Part Of The Blame Of What Happened In Benghazi.” NBC’s CHUCK TODD: “There is some perverse good news for Romney on this Libya topic. I think that the increased coverage of it will still cause questions, right, the president didn’t answer why was the film being used to still, as part of the blame of what happened in Benghazi, number one, and number two, guess what, the third debate is foreign policy. Romney has an opportunity to clean up, frankly, his mess, in the next debate since that’s the topic area and my guess is we know what the first 15 minutes of the next debate is going to be. It’s going to be on a back-and-forth on Libya.” (PBS, 10/16/12)

The Washington Post’s Charles Lane: “This suggests O did not flatly call it terror attack on day after: A detailed timeline of Libya statementshttp://wapo.st/VKRtxO #debate” (Charles Line, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

New Hampshire Union Leader’s Drew Cline: “Obama’s completely dodged the question: Who refused Libya staff’s request for added security before 9/11?” (Drew Cline, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

Hartford Courant’s Rick Green: “O dodges Libya question. Ugly.” (Rick Green, Twitter Feed, 10/16/12)

The Washington Post’s Ed Rogers: “Also, Specifically Regarding Benghazi, The President Appears To Have Offered A New Take On What He Thought And Did Immediately After The Attacks. If The President Is Changing His Story Again, It Could Confirm That He Is Being Deceitful, And It Could Be Very Harmful. Everyone Will Be Watching This.” (Ed Rogers, “Obama Needed A Better Debate And He Had One,” The Washington Post, 10/16/12)

The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin: “On Libya, Obama Ducked On The Failure To Provide Security To Our People.” (Jennifer Rubin, “Romney Vs. Obama, Round Two,” The Washington Post, 10/16/12)

Fact Checking The Debate

THE CLAIM: Obama Gave A Misleading Response About His Reaction To The Terrorist Attack In Libya. OBAMA: “Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job. But she works for me. I’m the president. And I’m always responsible. And that’s why nobody is more interested in finding out exactly what happened than I did (sic). The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror. And I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime. And then a few days later, I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force Base and grieving with the families.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: The Washington Post ‘s Fact Checker: Obama Did Not Say “Terrorism” In The Rose Garden And “It Took The Administration Days To Concede That That It Was An ‘Act Of Terrorism’” Unrelated To The Video. “What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ‘No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,’ he said. But he did not say ‘terrorism’-and it took the administration days to concede that that it was an ‘act of terrorism’ that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Libya Attack,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: Politico ‘s Mike Allen: In The Rose Garden, Obama Said “Very Generally, We Will Not Let Acts Of Terror Go Unpunished.” POLITICO’s MIKE ALLEN: “There’s going to be a bunch of fact checks, but just to do a fact check here. When Governor Romney said that Obama had been slow in calling the Libya attack terrorism and the President said ‘oh wait a minute, in the Rose Garden, the day after, I referred to an act of terror’, Candy Crowley stepped in and said that he was right. It’s actually arguable. And I’m looking at the transcript of that White House event the day after and he started by referring to them as selfless acts, which is casted very differently than the sort of very planned action that we now have. Later toward the end, he makes a reference to 9/11 and he says, very generally, we will not let acts of terror go unpunished. So that’s going to be an arguable point.” (Presidential Debate Wrap-Up, Politico Live, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: In Obama’s Rose Garden Remarks, “He Did Not Explicitly Refer To The Benghazi Attack As An ‘Act Of Terror,’ Though He Did Use Those Words.” “Romney said during Tuesday night’s debate that it took 14 days for Obama to acknowledge that the attack was a terrorist attack, while Obama and CNN’s Candy Crowley agreed that Obama said so Sept. 12 in remarks in the Rose Garden. In those remarks, journalists noticed, he did not explicitly refer to the Benghazi attack as an ‘act of terror,’ though he did use those words. ‘No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,’ he said.” (Josh Rogin, “Obama Did Call Benghazi Attack ‘An Act Of Terror’ – In Colorado,” Foreign Policy ‘s The Cable, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: The Washington Post ‘s Fact Checker: “From Our Many Years Of Covering Diplomacy We Would Say There Is A World Of Difference” Between Acknowledging Terrorism And Referring To “Acts Of Terror.” “Note: we added this statement to the timeline after Josh Gerstein of Politico asserted that the phrasing ‘acts of terror’ showed Obama acknowledged ‘terrorism’ was behind the attack. From our many years of covering diplomacy we would say there is a world of difference, but readers can draw their own conclusions.” (Glenn Kessler, “From Video To Terrorist Attack: A Definitive Timeline Of Administration Statements On The Libya Attack,” The Washington Post ‘s Fact Checker, 9/27/12)

THE FACTS: CNN’s Candy Crowley Said Governor Romney Was “Right” That Obama Didn’t Call Libya A Terrorist Attack. CNN’s JOHN KING: “By misspeaking about exactly what the president said the day after, Governor Romney has now, he is in this fact check environment, this should be a problem for the president. This should not be a problem for what Governor Romney said in the debate. Because He was wrong about – the president did generically refer to an act of terror the day after. We are correcting – Candy corrected Governor Romney on the spot. And so we are having a question. What did Governor Romney say as opposed to what did the administration do. So Governor Romney’s choice of words there was a poor one. So he’s being fact checked, and that takes something away from him. I would make this argument. This is going to be done in studios like this in Washington and New York and we’re going to talk about it. Our undecided voters out there in the country and lots of undecided voters in the battleground states that are going to make their decisions based on what happened in Libya or based on who they think is going to have a better economic plan. I vote the latter.” CNN’s ANDERSON COOPER: “I totally agree. I mean this is a murky situation. I think Candy had it right. Romney clearly got it wrong. On one fact, but there’s a bigger story. Surely we’re not going to spend a lot of time on trying to start or litigate. “Let’s bring in Candy, though. Candy, because this was a moment which obviously now both campaigns are going to be focusing on. Tell us your thoughts during that moment.” CNN’s CANDY CROWLEY: “Well, you know, again, I heard the president’s speech at the time. I sort of re-read a lot of stuff about Libya, because I knew we’d probably get a Libya question, so I kind of wanted to be up on it. So I knew that the president had said, you know, ‘these acts of terror won’t stand’ or whatever the whole quote was. And I think actually, because right after that, I did turn around and say but you are totally correct that they spent two weeks telling us that this was about a tape and that there was this riot outside the Benghazi consulate, which there wasn’t. So he was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word. They’re going to parse and we all know what the definition of ‘is’ is, but, you know, in the end, I think John’s probably right.” (CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/16/12)

• Click Here To Watch

THE FACTS: NBC’s Chuck Todd: “I Think That The Increased Coverage Of It Will Still Cause Questions, Right, The President Didn’t Answer Why Was The Film Being Used To Still , As Part Of The Blame Of What Happened In Benghazi.” NBC’s CHUCK TODD: “There is some perverse good news for Romney on this Libya topic. I think that the increased coverage of it will still cause questions, right, the president didn’t answer why was the film being used to still, as part of the blame of what happened in Benghazi, number one, and number two, guess what, the third debate is foreign policy. Romney has an opportunity to clean up, frankly, his mess, in the next debate since that’s the topic area and my guess is we know what the first 15 minutes of the next debate is going to be. It’s going to be on a back-and-forth on Libya.” (PBS, 10/16/12)

LIE #2: OBAMA DISTORTED ROMNEY’S POSITION ON THE AUTO BAILOUTS

THE CLAIM: Obama Attacks Romney Saying His Bankruptcy For Detroit Would Not Have Worked. OBAMA: “Candy, what Governor Romney said just isn’t true. You wanted to take them into bankruptcy without providing them any way to stay open. We would have lost a million jobs. Take the executives at GM and Chrysler, some of whom are republicans. They may even support Governor Romney. They will tell you that would not have worked.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: “Romney Called For A Managed Bankruptcy,” And “GM And Chrysler Did Go Through A Managed Bankruptcy.” “Although ‘bankrupt’ often conjures up images of liquidation, Romney called for a ‘managed bankruptcy.’ This is a process in which the company uses the bankruptcy code to discharge its debts, but emerges from the process a leaner, less leveraged company. Ultimately, along with getting nearly $80 billion in loans and other assistance from the Bush and Obama administrations, GM and Chrysler did go through a managed bankruptcy. (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Letting Detroit Go Bankrupt,” The Washington Post’s Fact Check, 10/16/12)

LIE #3: OBAMA RESURFACED FAUX WAR SAVINGS LIES

THE CLAIM: Obama Said “Let’s Take The Money That We’ve Been Spending On War Over The Last Decade To Rebuild America, Roads, Bridges, Schools.” OBAMA: “Let’s take the money that we’ve been spending on war over the last decade to rebuild America, roads, bridges, schools. We do those things, not only is your future going to be bright, but America’s future is going to be bright as well.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: “Using Money That Had Been Earmarked For Wars To Build Schools And Infrastructure Would Involve Even More Borrowing, Adding To The Federal Deficit.” “What Obama didn’t mention is that much of the money that has been paying for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was borrowed. In fact, the government borrows nearly 40 cents for every dollar it spends. Thus using money that had been earmarked for wars to build schools and infrastructure would involve even more borrowing, adding to the federal deficit.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Stumbles In Latest Presidential Debate,” The Associated Press, 10/16/12)

LIE #4: OBAMA LIED ABOUT ENERGY PRODUCTION ON HIS WATCH

THE CLAIM: Obama Touts The Highest Levels Of Energy Production From Oil And Gas In Years. OBAMA: “The most important thing we can do is to make sure we control our own energy. Here is what I have done since I was president, we have increased oil production to the highest levels in 16 years. Natural gas production is the highest it has been in decades. (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

• THE CLAIM: Obama Refuted The Claim That He Has Halved The Number Of Gas And Oil Permits On Federal Lands And Waters. ROMNEY: “As a matter of fact, oil production is down 14 percent this year on federal land, and gas production is down 9 percent. Why? Because the president cut in half the number of licenses and permits for drilling on federal lands and in federal waters.” OBAMA: “Candy, there’s no doubt that world demand’s gone up. But our production is going up, and we’re using oil more efficiently. And very little of what Governor Romney just said is true. We’ve opened up public lands. We’re actually drilling more on public lands than in the previous administration.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, NY, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: Contrary To President Obama’s Assertions, “Production Of Oil On Public Land Is Down 14 Percent And Production Of Gas On Public Land Is Down 9 Percent.” “Is Gov. Mitt Romney telling the truth when he says oil and gas production is down on public land? Contrary to President Obama’s assertions, Romney’s telling the truth when he says, ‘Production of oil on public land is down 14 percent and production of gas on public land is down 9 percent.’ That’s because energy production on federal lands is down compared to 2010, according to the Energy Information Administration.” (Juliet Eilperin, “The Truth About Oil And Gas Production On Public Land,” The Washington Post’ s Fact Check, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: ABC’s Jonathan Karl: “It Is True That Those Drilling Leases And Permits Are Down Under President Obama.” ABC’s JOHNATHAN KARL: “But on this issue of oil and gas drilling, Governor Romney said that oil and gas drilling is down by 50% on public lands. That is not exactly true but it’s not far off. In fact, we looked at the numbers and oil drilling permits on public land dropped by 37% in the first two years of the Obama administration, 42% in terms of leases for natural gas. So the numbers weren’t exactly right, but it is true that those drilling leases and permits are down under President Obama.” (ABC’s Presidential Debate Coverage, 10/16/12)

LIE #5: OBAMA LIED ABOUT MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUTS

THE CLAIM: Obama Said He Had Kept His Promise To Cut Taxes For Middle Class Families, And Had Cut Them By $3,600. OBAMA: “I said I would cut taxes for middle-class families. That is what I have done. By $3,600.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, NY, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: Obama “Makes It Sound Like It Is One Big Tax Cut. The $3,600 Figure Is Over Four Years.” “But he makes it sound like it is one big tax cut. The $3,600 figure is over four years – $800 in each of 2009 and 2010 due to the Making Work Pay tax credit and $1,000 in each of 2011 and 2012 due to a Social Security payroll tax cut.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s $3,600 Tax Credit,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: “The Making Work Pay Tax Credit Has Expired And Obama Has Not Promised To Extend The Payroll Tax Cut, Meaning That People’s Taxes Will Go Up Next Year.” “Obama makes it sounds as though workers got a $3,600 cut every year. But the Making Work Pay tax credit has expired and Obama has not promised to extend the payroll tax cut, meaning that people’s taxes will go up next year even if he succeeds in his effort to extend Bush-era tax cuts for those earning less than $250,000 a year.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s $3,600 Tax Credit,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

LIE #6: OBAMA CLAIMED GOVERNOR ROMNEY INVESTED IN COMPANIES THAT WERE PIONEERS OF OUTSOURCING

THE CLAIM: Obama: “Romney Invested In Companies That Were Pioneers Of Outsourcing.” OBAMA: “But when Governor Romney says that he has very different economic plan, the centerpiece of his economic plan are tax cuts. That’s what took us from surplus to deficit. When he talks about getting tough on China, keep in mind that Governor Romney invested in companies that were pioneers of outsourcing to China and is currently investing in countries — in — in companies that are building surveillance equipment for China to spy on its own folks.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: “Here, Obama Is Referencing An Article In The Washington Post That Has Been Frequently Exploited By His Campaign.” “Here, Obama is referencing an article in The Washington Post that has been frequently exploited by his campaign. The article used the word ‘pioneers’ but it does not say that transfers of U.S. jobs took place while Romney ran the private equity firm Bain Capital.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Pioneers Of Outsourcing,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: “One Of The President’s Campaign Ads Attacking Romney On Outsourcing Earned Four Pinocchios.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Pioneers Of Outsourcing,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: Obama “Has Not Been Able To Fulfill Many Of His Campaign Promises In 2008 To Stem The Outflow Of American Jobs To Other Countries.” “Obama never mentions another Washington Post article, one that detailed how he has not been able to fulfill many of his campaign promises in 2008 to stem the outflow of American jobs to other countries.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Pioneers Of Outsourcing,” The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker, 10/16/12)

LIE #7: OBAMA CLAIMED HE CAN CUT THE DEFICIT BY HIKING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY

THE CLAIM: Obama Claimed That “We’ve Got To Make Sure That The Wealthy Do A Little Bit More” To Make Sure We Are Serious About Reducing The Deficit. OBAMA: “But what I’ve also said is if we’re serious about reducing the deficit, if this is genuinely a moral obligation to the next generation, then in addition to some tough spending cuts, we’ve also got to make sure that the wealthy do a little bit more.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: CNN’s Tom Foreman: The White House Tax Plan Is “A Level They Are Not Willing To Talk About.” CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: What about President Obama’s plan? Does it hold up to scrutiny, Tom, any better than Mitt Romney’s plan? FOREMAN: Well, let’s look at that. He has the same thing. He’s got a plan of spending, things that he would like to do. He would like to have all of this money to cover it; he won’t. He’ll also have a deficit. How does he want to deal with it? He said it again tonight. Let’s tax the wealthy more. This is a popular idea in polls, but look at the problem that it has. There aren’t that many wealthy people in the country if you talk about people making $250,000 individually, every one person that makes that much money, this is how many there are who don’t make that much. You would actually have to tax this person at a much higher level than what the White House is suggesting if you really wanted to make up much difference in this pile over here. The truth is, that’s a level they are not willing to talk about, and the president said the math doesn’t add up in Mitt Romney’s plan; the math doesn’t add up in either one of the plans based on the details we have so far. We need many, many more. So this basic claim from both sides, I can reduce the deficit, we’re going to give a big grade of “I” for incomplete. Neither one has given enough answers to give us much faith in that, Wolf.”(CNN’s “Debate Night In America,” 10/16/12)

LIE #8: OBAMA CLAIMED HE CUT BUSINESS TAXES 18 TIMES

THE CLAIM: Obama Claimed He Cut Small Business Taxes Eighteen Times. OBAMA: “My philosophy on taxes has been simple, and that is, I want to give middle-class families, and folks who are striving to get in the middle class, some relief, because they have been hit hard over the last decade, over the last 15, over the last 20 years. So four years ago I stood on a stage just like this one — actually, it was a town hall — and I said I would cut taxes for middle-class families, and that’s what I’ve done by $3,600. I said I would cut taxes for small businesses, who are the drivers and engines of growth, and we’ve cut them 18 times. And I want to continue those tax cuts for middle-class families and for small businesses.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Hempstead, N.Y., 10/16/12)

THE FACTS: Many Of Obama’s Oft-Repeated 18 Small Business Tax Cuts Are Simply “Renewals Of Tax Breaks That Already Existed.” “ President Obama often touts his 18 small business tax cuts, but there’s some confusion as to what they really are. Many are renewals of tax breaks that already existed.” (John Pagliery, “Obama’s 18 Small Business Tax Cuts – Explained,” CNN Money, 9/24/12)

• “Others Are Expansions Of Previous Breaks. And Every Time A Measure Gets Renewed, The Obama Administration Is Counting It As Yet Another Tax Cut.” (John Pagliery, “Obama’s 18 Small Business Tax Cuts – Explained,” CNN Money, 9/24/12)

THE FACTS: “If Extensions Or Expansions Aren’t Double Counted, The List Comes Out To 14 Tax Breaks — And Only Five Are Still Around.” (John Pagliery, “Obama’s 18 Small Business Tax Cuts – Explained,” CNN Money, 9/24/12)

• “When It Comes To Job Creation, They Don’t Add Up To Much.” “President Obama has passed 17 tax breaks and credits for small businesses. But when it comes to job creation, they don’t add up to much.” (Catherine Clifford, “Obama’s 17 Tax Breaks For Small Business: Big Whoop!,” CNN Money, 9/8/11)

• “The Scope Of The Tax Breaks And Credits Is Too Narrow, The Requirements Too Specific, And — In Some Cases — The Process Too Onerous To Get Firms Off The Sidelines And Onto The Hiring Battlefield.” (Catherine Clifford, “Obama’s 17 Tax Breaks For Small Business: Big Whoop!,” CNN Money, 9/8/11)

Obama’s Green Energy Losses Mount

ELECTRIC CAR BATTERY MAKER A123 SYSTEMS HAS FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY AFTER $249 MILLION IN TAXPAYER SUPPORT

Today, Taxpayer-Backed A123 Systems, A Maker Of Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Batteries For Electric Cars, Filed For Bankruptcy. “A123 Systems Inc. (AONE), a maker of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries for electric cars, filed for bankruptcy after failing to make a debt payment that was due yesterday. The company listed assets of $459.8 million and debt of $376 million as of Aug. 31 in Chapter 11 documents filed today in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware. Chapter 11 is the section of the Bankruptcy Code used by companies to reorganize.” (Dawn McCarty and Craig Trudell, “Electric Car Battery Maker A123 Systems Files Bankruptcy Papers,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 10/16/12)

• A123 Systems Has Posted At Least 14 Straight Quarterly Losses With Shares Falling 85 Percent This Year. “A123 has posted at least 14 straight quarterly losses. Its shares have fallen 85 percent this year to 24 cents at yesterday’s close in New York and traded at 16 cents at 8:29 a.m. before the start of regular trading.” (Dawn McCarty and Craig Trudell, “Electric Car Battery Maker A123 Systems Files Bankruptcy Papers,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 10/16/12)

• FLASHBACK: In July 2011, President Obama Touted A123 Systems As A Job-Creating Company With Soaring Demand For Its Vehicle Components. OBAMA: “There’s A123, a clean-energy manufacturer in Michigan that just hired its 1,000th worker as demand has soared for its vehicle components. Companies like these are taking root and putting people to work in every corner of the country.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President On Fuel Efficiency Standards , Washington, DC, 7/29/11)

After A $249.1 Million Federal Grant And Struggling With Costs Of Recalled Batteries, A123 Systems Is Looking To Make A “Deal With Wanxiang Group Corp., China’s Largest Auto-Parts Maker, For Financing In Exchange For A Majority Ownership Stake.” “A123, which received a $249.1 million federal grant in 2009 to build a U.S. factory, needed a financial lifeline after struggling with costs from a recall of batteries supplied to Fisker, the plug-in hybrid luxury carmaker. A123 announced in August that it was working on a deal with Wanxiang Group Corp., China’s largest auto-parts maker, for financing in exchange for a majority ownership stake.” (Dawn McCarty and Craig Trudell, “Electric Car Battery Maker A123 Systems Files Bankruptcy Papers,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 10/16/12)

• With Wanxiang’s Large Stake, Obama’s “Made In America” Dream Is Unlikely To Come True For Electric Vehicles And Batteries. “President Barack Obama called A123 Chief Executive Officer David Vieau and then-Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm during a September 2010 event celebrating the opening of the plant in Livonia, Michigan, that the company received the U.S. grant to help build. ‘This is about the birth of an entire new industry in America — an industry that’s going to be central to the next generation of cars,” Obama said in the phone call, according to a transcript provided by the White House. “When folks lift up their hoods on the cars of the future, I want them to see engines and batteries that are stamped: Made in America.’” (Dawn McCarty and Craig Trudell, “Electric Car Battery Maker A123 Systems Files Bankruptcy Papers,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 10/16/12)

A123 Is Saddled With A Costly Recall Due To Faulty Batteries Supplied To Fisker Automotive – Another Obama Green Energy Boondoggle

A123 Incurred Heavy Losses Due To A Recall Of Defective Battery Packs It Supplied To Fisker Automotive. “The losses stem from A123′s recall of defective batteries built at its Livonia, Michigan, plant. The flaw came to light earlier this year when a Fisker Karma plug-in hybrid with an A123 battery failed during a test by Consumer Reports magazine. The repairs will cost nearly $67 million and force A123 to rebuild its inventory. A123 makes the battery for the Fisker Karma, the BMW hybrid 3- and 5-Series cars and GM’s all-electric Chevy Spark due in 2013.” (Deepa Seetharaman, “A123 Sees ‘Going Concern’ Risk Due To Steep Losses,” Reuters, 5/30/12)

• One Of Fisker’s Karmas Broke Down In The Middle Of A Consumer Reports Test, Spawning A Battery Recall. “Earlier this year, one of the Karmas stopped working in the middle of a Consumer Reports road test — an embarrassing breakdown that Fisker later blamed on a faulty battery. The lithium-ion batteries became the subject of a recall, including for a defect that raised the risk of fires.” (Matthew Mosk, “Fisker May Never Build Electric Cars In US,” ABC News, 5/30/12)

Consumer Reports Calls Government-Financed, Luxury-Hybrid Fisker Automotive’s Karma An “Ergonomic Disaster” That “Does Not Fare Well Against Most Other Luxury Vehicles” Where “The Karma’s Problems Outweighed The Good.” “An influential consumer magazine said Fisker Automotive’s Karma plug-in hybrid has a variety of flaws, from limited visibility to a poorly designed touch-screen system that amounts to an ‘ergonomic disaster.’ The less-than-glowing report from Consumer Reports magazine is the latest blow for Fisker, which is looking to raise funds after being denied access to more than half of a $529 million government loan that was the cornerstone of its business plan. Consumer Reports tested a $107,850 Karma – the most expensive vehicle the magazine has tested – and said it does not fare well against most other luxury vehicles, due partly to its cramped interior and overly complex controls system. ‘Although we found its ride, handling and braking performance sound and it has first-class interior materials, the Karma’s problems outweighed the good,” said Jake Fisher, director of Consumer Reports’ auto test center.” (Deepa Seetharaman, “Fisker’s Pricey Karma Car Plagued With Flaws’: Consumer Reports,” Reuters, 9/25/12)

• Fisker Drew Down $193 Million From An Obama Administration Energy Loan Prior To the Funds Being Frozen. “Fisker intends to build the Atlantic at a former General Motors Co. factory in Delaware, he said. The company had cast doubt on the future of the Delaware factory earlier this year after the Obama administration last year suspended payments on a $529 million U.S. Department of Energy loan that was funding the Atlantic project. Fisker drew about $193 million of the loan to engineer its hybrid before the funds were frozen.” (Joseph White, “Fisker Held Funding Talks,” The Wall Street Journal , 10/1/12)

AFTER BILLIONS SPENT ON ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND BATTERIES, SALES ARE NOWHERE CLOSE TO OBAMA’S GOAL OF 1 MILLION CARS

“Electric-Vehicle Sales Since 2011 Totaled Fewer Than 50,000 Through September, Just 5 Percent Of The President’s Target.” “Whether the technology itself is a loser or consumers are merely slow to adapt to new things, car buyers so far haven’t embraced electric vehicles in numbers close to Obama’s goal. Electric-vehicle sales since 2011 totaled fewer than 50,000 through September, just 5 percent of the president’s target.” (Angela Greling Keane, “Obama’s $5 Billion Slow To Charge Electric Car Purchases,” Bloomberg, 10/16/12)

• Brett Smith, Co-Director At The Center For Automotive Research: “The Reality Is: That Business Model Isn’t There Yet …” “‘The reality is: that business model isn’t there yet,’ said Brett Smith, co-director of manufacturing, engineering and technology at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan. ‘It isn’t there yet for volume. It isn’t there yet for reaching the mass consumer. And it probably isn’t going to be there for a while.’” (Angela Greling Keane, “Obama’s $5 Billion Slow To Charge Electric Car Purchases,” Bloomberg, 10/16/12)

The Washington Post : “The American Taxpayer Has Gotten Precious Little For The Administration’s Investment In Battery-Powered Vehicles, In Terms Of Permanent Jobs Or Lower Carbon Dioxide Emissions.” “No matter how you slice it, the American taxpayer has gotten precious little for the administration’s investment in battery-powered vehicles, in terms of permanent jobs or lower carbon dioxide emissions. There is no market, or not much of one, for vehicles that are less convenient and cost thousands of dollars more than similar-sized gas-powered alternatives – but do not save enough fuel to compensate. The basic theory of the Obama push for electric vehicles – if you build them, customers will come – was a myth. And an expensive one, at that.” (Editorial, “GM’s Vaunted Volt Is On The Road To Nowhere Fast,” The Washington Post , 9/14/12)
The Failures Of Subsidized Car Manufacturers Are Dragging U.S. Advanced-Battery Industry Down With Them, Leaving The Battery Companies Vulnerable For Foreign Purchase. “As these companies flail, they are taking the much-ballyhooed U.S. advanced-battery industry down with them. A Chinese company had to buy out distressed A123, to which the Energy Department has committed $263 million in production aid and research money. Ener1, which ran through $55 million of a $118 million federal grant before going bankrupt, sold out to a Russian tycoon.” (Editorial, “GM’s Vaunted Volt Is On The Road To Nowhere Fast,” The Washington Post , 9/14/12)
Despite The Commitment Of Millions Of Taxpayer Dollars, It is Increasingly Clear That Obama’s Paltry Campaign Promise To Get 1 Million All-Electric and Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles Will Not Hit 2015 Target. “As a candidate for president in 2008, Barack Obama set a goal of getting 1 million all-electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles on the road by 2015. In February 2011, the Obama administration’s Energy Department issued an analysis purporting to show that, with the help of subsidies and tax credits, ‘the goal is achievable.’ This was a paltry claim in the first place, since 1 million cars amount to less than 1 percent of the total U.S. fleet. Yet it is increasingly clear that, despite the commitment of many millions of taxpayer dollars, the United States will not hit Mr. Obama’s target by 2015.” (Editorial, “GM’s Vaunted Volt Is On The Road To Nowhere Fast,” The Washington Post , 9/14/12)

• “Analysis Suggest That We’ll Be Lucky To Get A Third of The Way There.” “A recent CBS News analysis suggested that we’ll be lucky to get a third of the way there. The Energy Department study assumed that General Motors would produce 120,000 plug-in hybrid Volts in 2012. GM never came close to that and recently suspended Volt production at its Hamtramck, Mich., plant, scene of a presidential photo-op. So far, GM has sold a little more than 21,000 Volts, even with the help of a $7,500 tax credit, recent dealer discounting and U.S. government purchases. When you factor in the $1.2 billion cost of developing the Volt, GM loses tens of thousands of dollars on each model.” (Editorial, “GM’s Vaunted Volt Is On The Road To Nowhere Fast,” The Washington Post , 9/14/12)

EVEN IN BANKRUPTCY, OBAMA’S FAILED INVESTMENTS HAUNT TAXPAYERS

Solyndra’s Investors Stand To Make Millions Off Of Tax Benefits The Energy Department Transferred To Them To Avoid Political Embarrassment

The Wall Street Journal : “In The Latest Twist, Solyndra’s Investors Could Be Rewarded For Their Failure, Thanks To A Tax Benefit The Administration Handed Out In A Bid To Evade Political Accountability.” “Perhaps you thought the Solyndra scandal amounted to a $535 million government loan that will never be repaid. No such luck. In the latest twist, Solyndra’s investors could be rewarded for their failure, thanks to a tax benefit the Administration handed out in a bid to evade political accountability.” (Editorial, “The Solyndra Memorial Tax Break,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/15/12)

• Solyndra’s Investors Are Trying To Take Advantage Of $350 Million In Tax Benefits They Received As Part Of The Company’s Bankruptcy. “Having sold off its manufacturing plant, fired nearly 1,000 workers and proven the non-viability of its business model, Solyndra’s only real assets are what the IRS calls ‘tax attributes.’ These are between $875 million and $975 million in net operating losses that can reduce future taxable income, which the IRS values as high as $350 million. Before it went toes up, Solyndra also accumulated $12 million in solar tax credits that can reduce tax liabilities dollar for dollar.” (Editorial, “The Solyndra Memorial Tax Break,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/15/12)

• The Wall Street Journal: “Energy Created The Tax Avoidance Problem In The First Place By Gifting Argonaut And Madrone The Net Operating Losses To Delay The Solyndra Crack-Up That Was Fast Becoming Inevitable.” “But this is little more than an ex post facto double-cross. Energy created the tax avoidance problem in the first place by gifting Argonaut and Madrone the net operating losses to delay the Solyndra crack-up that was fast becoming inevitable. That left taxpayers worse off than if they simply let Solyndra fail.” (Editorial, “The Solyndra Memorial Tax Break,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/15/12)

The Wall Street Journal: “The Larger Problem Is Mr. Obama’s Economic Model That Seeks To Picks Winners And Losers And Misallocates Capital.” “The larger problem is Mr. Obama’s economic model that seeks to picks winners and losers and misallocates capital. That’s bad enough. But does he have to stick it to taxpayers twice for the same failed investment?” (Editorial, “The Solyndra Memorial Tax Break,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/15/12)

Taxpayers Will Only Recover A Fraction Of The Money Invested In Solyndra Due To The Obama Administration’s Political Calculation

In February 2011, The Department Of Energy Agreed To “Waive Its Privilege As First Creditor In The Event Of A Bankruptcy.” “The political brawl over Solyndra, the solar array manufacturer that received $528 million in government aid and then went bankrupt, shifted focus Friday to a decision by the Energy Department that allowed another lender to step in to help rescue the company. That decision in February gave Solyndra a temporary reprieve and a chance to survive, but it also forced the government to waive its privilege as first creditor in the event of a bankruptcy – which then occurred at the end of August. … The Energy Department’s approval was required for Solyndra to borrow any new funds, because if the loan was consummated, the federal government would have to surrender its status as the most senior lender, in favor of the new lender.” (Matthew L. Wald, “Questions Raised Over Letting Another Lender Help A Failing Solar Company,” The New York Times , 9/16/11)

• As A Result, Obama’s Department Of Energy Allowed Taxpayers To Take A Back Seat To George Kaiser’s Argonaut Investments. “Complicating the politics of the situation for the Obama administration, part of the new loan came from Argonaut, the investment company backed by George Kaiser, an Oklahoma oil billionaire who is an Obama campaign contributor. Argonaut was already heavily invested in Solyndra, and provided another $69 million in cash in exchange for taking over $75 million that Solyndra was owed by its customers.” (Matthew L. Wald, “Questions Raised Over Letting Another Lender Help A Failing Solar Company,” The New York Times , 9/16/11)

• In 2008, George Kaiser Bundled Between $50,000 And $100,000 For Obama. (Center For Responsive Politics, Accessed 10/16/12)

Solyndra’s Private Equity Investors Are Expected To Recoup $70 Million Through The Sale Of Solyndra Assets. “Documents filed Friday evening in a Delaware bankruptcy court say that private-equity firms, including one whose chief has ties to the Obama administration, will get back at least half of the $70 million they put into Solyndra early last year as the company battled for survival.” (Peg Brickley, “Solyndra Outlines Its Bankruptcy Repayment Plans,” Dow Jones Newswires, 7/31/12)

• “Unsecured Creditors Owed $50 Million To $120 Million Will Recover 2.5 Percent To 6 Percent, According To Solyndra’s Chapter 11 Estimates.” (Peg Brickley, “Solyndra Outlines Its Bankruptcy Repayment Plans,”Dow Jones Newswires, 7/31/12)

Taxpayers Are Expected To Recover $24 Million Of The Loan To Solyndra. “Court papers estimate that one piece of the U.S. loan, nearly $143 million, could go unpaid, or it could receive as much as a 17 percent recovery. A second piece, $385 million, is in for a recovery of ‘$0 plus, depending on outcome of liquidation efforts,’ court papers say. … $24 million Amount predicted to be repaid under its Chapter 11 plan” (Peg Brickley, “Solyndra Outlines Its Bankruptcy Repayment Plans,” Dow Jones Newswires, 7/31/12)

Another Obama-Picked, Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Company Goes Bankrupt

Today, Taxpayer-Backed A123 Systems, A Maker Of Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Batteries For Electric Cars, Filed For Bankruptcy. “A123 Systems Inc. (AONE), a maker of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries for electric cars, filed for bankruptcy after failing to make a debt payment that was due yesterday. The company listed assets of $459.8 million and debt of $376 million as of Aug. 31 in Chapter 11 documents filed today in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware. Chapter 11 is the section of the Bankruptcy Code used by companies to reorganize.” (Dawn McCarty and Craig Trudell, “Electric Car Battery Maker A123 Systems Files Bankruptcy Papers,” Bloomberg Businessweek, 10/16/12)

OBAMA HAS CONSISTENTLY HIGHLIGHTED A123 SYSTEMS AS A SUCCESS STORY

In April 2010, Obama Touted A123 Systems As One Of The “Success Stories” From The Stimulus. OBAMA: “Last August, following a nationwide competition among America’s clean-energy technology leaders, Vice President Biden traveled to Michigan to announce that A123 was one of the 48 companies to win a Recovery Act grant for advanced battery technology. That grant helped A123 hire 44 new workers. And that grant is supporting the construction of three new plants in the state of Michigan, which A123 expects will allow it to hire more than 120 workers by the end of this year, more than 1,000 by the end of next year, and more than 3,000 by the end of 2012. Two of those workers, James Fenton and Nino Biundo, are here today. They lost their previous jobs in the recession. And then 123 — A123 hired them both to help manufacture the batteries of tomorrow. A123 has already begun construction on one facility in the city of Livonia, which is scheduled to go online in July, and they’ve begun designing a facility in the city of Romulus. And they’ve announced plans to build their first high-volume factory in Brownstown. So truth be told, A123 was looking to build that factory in Asia. But because it received that grant, it chose the state of Michigan for its largest and most innovative plant yet. And that plant will be one of 30 new plants to go fully operational over the next six years manufacturing electric vehicle batteries and components right here in the United States of America. So this is what’s possible in a clean-energy economy — these folks right here, doing extraordinary work. This is what happens when we place our bets on American workers and American businesses. And we’re going to continue working to help them manufacture more success stories like these across all sectors of our economy.” (President Barack Obama, Statement By The President On The Economy And The Oil Spill In The Gulf Of Mexico, Washington, DC, 4/30/10)

In July 2010, Obama Promises Plants Like A123 Systems’ In Michigan “Will Put Thousands Of People To Work.” OBAMA: “These plants will put thousands of people to work. This includes folks who were working at a couple of facilities being built in Michigan by another battery technology company called A123. And in every case, we’ve been guided by a simple idea — government can’t generate the jobs or growth we need by itself, but what government can do is lay the foundation for small businesses to expand and to hire, for entrepreneurs to open up shop and test new products, for workers to get the training they need for the jobs of the 21st century, and for families to achieve some semblance of economic security. So our goal has never been to create a government program but rather to unleash private sector growth, and we are seeing results.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President On Investing In Clean Energy , Holland, MI, 7/15/10)

In September 2010, Obama Phoned In A “Congratulations” To A123 Systems, Recipient Of A $249 Million Recovery Act Grant. “This morning, President Barack Obama called A123 Systems from the Oval Office to congratulate them on opening the nation’s first manufacturing facility to mass-produce electric vehicle batteries. Today’s plant opening was made possible by a $249 million Recovery Act advanced battery grant the company received last August, an award the company matched dollar-for-dollar with private capital.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President In A Phone Call To Recovery Act Advanced Battery Grant Recipient, A123 Systems in Livonia, MI , Washington, DC, 9/13/10)

In September 2010, Obama Said A123 Would “Power The American Economy For Years To Come.” OBAMA: “But most of all, I want to congratulate and thank all the men and women of A123 Systems. You guys are making us proud. The work you’re doing will help power the American economy for years to come. And so everybody there should just feel very, very good about what you guys are doing. And I am looking forward to continuing to see the great work that you guys do in the years to come.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President In A Phone Call To Recovery Act Advanced Battery Grant Recipient, A123 Systems in Livonia, MI , Washington, DC, 9/13/10)

In July 2011, Obama Touted A123 Systems As A Job-Creating Company With Soaring Demand For Its Vehicle Components. OBAMA: “As these companies look for ways to boost efficiency, they’ll be conducting research and development on test tracks. They’re going to look to startups working on biofuels and new engine technologies. They’re going to continue to invest in advanced battery manufacturing. They’re going to spur growth in clean energy. And that means new jobs in cutting-edge industries all across America. I’ll give you a couple of examples. There’s a company called Celgard in North Carolina that’s expanding its production line to meet demand for advanced batteries. And they’ve hired 200 employees and they’re adding 250 more. There’s A123, a clean-energy manufacturer in Michigan that just hired its 1,000th worker as demand has soared for its vehicle components. Companies like these are taking root and putting people to work in every corner of the country. ” (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President On Fuel Efficiency Standards , Washington, DC, 7/29/11)

More Holes Emerging In Obama’s Libya Timeline

On September 14, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Insisted That The Attack Was In Reaction To The Film, Despite Being Told That The Pentagon Had Briefed The Senate That The Attacks In Benghazi Were Staged By Terrorists. ABC’s JAKE TAPPER: “While we were sitting here, Secretary Panetta and the vice chair of the joint chiefs briefed the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the senators came out and said their indication was that this – for the attack on Benghazi – was a terrorist attack organized and carried out by terrorists, that it was premeditated, a calculated act of terror. Levin said – Senator Levin, I think it was a planned premeditated attack, the kind of equipment that they had used. There is evidence it was a planned premeditated attack. Is there anything more you can – now that the administration is briefing senators on this, is there anything more you can tell us?” WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY: “Right. Well, I think we wait to hear from administration officials. Again, it’s actively under investigation, both the Benghazi attack and incidents elsewhere, you know. And my point was that at – we don’t have and did not have concrete evidence to suggest that this was not in reaction to the film.” (Jay Carney, White House Press Briefing, Washington, DC, 9/14/12)

• Click To Watch

On September 16, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice Said The Administration Viewed The Benghazi Attack As “Almost A Copycat Of The Demonstrations Against Our Facility In Cairo, Which Were Prompted Of Course By The Video.” NBC’s DAVID GREGORY: “You talked about this as spontaneous. Can you say definitively that the attacks that killed Ambassador Stevens and others there was spontaneous? Was it a planned attack? Was there a terrorist element to it?” AMBASSADOR SUSAN RICE: “The best information we have at present, first of all, there’s an FBI investigation that’s ongoing and we look to that investigation to give us the definitive word as to what transpired. But putting together the best information that we have available to us today, our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo. Almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted of course by the video. What we think then transpired in Benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. They came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are readily available in post revolutionary Libya and it escalated into a much more violent episode. Obviously, that’s our best judgment now. We’ll await the results of the investigation, and the president has been very clear we’ll work with the Libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/16/12)

• Rice Claimed That Extremists Had “Hijacked” Protests Outside The Benghazi Compound. U.N. AMBASSADOR SUSAN RICE: “We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to – or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in – in the wake of the revolution in Libya are – are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there. We’ll wait to see exactly what the investigation finally confirms, but that’s the best information we have at present.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 9/16/12)
• Rice Said That The Attack In Benghazi Was “A Direct Result Of A Heinous And Offensive Video.” U.N. AMBASSADOR SUSAN RICE: “First of all, let’s be clear about what transpired here. What happened this week in Cairo, in Benghazi, in many other parts of the region…” ABC’s JAKE TAPPER: “Tunisia, Khartoum…” RICE: “…was a result – a direct result of a heinous and offensive video that was widely disseminated, that the US government had nothing to do with, which we have made clear is reprehensible and disgusting.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 9/16/12)
• Rice: “We Don’t See At This Point Signs This Was A Coordinated Plan, Premeditated Attack.” U.N. AMBASSADOR SUSAN RICE: “The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video. People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are quite common in post-revolutionary Libya and that then spun out of control. But we don’t see at this point signs this was a coordinated plan, premeditated attack. Obviously, we will wait for the results of the investigation and we don’t want to jump to conclusions before then. But I do think it’s important for the American people to know our best current assessment.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,” 9/16/12)

U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice Denied That U.S. Security Should Have Been Stronger In Benghazi After A String Of Attacks Over The Summer. FOX NEWS’ CHRIS WALLACE: “All right. And the last question, terror cells in Benghazi had carried out five attacks since April, including one at the same consulate, a bombing at the same consulate in June. Should U.S. security have been tighter at that consulate given the history of terror activity in Benghazi?” U.N. AMBASSADOR SUSAN RICE: “Well, we obviously did have a strong security presence. And, unfortunately, two of the four Americans who died in Benghazi were there to provide security. But it wasn’t sufficient in the circumstances to prevent the overrun of the consulate. This is among the things that will be looked at as the investigation unfolds and it’s also why –” WALLACE: “Is there any feeling that it should have been stronger beforehand?” RICE: “It’s also why we increased our presence, our security presence in Tripoli in the aftermath of this, as well as in other parts of the world. I can’t judge that, Chris. I’m — we have to see what the assessment reveals.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,” 9/16/12)

After Its Initial Denial, Administration Officials Began To Admit That The Benghazi Attack Was An Act Of Terrorism, Though Obama Himself Did Not

After Focusing On The Protests Against The Video For The First Week After The Attack, The Obama Administration Finally Reached The “Belated Conclusion” That It Was A Coordinated Assault By Terrorists With Connections To Al Qaeda. “For days after the attack, intelligence officials and the Obama administration said it was likely the outgrowth of protests sparked by an anti-Islamic video made in the U.S. Intelligence officials now believe the attack was carried out by local militants who were in contact with regional members of al Qaeda-affiliated groups, using the eruption of protests elsewhere as an opportunity to mount an assault on U.S. installations. That belated conclusion has raised questions about the adequacy of intelligence and security preparations at U.S. diplomatic posts abroad as they confront both old and newer risks.” (Siobhan Gorman And Matt Bradley, “Militant Link To Libya Attack,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/1/12)

• On September 19, National Counterterrorism Center Director Matt Olsen Told The Senate Homeland Security Committee That Ambassador Stevens Had Been “Killed In The Course Of A Terrorist Attack On Our Embassy.” SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (ID-CT): “So, let me begin by asking you whether you would say that Ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans died as a result of a terrorist attack.” NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER DIRECTOR MATT OLSEN: “Certainly on that particular question, I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy.” (Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs Committee, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 9/19/12)
• On September 20, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Said It Was “Self-Evident” That The Benghazi Attack Was An Act Of Terrorism. WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY: “It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials. So, again, that’s self-evident. I would point you to a couple of things that Mr. Olsen said, which is that at this point it appears that a number of different elements were involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in Eastern Libya.” (Jay Carney, White House Press Briefing, Washington, DC, 9/20/12)
• On September 21, Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton Confirmed That “What Happened In Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack.” SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON: “Yesterday afternoon when I briefed the Congress, I made it clear that keeping our people everywhere in the world safe is our top priority. What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans. And we are taking aggressive measures at all of our posts to protect our staffs and their families along with locally employed people who provide so many important contributions to the work of our missions.” (Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton, Remarks With Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, Washington, DC., 9/21/12)

But On September 20, Obama Contradicted His Administration When He Said We Still Did Not Know If Terrorists Had Attacked The Benghazi Compound, Claiming, “What We Do Know Is That The Natural Protests That Arose Because Of The Outrage Over The Video Were Used As An Excuse By Extremists…” QUESTION: “We have reports that the White House said today that the attacks in Libya were a terrorist attack. Do you have information indicating that it was Iran, or al Qaeda was behind organizing the protests?” OBAMA: “Well, we’re still doing an investigation, and there are going to be different circumstances in different countries. And so I don’t want to speak to something until we have all the information. What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests –” QUESTION: “Al Qaeda?” OBAMA: “Well, we don’t know yet.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks At The Univision Town Hall, Miami, FL, 9/20/12)
On September 24, Obama Appeared On The View And Again Refused To Call The Attack Terrorism, Only Saying That The Attack “Wasn’t Just A Mob Action.” “President Barack Obama said Monday that the Sept. 11 attack that claimed the life of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans ‘wasn’t just a mob action,’ but he stopped short of explicitly labeling the assault as an act of terrorism. Obama’s comments came as he taped an interview with ‘The View’ during a brief trip to New York to address the annual United National General Assembly. He had been asked whether the attack on the U.S. Consulate compound in the city of Benghazi was a terrorist act.” (Olivier Knox, “Obama: Libya Attack ‘Wasn’t Just A Mob Action,’” Yahoo News’ The Ticket, 9/24/12)

NOW THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS STRUGGLING TO DEFEND ITS INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY FAILURES

On October 9, The State Department Admitted That It Knew All Along That There Was No Protest Before The Benghazi Attack

The State Department Revealed That “Prior To The Attack On The U.S. Mission In Benghazi Late In The Evening On Sept. 11, There Was No Protest Outside The Compound.” “Prior to the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi late in the evening on Sept. 11, there was no protest outside the compound, a senior State Department official confirmed today, contradicting initial administration statements suggesting that the attack was an opportunistic reaction to unrest caused by an anti-Islam video. In a conference call with reporters Tuesday, two senior State Department officials gave a detailed accounting of the events that lead to the death of Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The officials said that prior to the massive attack on the Benghazi compound by dozens of militants carrying heavy weaponry, there was no unrest outside the walls of the compound and no protest that anyone inside the compound was aware of.” (Josh Rogin, “State Department: No Video Protest At The Benghazi Consulate,” Foreign Policy ’s The Cable , 10/9/12)

• “The State Department Says It Never Concluded That An Attack That Killed The U.S. Ambassador To Libya Was Simply A Protest Gone Awry, A Statement That Places The Obama Administration’s Own Foreign Policy Arm In Sync With Republicans.” “The State Department says it never concluded that an attack that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya was simply a protest gone awry, a statement that places the Obama administration’s own foreign policy arm in sync with Republicans. That extraordinary message, appearing to question the administration’s initial description of the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, came in a department briefing Tuesday — a day before a hearing on diplomatic security in Libya was to be held by the Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.” (Larry Margasak and Bradley Klapper, “State Dept. Description Of Attack In Sync With GOP,” The Associated Press , 10/10/12)

The State Department’s Statement Raises “Further Questions About Why The Obama Administration Initially Used That Explanation After Assailants Killed Four Americans There.” “A senior State Department official says his department never concluded that the consulate attack in Libya stemmed from protests over an American-made video ridiculing Islam, raising further questions about why the Obama administration initially used that explanation after assailants killed four Americans there. Briefing reporters Tuesday, officials provided a more detailed rundown of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi. They said the attack came without warning and involved multiple groups of men armed with weapons such as machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. But asked about the administration’s initial explanation linking the violence to the video, one official said, ‘That was not our conclusion.’ The official called it a question for ‘others’ to answer.” (Larry Margasak, “State Department: We Didn’t Link Libya Attack To Video,” The Associated Press, 10/9/12)

On October 10, State Department Personnel Came Forward With Details Of The Deteriorating Security Situation In Libya Before The Attacks

On October 10, State Department Officials Told Congress That They Had Rejected Requests For Increased Security Personnel In The Months Before The 9/11 Benghazi Attack. “Senior State Department officials acknowledged to Congress on Wednesday that they had turned down requests to send more U.S. military personnel to guard diplomatic facilities in Libya shortly before the Sept. 11 attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. … Wood’s team left Libya in August after Lamb had refused to approve extending its assignment for a second time. She said the State Department planned to turn over most basic protective duties to a Libyan guard force, part of a decade-long shift away from using U.S. Marines to protect embassies. Lamb said the mix of State Department officers, Libyan guards and militiamen ‘could do the same function’ as the U.S. military.” (Ken Dilanian and Kathleen Hennessey, “U.S. Declined Requests To Boost Security In Libya, Congress Told,” Los Angeles Times, 10/10/12)

• Less Than Two Months Before The Benghazi Attack, The State Department Determined That “The Risk Of U.S. Mission Personnel, Private U.S. Citizens And Businesspersons Encountering An Isolating Event As A Result Of Militia Or Political Violence Is HIGH.” “Less than two months before the fatal attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, the State Department concluded that the risk of violence to diplomats and other Americans in Libya was high and that the weak U.S.-backed government in Tripoli could do little about it. ‘The risk of U.S. Mission personnel, private U.S. citizens and businesspersons encountering an isolating event as a result of militia or political violence is HIGH,’ a State Department security assessment from July 22 concludes.” (Anne Gearan, “Before attack on U.S. mission in Libya, State Dept. concluded risk of violence was high,” The Washington Post , 10/9/12)

• U.S. Security Officials Repeatedly Warned The State Department That More U.S. Security Personnel Were Needed In Libya. “The former head of a Special Forces ‘Site Security Team’ in Libya tells CBS News that in spite of multiple pleas from himself and other U.S. security officials on the ground for ‘more not less’ security personnel, the State Department removed as many as 34 people from the country in the six months before a terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others. Lt. Col. Andy Wood will appear this week at a House Oversight Committee hearing that will examine security decisions leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. Speaking to CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson, Wood said when he found out that his own 16-member team and a six-member State Department elite force were being pulled from Tripoli in August – about a month before the assault in Benghazi – he felt, ‘like we were being asked to play the piano with two fingers. There was concern amongst the entire embassy staff.’ He said other staffers approached him with their concerns when the reduction in security personnel was announced.” (“Ex-U.S. Security Team Leader In Libya: ‘We Needed More Not Less’ Security Staff,” CBS News, 10/8/12)

• Security Officers Testified Before Congress That The State Department Responded To Their Requests For Additional Security In Libya With Cutbacks. “The State Department scaled back U.S. security staff in Libya in the weeks and months before the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, despite requests for additional personnel, former U.S. security officials told a politically charged congressional hearing.” (Jay Solomon and Dion Nissenbaum “Security Cut Before Libya Raid,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/10/12)

“The Hearing Highlighted The Obama Administration’s Continued Difficulty Presenting A Consistent Explanation About What Happened In The Benghazi Attack.” (Jay Solomon and Dion Nissenbaum “Security Cut Before Libya Raid,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/10/12)

The Next Day, Biden Said He Was Not Aware Of The Security Failures In Benghazi

Biden: “We Weren’t Told They Wanted More Security. We Did Not Know They Wanted More Security There.” (Vice Presidential Debate, Danville, KY, 10/11/12)

• Click To Watch

“Biden Seemed Unaware” That “The Administration Had Been Implored To Beef Up Security At The U.S. Consulate In Libya Before The Deadly Terrorist Attack There .” Anyone who paid attention to a hearing in Congress this week knew that the administration had been implored to beef up security at the U.S. Consulate in Libya before the deadly terrorist attack there. But in the vice presidential debate Thursday night, Joe Biden seemed unaware.” (Calvin Woodward, “Fact Check: Slips In Vice President’s Debate,” The Associated Press, 10/12/12)

• Biden’s Comment Came After “The State Department Has Made Clear” That They Were Aware Of Diplomat’s Calls For More Security. “Biden was soaring along on foreign policy at the start of the debate, making a clear argument in response to a question about what happened in Benghazi … until he said that the administration didn’t know that diplomats there had wanted more security. In fact, the State Department has made clear they did, which is among the many issues at play in the investigation into what happened in the violence that left four Americans dead.” (Maggie Haberman, “7 Takeaways From The Danville Debate,” Politico, 10/12/12)

Politifact Rated Biden’s Comment “Mostly False,” Noting That Even If He Was Not Directly Aware Of The Request, “It Was Made In The State Department, Which Is Part Of The Obama Administration.” “Vice President Biden said ‘We weren’t told they wanted more security.’ That statement is accurate only if you define ‘we’ to mean ‘people at the White House.’ A State Department officer in Libya said that he requested additional guards and was turned down by at least one other official in the State Department. The White House said Biden meant that the security requests had not been conveyed to him and others in the executive office. It’s possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn’t make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made. We rate the statement Mostly False.” (Jon Greenberg, “Biden Says ‘We Weren’t Told’ About Libya Security Requests,” PolitiFact, 10/12/12)
Biden’s Comments Also Raised Questions About What Had Been Included In The President’s Briefing On The U.S. Security Posture The Day Before The 9/11 Anniversary. FOX NEWS’ ED HENRY: “And so, then on September 10th, you put out a press release that said that the President himself was briefed — not the State Department — the President was briefed about consulates and other installations around the world, and the security posture ahead of the 9/11 anniversary. So are you now also saying that in that briefing, the President was not told about security problems at Benghazi, a consulate that had been targeted? He was not briefed that day?” WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY: “I can tell you absolutely that there was no actionable intelligence that suggested there would be an attack at the Benghazi facility. Absolutely, categorically, that is a fact.” HENRY: “So what was he briefed on that day? This is a consulate that was targeted several times. He was not told the day before the 9/11 –” CARNEY: “Ed, it an anniversary in advance of which this administration, just like the previous administration, took action to prepare for potential acts against the United States or our allies that might take place as part of the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks in 2001. What I can say is that there was no actionable intelligence indicating there would be an attack at the Benghazi facility.” HENRY: “That’s different, though. What I’m asking is, actionable intelligence — I understand that distinction. But you’re saying the President, on 9/10, was not told, broadly, about the consulate in Benghazi being targeted several times, there being problems, there being concerns about it, the ambassador wanting more security? He wasn’t told about any of that?” CARNEY: “Ed, again, I cannot get into the specific details of a classified briefing and a classified document. What I can tell you –” HENRY: “Right, but the Vice President last night said he was not told. So I just want to be clear. You can’t –” CARNEY: “You’re conflating a lot of things.” HENRY: “No I’m not. He said they were not told.” CARNEY: “What I’m saying is that there was no actionable intelligence, and I think that is pretty clear. What I’m saying and what I obviously cannot discuss in detail is covert — I mean, rather, classified information.” (White House Press Briefing, Washington, DC, 10/12/12)

Now The White House Has Doubled Down On Biden’s Defense And Claimed That Diplomatic Security Decisions Are Not Under Its Control

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney “Reinforced” Biden’s Comments By Saying The State Department, Not The White House, Was Responsible For The Security Decisions Made In Libya. “White House press secretary Jay Carney on Friday doubled down on charges by the Obama campaign that Republicans are politicizing the raid in Benghazi. … Carney reinforced Vice President Joe Biden’s assertion during Thursday’s debate that neither Biden nor the president was informed about requests for additional security in Benghazi ahead of the attack on Sept. 11. And he said decisions about security levels there — and at thousands of other U.S. missions around the world — are ‘appropriately’ made by security professionals at the State Department.” (Donovan Slack, “Carney Finds GOP Worries About Diplomatic Security ‘Rich,’“ Politico ’s Politico 44 , 10/12/12)
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Refused To Say That The Buck Stops With Obama In Matters Of Diplomatic Security. FOX NEWS’ ED HENRY: “Can you say on Libya, that basically the buck stops with the State Department on security then, it doesn’t stop at the White House?” WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY: “Well that’s an unartful, made for television phrasing, Ed. But the fact of the matter…” HENRY: “So you’re saying it’s up to the State Department, that the President can’t, that basically, he doesn’t make those assessments, is what you said the first time.” CARNEY: “There are thousands of diplomatic personnel across the world. There are countless facilities around the world. And I am saying when it comes to the number of personnel who are in place at consulates and embassies and other diplomatic facilities around the world, those decisions are appropriately made at the State Department by security personnel. When it comes to funding, yeah, this president fights to make sure that embassy security and diplomatic security is adequately funded and make sure that that funding is restored when efforts on Capitol Hill are made principally by House republicans, including Congressman Ryan to slash it in order to cut taxes for the wealthiest 2% in this country. You bet that’s the President’s responsibility and he has demonstrated that he’s kept that responsibility.” (White House Press Briefing, Washington, DC, 10/12/12)
· Click To Watch
FLASHBACK - Obama: “As President Of The United States, It’s Pretty Clear To Me That I’m Responsible For Folks Who Are Working In The Federal Government And You Know, Harry Truman Said The Buck Stops With You.” OBAMA: “Well, here’s what I know, we were just talking about responsibility and as president of the United States, it’s pretty clear to me that I’m responsible for folks who are working in the federal government and you know, Harry Truman said the buck stops with you.” (“President Obama Says Romney Should Answer Bain Capital Questions,”WJLA, 7/13/12)

OBAMA’S REACTION TO THE ATTACKS HAS BEEN TO STONEWALL AND BLAME OTHERS

The Wall Street Journal : “Rather Than Accept Responsibility, The Administration Has Tried To Stonewall And Blame Others.” “Four Americans lost their lives in Benghazi in a terrorist attack that evidence suggests should have been anticipated and might have been stopped. Rather than accept responsibility, the Administration has tried to stonewall and blame others. Congress should call hearings to hold someone accountable for this debacle.” (Editorial, “The Libya Debacle,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/26/12)

• NBC’s David Gregory: “They’re just sowing more confusion about this rather than resolving the issue, which is creating more of an issue.” (MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” 10/12/12)

CNN’s John King Said That The Obama Administration Was “Publicly Scolding, Publicly Blaming Others For What Happened In The Administration. ” CNN’s WOLF BLITZER: “And there’s the whole notion of throwing the intelligence community under the bus saying ‘that’s what they were telling us, we were only reporting what they were telling us,’ which is awkward for a vice president to do that.” CNN’s JOHN KING: “It’s awkward for anybody. If you talk to people in the intelligence community and now at the State Department, they’re not happy. They’re not happy. The leaders of the administration, in their view, Jay Carney speaks for the president, so that’s the President of the United States, the Vice President last night, on stage last night, essentially publicly scolding, publicly blaming others for what happened in the administration. Those people don’t like that.” (CNN’s “ The Situation Room,” 10/12/12)
Click To Watch