Bob Woodward: White House Acts Like It "Wants to Be Nixonian"

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

It

The Benghazi scandal is not Watergate, says one of the reporters who broke the story, but he did invoke the name of the president who famously declared, "I am not a crook."

"This is not Watergate," the Washington Post's Bob Woodward said Sunday on "Meet the Press," "but there are people in the administration who have acted as if they want to be Nixonian."

In the initial Benghazi talking points the CIA says explicitly that there were al-Qaida ties to the group that attacked the American diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11, 2012, Woodward noted. The final talking points used by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on all five Sunday talk shows five days later made no such reference.

"This is a business where you have to tell the truth, and that did not happen here," Woodward said.

On CNBC on Friday, however, Woodward seemed more comfortable using the word "Watergate."

"If you read through all these emails, you see that everyone in the government is saying, 'Oh, let's not tell the public that terrorists were involved, people connected to al Qaida. Let's not tell the public that there were warnings,'" Woodward said on "Morning Joe."

"And I have to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts to the conversations, and he personally went through them and said, 'Oh, let's not tell this, let's not show this.' I would not dismiss Benghazi. It's a very serious issue."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newswidget/woodward-obama-nixon-watergate/2013/05/19/id/505248?promo_code=10078-1&utm_source=Herman%20Cain&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's talk about the IRS first, and just get some actual questions on the table. You and others have said that no one in the White House knew about IRS actions before getting the heads up on the inspector general's report last month. Are you absolutely sure of that?

PFEIFFER: Yes, that is -- that is -- that's what we've looked at. That's what we know. That's the first we've heard of it, and you know as -- as it's been said, the -- the deputy secretary of the Treasury was made aware, just of the fact that the investigation was beginning last year. But no one in the White House was aware. It's important to know what we -- what we actually knew, which is just that there was an investigation that was coming to conclusion, that that we knew the results. We didn't see the report until it was released last Wednesday.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That was -- until last Wednesday. So, last June, Neal Wolin, the Deputy Treasury Secretary is told. As far as you know, he did not tell his boss, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, and Geithner did not tell the White House?

PFEIFFER: That is correct.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-white-house-senior-adviser-dan-pfeiffer/story?id=19204852#.UZo9P7XVA20

They certainly are acting guilty.

[GandD 5,966]

I'm just not buying into this whole Benghazi scandal BS. This administration is getting called out for everything that went wrong. What administration ever avoided all mistakes? I mean, with the logic being used here, 911 was a scandal for the Bush white house They failed to protect America from terrorism. But, rationality should kick in and say, yes mistakes were made but the government making mistakes that lead to deaths does not equal scandal.

[GandD 5,966]

"If you read through all these emails, you see that everyone in the government is saying, 'Oh, let's not tell the public that terrorists were involved, people connected to al Qaida. Let's not tell the public that there were warnings,'" Woodward said on "Morning Joe."

"And I have to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts to the conversations, and he personally went through them and said, 'Oh, let's not tell this, let's not show this.' I would not dismiss Benghazi. It's a very serious issue."

Oh and if you think all political entities don't do this, you're kidding yourself. I can likely find multiple examples of this under nearly every president ever.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I'm just not buying into this whole Benghazi scandal BS. This administration is getting called out for everything that went wrong. What administration ever avoided all mistakes? I mean, with the logic being used here, 911 was a scandal for the Bush white house They failed to protect America from terrorism. But, rationality should kick in and say, yes mistakes were made but the government making mistakes that lead to deaths does not equal scandal.

It's about the cover up not the attack... Follow along. Your logic trying to compare it to 911 is insane at best.

I love how when you liberals just can no longer defend the liberals you love to defend, you never fail to say.. "Well I am sure some "insert Republican from history" did it also. "

You three musketeers of liberal absurdity here are always consistent. I give you that.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Oh and if you think all political entities don't do this, you're kidding yourself. I can likely find multiple examples of this under nearly every president ever.

Well there you go.. Standard liberal logic 101. It must be ok because I can Google up some pub in history that did it also. Like that makes it ok.

Ok I can deal with that. I know one very prominent Pub that used the government against his enemies and engaged in big cover ups. Richard Nixon.

Can you defend Obama based on the facts or is the standard liberal logic... Point finger at someone in history really all you got ?

[Teddy B 17,252]

It's about the cover up not the attack... Follow along. Your logic trying to compare it to 911 is insane at best.

I love how when you liberals just can no longer defend the liberals you love to defend, you never fail to say.. "Well I am sure some "insert Republican from history" did it also. "

You three musketeers of liberal absurdity here are always consistent. I give you that.

I think it's comical how anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liberal. I prefer to view anyone who disagrees with you as somewhat intelligent.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I think it's comical how anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liberal. I prefer to view anyone who disagrees with you as somewhat intelligent.

Well since I have been here about 2 years I pretty much know who the liberals are.

So do you have anything to add to the subject or did you drop by for the standard liberal point fingers, divert, talk about anything but the subject tactic. ?

It goes like this--

Hey did you know the CIA very clearly told the Administration that it was a Al Qaeda terrorist attack and they very purposely lied about it, and tried to blame it on a Video that had nothing to do with it

Typical Moon Bat Response---Well Reagan or Bush blah blah blah.... you are stupid blah blah blah.

You guys really are very consistent in absolute absurdity and denial.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Well since I have been here about 2 years I pretty much know who the liberals are.

No, you really have no clue what a liberal is, let alone who they are.

[lostinblue 1,989]

I'm just not buying into this whole Benghazi scandal BS. This administration is getting called out for everything that went wrong. What administration ever avoided all mistakes? I mean, with the logic being used here, 911 was a scandal for the Bush white house They failed to protect America from terrorism. But, rationality should kick in and say, yes mistakes were made but the government making mistakes that lead to deaths does not equal scandal.

Obama 2nd Debate: “And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our U.N. Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as president, that’s not what I do as Commander in Chief.”

Who gave the order to stand down......

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

No, you really have no clue what a liberal is, let alone who they are.

So the Obama admin did not try to lie about Benghazi ? Is that what you are saying ?

[GandD 5,966]

Well there you go.. Standard liberal logic 101. It must be ok because I can Google up some pub in history that did it also. Like that makes it ok.

Ok I can deal with that. I know one very prominent Pub that used the government against his enemies and engaged in big cover ups. Richard Nixon.

Can you defend Obama based on the facts or is the standard liberal logic... Point finger at someone in history really all you got ?

The point is not that others doing it make it ok. The point is that it happens all the time under all presidents, yet you are especially mad about it happening under this president. That tells me this is more politically motivated anger than anger about the attack. Standard partisan logic says things the opposition guy did are always a bigger deal that what your guy did.

[GandD 5,966]

It's about the cover up not the attack... Follow along. Your logic trying to compare it to 911 is insane at best.

I love how when you liberals just can no longer defend the liberals you love to defend, you never fail to say.. "Well I am sure some "insert Republican from history" did it also. "

You three musketeers of liberal absurdity here are always consistent. I give you that.

It wasn't a cover up. What you perceive as a cover up is a political party trying to figure out how to properly word a response to a not-completely understood situation. If you want to be mad about something, be mad about the AP phone scandal. That's real.

I think it's comical how anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liberal. I prefer to view anyone who disagrees with you as somewhat intelligent.

No frickin' joke. 100% with you.

[decocker 7,198]

It wasn't a cover up. What you perceive as a cover up is a political party trying to figure out how to properly word a response to a not-completely understood situation. If you want to be mad about something, be mad about the AP phone scandal. That's real.

they can't back down now, what with all the hearings, time wasted and money spent and still spending. this is fun for them.

they've already riled the crazier sector of their base, if they back down now it will look like they have no follow through or ability to get anything actually accomplished..

[GandD 5,966]

this is fun for them.

I COMPLETELY agree. This is way more of a gotcha moment than people caring about what happened.