Verse 29 of the Obama Impeachment song: Netanyahu’s speech to Congress is destructive?

National security adviser Susan Rice denounced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s upcoming address to a joint meeting of Congress, calling it “destructive” to the relationship between the United States and Israel.

Rice, appearing on “Charlie Rose,” said that Netanyahu’s decision to accept the invitation of House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) to offer critical views of a potential nuclear deal with Iran shortly before the Israeli elections has “injected a degree of partisanship, which is not only unfortunate. I think it’s destructive of the fabric of the relationship.” Netanyahu is scheduled to speak March 3; the Israeli elections are March 17.

Which leads to verse 29 of the Obama Impeachment song:

Netanyahu’s speech destruct

While ISIS peacefully abduct

And Iran the Bomb construct

My absolute power all corrupt.

The whole song at:

Greta van Susteren leveled this fiery salvo in response to Susan Rice’s comments:

“Has President Obama’s Nation Security Adviser Susan Rice gone off the deep end? What kool aid is SHE drinking?

Rice, who as you know ridiculously went around to the 5 Sunday shows claiming Benghazi was caused by a video, just claimed to CBS Charlie Rose that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to Congress next week is “destructive” to the relationship between the US and Israel. Really? PM Netanyahu is the destructive one to the relationship?

Ah…maybe she ought to look at her boss’ conduct if she wants to talk ‘destructive’ to the relationship.

Consider this..

1/ Remember when her boss, President Obama, got caught on a hot mike ‘trash talking’ PM Netanyahu with then French President Sarkozy? Does she not think THAT was destructive to the relationship? Insulting another world leader like that?

or how about this?

2/ When the Jewish deli got hit by terrorism in Paris in January, and PM Netanyahu and all those world leaders showed up in solidarity — where was President Obama? A no show! Does she think THAT was not destructive to the relationship? A no show for that terrorism attack on a Jewish deli?

or how about this?

3/ In October an Administration official called PM Netanyahu in a magazine article “chicken shit” and “a coward.” Does she not think THAT was destructive to the relationship?

And how about the fact that President Obama did not followup with an apology to PM Netanyahu on behalf of his Administration? Does she not think THAT was destructive to the relationship?

And by the way, was SHE the “Administration official” who called PM Netanyahu ‘coward’ and ‘chicken shit?’

and want more?

how about this?

4/ PM Netanyahu is desperately trying to protect his country from Iran getting a nuclear weapon….and is speaking to Americans via Congress..

– a/ Democrats are going to be a ‘no show’ to insult him and have already made that known….and
-b/ the VP, as President of the Senate says he is not showing up…and
-c/ President Obama won’t find 5 minutes to meet with the Prime Minister when he is here in DC.

Does she think THAT might be destructive to the relationship?

The is all because the White House is upset because Speaker Boehner did not tell them first before inviting PM Netanyahu. Do you know how insane that is to be upset about ‘manners’ and ‘protocol’ when the topic is NUCLEAR WEAPONS?

What kool aid is Susan Rice drinking?”

Here is the Washington Post article:…/susan-rice-netanyahus-spee…/

The lies of Benghazi. Ay, there’s the rub.

The lies of Benghazi. Ay, there’s the rub.

My biggest regret is what happened in Benghazi,” Mrs. Clinton said during an appearance at the National Automobile Dealers Association convention in New Orleans, La. “It was a terrible tragedy, losing four Americans, two diplomats, and now it’s public, so I can say, two CIA operatives. Losing an ambassador like Chris Stevens, who was one of our very best.

This comment revealed more than Mrs. Clinton intended. Her regret is that the terror attack in Benghazi happened during her watch. The comment “now it’s public” revealed much about the callousness of the Obama administration, herself included. On the day of the attack, when the well organized attack was underway, the CIA operators wanted to intervene and save the diplomats but were told to “stand down.” The recent congressional hearings revealed that the existence of the CIA annex was so top secret that even the U.S. military did not know of its existence. Whatever the CIA was doing in Benghazi was so important that it was more expedient to sacrifice the lives of the diplomats than to expose the CIA.

However, the CIA heroes disobeyed the order and went and saved nearly everybody in the mission, but they could not find Ambassador Stevens and another man, so they were left to die at the hands of the terrorists. This exposed to the whole world the CIA annex, so a cover story had to be invented, and thus the lies began.

Who invented the lies about the infamous video clip being responsible? After all there had been a takeover of the U.S. embassy in Egypt the day before where people shouted “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama” and raised the al-Qaeda flag.  ( That needed a diversion badly and the video clip, which was a secondary rallying cry among the unorganized masses became widely featured in reports. This in turn resulted in multiple protests in many cities by crowds stirred up by agitators.

Obama, Hillary Clinton and the inner circle of the administration had for weeks strongly advocated the U.N’s proposal of religious freedom that would make it a crime to criticize in any way the Prophet Muhammad, so somebody planted the story and link to the U-tube video in a Cairo newspaper. That started the chain reaction.

Now the plot thickens. Who was the “brain” behind this diversion?

Hillary Clinton? Not very likely. She might have been Secretary of State, but as such had very little influence and even knowledge of administration policy. When you want to keep somebody out of the loop you send them to meetings, while important business is being conducted. Hillary Clinton was sent to over 100 countries, and thus being effectively kept out of the loop.

David Petraeus? Even less likely. He was selected CIA director to show the
David-Petraeusinclusiveness of the Obama Administration but was kept out of the loop because the administration knew he could not be trusted with this sensitive information, so his role was reduced to a mere administrative role, ready to be jettisoned as soon as the election was over.

Susan Rice?  She went to six Sunday morning news shows and peddled the story of the tape. Republicans in general took a dim view of her performance and Dan Pfeiffer of the White House thought they owed her an apology.( She is in on the original planting of the video trailer story in the Cairo Susan_Rice,_official_State_Dept_photo_portrait,_2009newspaper, and a willing accomplice in the video diversion conspiracy, but was not part of the decision to sacrifice the diplomats.

Barack Obama? You are getting lukewarm. On a day with fresh news about al-Awlaki, it seemed the president was pondering the drone program that he had expanded so dramatically and with such lethal results, as well as the death of Bin Laden, which was still resonating worldwide months later. “Turns out I’m really good at killing people,” Obama said quietly, “Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.” Obama is certainly callous enough to tell CIA and the military: You do what you have to do, and then walk away. He is thus implicated by being Commander In Chief and walk away. (no picture here. He was AWOL)

Valery Jarrett? She is the brain behind Obama, born in Iran and well versed in what Impact of the FinancialSpecial Session: The New US Agegoes on in the Middle East. She holds a part of the key to the mystery of the CIA annex, but did not give the order to “stand down”.

John_Brennan_CIA_official_portraitThis leaves us John Brennan, you know, the guy who calls Jerusalem Al-Quds. He was Deputy National Security Advisor, a position which does not require Senate confirmation, but he was the most influential of all his advisors regarding the Middle East. He must have been the one that ran the CIA annex operations in Benghazi, and their actions were more important to keep secret than saving a few diplomats.  Therefore, using Occam’s razor, he must have been the one giving the order to “stand down”. By the way, he is the current CIA director.

All of this is speculative, and we may never find out the whole truth, since the CIA annex was scrubbed clean within 24 hours of the terrorist attack. Granted it took three weeks before FBI was allowed to go in and start their investigation. Since then 15 witnesses cooperating with the FBI have been murdered.

To the best of my guesses the diversion to blame the video and apologize to the whole world for it at taxpayers expense was a joint effort between Clinton, Obama, Rice and Brennan, led by Valery Jarrett.

As long as the White House is stonewalling, the guesswork will continue.

Do republicans owe Susan Rice an apology? Dan Pfeiffer of the White House thinks so. I think not.

Do republicans owe Susan Rice an apology? Dan Pfeiffer of the White House thinks so. I think not.
It started innocently enough in Tunis December 17 2010. A street vendor, Mohamed Bouazizi, set himself on fire in protest of the confiscation of his wares and the harassment and humiliation that he reported was inflicted on him by a municipal official and her aides. His act became a catalyst for the Tunisian Revolution and the wider Arab Spring, inciting demonstrations and riots throughout Tunisia in protest of social and political issues in the country. The demonstrations grew and on May 20 2012 a demonstration was taped by Memri TV. The rallying cry was “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama”
The tape is 7 min long, but you only have to listen to the first minute to get the gist of what was going on. The rest is more or less a martial arts demonstration:

Meanwhile, the Arab Spring was in full bloom and Obama spoke with genuine joy and exaltation about the birth of true democracy in the Arab world. In Egypt Mubarak was gone and demonstrations were a daily occurrence in Cairo. They culminated on Sep 11 2012 with Jihadists storming the U.S. embassy and planting the black Al-Qaida flag of the Caliphate on the top of the wall. They were shouting slogans. Was it about a video? Listen for yourselves:

This mantra spread to Morocco, Qatar and has even spread to Syria in 2013:

Does this sound like a protest about a video?
Does anybody in their right mind still think Republicans owe Susan Rice an apology?