File this under: “Had a Republican President/Administration Done This”…
They just don’t know when to stop. It’s the old “hand in the cookie jar” scenario of refusing to let go and be revealed for the liars and fools they are. This whole Ben Rhodes not only coldly smacks of the Jonathan Gruber – ObamaCare lies scandal from a couple years ago, but makes it even more and more evident nothing this administration has said over these last 7 years can be taken as “Bible-swearing” truth and everything they have done in this time-span should be questioned and even investigated to the fullest.
(The Hill) – Ben Rhodes might have a “mind meld” with President Obama, but he is causing headaches for the White House.
Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, managed in a recent New York Times Magazine profile to undercut the president’s message on the Iran nuclear agreement while angering the Washington press corps and foreign policy establishment.
The broad backlash triggered by the piece rippled throughout the nation’s capital and caused the White House to go into damage control mode.
In a blog post late Sunday, Rhodes wrote that the public relations campaign he ran to sell the Iran deal was meant “to push out facts” and not “spin” the public and members of Congress.
He wrote that the White House and its allies “believed deeply in the case that we were making,” that the deal represented the best chance at cutting off Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon while avoiding war.
The longtime Obama aide was responding to criticism to his comments in the profile, which was published online last Thursday.
In the profile, Rhodes said he “created an echo chamber” of support for the deal by spoon-feeding talking points to friendly think tanks and experts.
Rhodes, who is 38 and holds a master of fine arts in creative writing, derided the press corps as too naive to cover world events.
He said the average reporter the White House talks to “is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns,” suggesting that allowed him to easily manipulate media coverage of U.S. foreign policy.
“They literally know nothing,” he said.
The piece was clearly a source of frustration for the White House, which is looking to burnish Obama’s foreign policy record during his final year in office.
Glenn Reynolds @ Instapundit confirms what Rhodes claims:
The Iran deal is a debacle, and the press went along because (1) Rhodes is right and they don’t know much; and (2) They’re happy to be lied to anyway, because they’re Democratic operatives with bylines.
But Ben Rhodes is his own best fan as he restates the scam and lies about the Iran nuke deal to defend it, him, and the administration. And the White House is helping carry the lie and deception as much as they can…
So much so that the White House is back in scrub-mode to cover its collective ass:
“Late today, we discovered that the State Department’s video of its December 2, 2013, press briefing, at which I confronted spokesperson Jen Psaki about the false statement made by her predecessor, Victoria Nuland – the one you saw in my story tonight – has itself, with the use of a white flash, been deleted from both the State Department’s official website and from its YouTube channel,” Rosen said. “In that exchange, Psaki effectively admitted that the administration had lied to me because the diplomacy needed ‘privacy.’”
During the 2013 exchange in question, Rosen asked Psaki about Nuland’s statement that there were “no” secret talks going on with Iran.
“Is it the policy of the State Department, where the preservation or the secrecy of secret negotiations is concerned, to lie in order to achieve that goal?” Rosen asked.
Psaki replied, “James, I think there are times where diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress. This is a good example of that.”
When asked about the deletion by Rosen, the State Department replied that they cannot explain the omission and they are working to restore the footage.
Except that this is not the first time the White House techies have used the old ‘white flash’ and other ‘editing’ methods to selectively delete such things, and then answer with the lame scratching-of-the-head “gee, we don’t know what happened” lie to cover-up the big lie cover-up.
In writing his piece on Rhodes, naturally Samuels knew the revelations would punish the administration. But that doesn’t seem to be his principal concern; he was loyal, first, to his profession.