A simple error or more of the same from the Liar of Benghazi?
First there was the Benghazi lie, in which she appeared on five Sunday morning news shows to tell the American people that the attack was motivated by a YouTube video.
The Bowe Bergdahl lie, in which she assured us that the U.S. Army deserter had served with honor and distinction.
The Turkish airbase lie, in which she stated that the Turkish government had agreed to allow their airbases to be used for operations against Syria and Iran.
The unmasking lie, in which she first claimed she didn’t know anything at all about it, and then, after it was revealed that she had, indeed, requested the unmasking, stated, in a stunning display of grammatical malfeasance, that she “leaked nothing to nobody.” We’re still waiting to see if that last bit is a lie or not.
And now, in the face of Syria’s recent gas attack on their own citizen’s, we have the chemical weapons lie, in which she said as recently as January that Assad had “voluntarily and verifiably” relinquished all the country’s chemical weapons.
What did I miss?
Why do people continue to believe anything this woman has to say? If she said the sky was blue, I’d go outside to make certain it wasn’t green. And for the love of God, who at the Washington Post thought this professional liar was qualified to write an op-ed on presidential truthfulness?
Charles Woods, whose son, Tyrone Woods, was killed in Benghazi, suggested recently that perhaps Rice should take a lie detector test. He might be onto something there. Although I’m not entirely certain she couldn’t fool the machine.
Susan Rice has no acquaintance with the truth and people who believe that she’ll ever tell the whole truth about the unmasking incident are – how can I say this nicely – delusional.
[This post first appeared here on the author's personal blog.]