Amb. Rice Finds A Way To Deepen Concerns About Her Competency

Susan RiceOur Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, offered to meet with three powerful Republican Senators — Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Kelly Ayotte — in an effort to clarify her statements made following the September 11, 2012 attacks on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.

One has to wonder why she called for this meeting given its outcome. The meeting ended late this morning, and the Senators offered a brief press conference following. It is clear from the presser that Rice did not help herself during the interaction.

Sen. Graham’s response to the meeting:


Also, Sen. McCain said:


Sen. Ayotte, whom the mainstream media usually fails to mention in an effort to create a meme of two old white guys beating up on a minority woman, explained:


The issue, of course, is that Rice may be nominated by President Barack Obama for the Secretary of State position soon to be abandoned by Hillary Clinton. Should Rice be nominated, Graham, McCain and Ayotte have promised to use their posts to block her confirmation in the United States Senate — that confirmation is a required process for presidential appointments.

Foreign Policy reported yesterday that the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, did not change the talking points that were given to Rice. It seems no one knows exactly who edited the talking points. However, the question is whether Rice knew that Al-Qaeda was responsible for the Benghazi attacks before she came out and said that the terrorist organization had been obliterated in the middle east due to Obama’s efforts. If she knew, and made those statements, it is clear that she relayed false information regardless of whether the talking points had been edited.

Rice is widely assumed to be Obama’s top preference for Secretary of State.


About The Brenner Brief

The Brenner Brief is rendering the mainstream media useless.
To submit a tip, contact us or request information on becoming a contributor, visit


  1. Why weren’t McCain and Graham “troubled” and “disturbed” during the hearings for Condi Rice to become Secretary of State? After all she failed to heed the warnings given to her as Bush’s national security advisor from the Clinton Administration telling her of possible threats of terrorism against the U.S. Her failure to act resulted to hundreds of lives lost on 9/11 and thousands lost during the Iraq War. Isn’t that much more troubling and disturbing?

    It is so sad to me to see Senator McCain going down this path. He used to be such an honorable person and great public servant. Is it long term bitterness of losing the 2000 GOP primary to George W. Bush or the 2008 presidential election to President Obama? It’s just a sad ending to what has been a great political career.

    Susan Rice gave the information that was available at that time on those Sunday talk shows. The information that she gave was given to her by the intelligence community, including the CIA headed by General Petraeus. She didn’t make up the information. As U.N. Ambassador she had no direct involvement in the attack. Secretary of State Clinton was unavailable that Sunday morning, so Ambassador Rice appeared as a substitute. Navy Admiral Mike Mullin has been appointed by Secretary Clinton to head a committee to find out what actually did happen. His committee’s report will be forthcoming in the next month or so.

    McCain, Graham, and Ayotte should wait for Adm. Mullin’s report before passing judgement on Amb. Rice. This is nothing more than a partisan attack, which most folks, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are so tired of.

    It is important for us in the GOP to stop looking so angry all the time. No one wants to vote for the mean guy! We can’t afford to be seen anymore as the party of angry old white guys, who in this case are attacking a minority woman who is considered to be by people on all sides of the political spectrum as being very intelligent (Rhodes Scholar) and competent in her current position.

    • “Susan Rice gave the information that was available at that time on those Sunday talk shows.”

      You are incorrect. Even the Libyan government was saying by then that it was not a spontaneous uprising from a video, and indeed was a terrorist attack.

      • She reported on the information that the U.S. intelligence agencies gave her. If she was given incorrect information by them, she would have had no knowledge of that at that early stage. She wasn’t on site of the incident, so had to rely on our intelligence sources.

  2. It wasn’t a coincidence that Benghazi attack happened on 9-11.

    • Bingo! Which is why it was ludicrous for her to blame it on a video no one had heard of or seen. Anyone with half a brain knew on September 11 that the attack had something to do with the original September 11. She’s a lying liar who lies. She fits in perfectly in the Obama administration.

Leave a comment or question. Report abusive, harassing or annoying behavior by clicking on Tips/Contact in the top menu.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: