What's the difference between John McCain's statement on the attack in Benghazi and Susan Rice's?

JOHN MCCAIN: It’s hard to know exactly what took place and how long it was planned, and — I don’t have that information. I know very well that there were demonstrations, that there was a group of either al-Qaida or some radical Islamists who — about 15 of them, armed with RPGs and other lethal weapons, that seized this opportunity to attack our consulate. And it was an act of terror. It wasn’t an act of a mob getting out of control. We should understand that. This was a calculated act of terror on the part of a small group of jihadists, not a mob that somehow attacked and sacked our embassy.

SUSAN RICE: Based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy — sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that — in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.

Update:

They both said the same thing!

LMAO! at you people.

13 Answers

Relevance
  • Shilo
    Lv 7
    7 years ago
    Best Answer

    John McCain - double talk. He says that it is hard to know exactly what took place, and he doesn't have that information; yet, goes on to describe what happened including how many jihadists involved. He also says that they seized this opportunity (ie protests); yet, this same mob was not involved. He tries to compartmentalize the facts without knowing the facts and at the same time, fails in his attempt to compartmentalize them.

    Susan Rice - prefaces the assessment by saying that it is based on the best information known at the time. Her subsequent description is more inclusive of all the factors, including the protests to the ugly video as well as the extremist elements involved.....more reasonable and clear in spite of what little was known at the time.

  • 7 years ago

    The Republicans want Obama to pick John Kerry as the new Sec'y of Defense, because that will vacate a Senate seat and give them a chance to pick up one more seat. So they are pre-emptively challenging Susan Rice, pre-emptively because Obama has never said he was going to pick her. In fact John McCain is on record saying he will oppose -whoever- Obama picks, so in his case it's not even about Susan Rice.

    They also wanted to create a scandal before the election, to accuse the Obama admin. of 'covering up' something in the Benghazi attack. Foreign policy was one of Mitt Romney's weakest areas in the election, so they wanted to attack Obama on something having to do with foreign policy. It didn't work, but the Republicans never give up on an accusation, even after it's been totally disproven. To stop attacking Obama would be the same as admitting they were wrong, and you know the Repubs never do that.

    Republicans and Democrats agree that at first it looked like a protest over the anti-Islamic video, but later evidence came to light that it had been planned in advance. A Republican president would have diverted people's attention by invading a country that had nothing to do with it, like Reagan in Grenada or GW Bush in Iraq. Maybe that's what they wanted Obama to do.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Nice try, libtard.

    McCain made his comments a couple days after the attack, based on news reports and no actual facts or briefings from the President, State Department, or Defense Department.

    Rice made here comments one week after the attack, based here comments on briefings from the President, State Department, Defense Department, and CIA. By that time many of the conservative news media were already reporting that it had nothing to do with the demonstrators, that it was a pre-planned terrorist attack, and many of the details were already being given out.

    So, in light of the fact that everyone but her seems to know what was going on....THAT is the difference.

  • Tom
    Lv 5
    7 years ago

    Susan Rice assumed it just got out of control 'it spun from there into something much, much more violent'

    McCain assumes it was calculated and planned.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 7 years ago

    When Susan Rice got her marching orders to Lie, she just simply followed through. Although Clapp needs to face the music and she deserves some Disciplinary Action both will go unpunished for LYING TO AMERICA. But they work for the Chicago Style Administration Never let a good disaster go to waste.

  • bhuwan
    Lv 4
    3 years ago

    right that's the actual coverup. US Embassies & consulates attacked decrease than Bush: June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures fifty one. February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Truck bomb kills 17. February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan Gunmen on motorcycles killed 2 consulate guards. July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan Suicide bomber kills 2. December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. 5 killed, 10 wounded. March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan Suicide automobile bomber killed 4, consisting of a U.S. diplomate at as quickly as focused via the assailants. September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automated weapons, and a automobile bomb (nevertheless 2nd truck bomb did no longer detonate). One killed and 13 wounded. January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece A rocket-propelled grenade grow to be fired on the embassy construction. no one grow to be injured. July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. 3 policemen killed. March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen Mortar attack misses embassy, hits interior sight women' college quite. September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and automobile bombs. Six Yemeni infantrymen and 7 civilians have been killed. sixteen greater have been injured. The college of Maryland database additionally lists sixty 4 assaults on American diplomatic targets for the period of the George W. Bush administration, consisting of automobile bombs on the U. S. embassy in Yemen and armed attackers assaulting a US consulate in Saudi Arabia.,klgfrdef

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Susan Rice was reading White House talking points, and the White House knew it was lying.

  • 7 years ago

    Susan Rice knowingly and stupidly took her orders from the White House and LIED.

  • 7 years ago

    Susan Rice willfully and blatantly LIED to the American people at the request of president Obama...FACT!!

  • 7 years ago

    Rice lied when she said it was a spontaneous protest and perpetrated that lie for days while giving interviews.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.