Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Governor Palin Talks With Sean Hannity (AUDIO)

Posted on October 31 2012 - 5:42 PM - Posted by: | Follow Steve on Twitter!





Governor Palin spoke with Sean Hannity today on his radio program.  Here is the interview courtesy of SarahNet.

(h/t Adrienne)



Tags: ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • http://theessexblog.blogspot.com/ kcnut

    My good friend sarah kicking butt as always

  • patnatasha

    sarah isnt’ going anywhere.

  • JP4SP

    Thanks for posting this!

  • daisy_mae

    Thanks so much for posting this Steve!  You da bomb :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

    Run Sarah Run!!!

  • Quiet_Righty

    In the old days, I would use an AM-FM cassette-radio to record a radio broadcast. What kind of tech should we use today?

  • IsraeliCojones

    Thank you so much for posting this, Steve – and thanks to SarahNet who never misses a bit :)

    • daisy_mae

      Hi IC!  Hope all is well with you!  I haven’t been able to stay on here much lately due to work.  Always trying to catch up.

      • IsraeliCojones

        Thanks for asking, daisy mae :)

        Everything’s fine, I’ll probably be back after the Elections’ results :)

        But I’m still watching Sarah’s vids and reading her posts. Can’t do more at the moment. Just keeping up on the main stuff.

        G-d bless you, dear :)

        • daisy_mae

          G-d bless you too :)

  • jgrimes

    Like always, GREAT interview.
    I stand w/ Sarah Palin….

  • Laddie_Blah_Blah

    Thanks for posting, Steve. Benghazi would never have happened if the guv were president.

    Sean does not seem to know that there were 8 operatives who were ordered to Benghazi from Tripoli by Petraeus. 

    • fb274

       Nope, not by CIA Director – but by Sec/State.  She most likely conferred with Petraeus, but the responsibility was under her jurisdiction (to an extent).  Actually it was the responsibility of obama.   I read there were 6 only and one of the 6 went with Woods to the ‘consulate’ to help remove the individuals who were stranded there.  When they got back to the annex, these 2 brave men along with others took out about 60 who were attacking them before they were killed.

      • Laddie_Blah_Blah

        Do you have a link to support this? 

        Those men were not marines, but former seals, according to every published report that I saw, which says to me they were not part of normal embassy security, any more than the former seals at the CIA annex were part of security for the Benghazi mission. Those ex-seals were there to provide security to support the CIA’s activities at the annex. Their chain of command ran directly to Petraeus. Once dispatched, the contingent from Tripoli did not report to the Benghazi mission, but to the CIA annex, according to all published reports.

        Again, according to everything I have read in the press, once the ex-seals from Tripoli had reported to, and formed up with the ex-seals already at the CIA annex, it was reportedly Petraeus to whom they were reporting, not Hillary, and that includes the ex-seals who had been dispatched to Benghazi from the embassy in Tripoli. Why would the Sec’y of State dispatch state personnel to protect a CIA facility when it was her embassy’s mission that was under attack? Does not make sense to me. The CIA does not ordinarily put its personnel under the command of a politically appointed diplomat, for reasons which should be obvious.

        The CIA station chief was still in Tripoli, according to all published accounts. He may coordinate with the ambassador, but does not report to the ambassador. He reports up the CIA chain of command, and, in any case, it was the ambassador who was under attack in Benghazi, pleading for help. If the CIA station chief and his cohort of ex-seals were under the authority of State, the ambassador’s call for assistance would have been heeded in Tripoli by the CIA station chief, but it was not. 

        Instead, the ex-seals were dispatched to the CIA annex, not the Benghazi mission. The most reasonable explanation for that is that they were dispatched from Tripoli to protect CIA assets, personnel, and operations. Once there, they were ordered to stay there, and to stay away from the Benghazi mission, and that order was reportedly issued by Petraeus. If those ex-seals were sent by Hillary, why would she send them to the CIA annex, and why, then, were they protecting a CIA facility, in place, instead of being immediately ordered to relieve the Benghazi mission? It seems obvious to me that they were sent by the CIA to protect the CIA, with no intent to engage at the Benghazi mission.

        Once again, according to all published reports, it was the State Dept. which consistently ordered all forces to "stand down" from supporting the mission in Benghazi. Petraeus was widely reported to have conveyed the same order to his men at the CIA annex, including those men who were dispatched from Tripoli.

        According to all the information available to the public from every news source reporting on this incident, there is nothing to indicate that Hillary sent anyone, anywhere. Her chain of command goes directly to the CINC, and we have had numerous press reports that he had forestalled any relief efforts on behalf of the ambassador at the Benghazi mission. You would have to believe that Hillary was defying a direct order from her immediate superior if it was she who ordered a relief force to the CIA annex.

        Much more likely, the relief force from Tripoli was under CIA control, and were dispatched by the CIA station chief under direction from Petraeus. Petraeus’ interest would have been to protect the CIA annex and the CIA’s covert op.  An order from him for his people to report to the CIA annex should be seen as a CIA effort to protect a CIA asset and operation. It would not have been seen as defying the CINC’s order to "stand down" regarding support to the Benghazi mission. Petraeus himself, is universally reported to have repeated that directive from his CINC.

        Once at the CIA annex, however, the ex-seals "went rogue," as we all now know. It was they who defied the CINC’s direct order, and Petraeus’ order, as well, or so it has been reported. 

        If you have better info, don’t be shy. We are all trying to piece things together because the administration has been stonewalling and lying from day one.

        • fb274

          Go to C-Span and listen to he hearings.  Where is Your link to support Petraeus’ ordering the flight from Tripoli to Benghazi????

          • socon

             Petraeus is complicit in this national disgrace.

          • Laddie_Blah_Blah

            The hearings!? Even the Congressmen conducting the hearings have said they are not getting the truth. Did you hear that part? The dishonesty of the testimony is one reason everyone is so upset, including Congress. 

            If you have something substantive to back up your assertion, give it up. The "shucking and jiving" of the administration’s witnesses at the hearings are a major part of the problem. If you are going to swallow what they are saying at the hearings, go ahead.

            "Where is Your link to support Petraeus’ ordering the flight from Tripoli to Benghazi????"

            The CIA does not issue press releases on CIA activity, nor do they talk to reporters. Nevertheless, the CIA annex was a CIA facility. I cannot give you a press report on that, but why else would everyone, including the State Dept. witnesses, refer to it as "the CIA annex?"  

            Woods was assigned to help with security at the CIA annex. Who do you think he was working for? The relief force sent from the embassy in Tripoli was sent to the CIA annex. Who do you think made the assignment to relocate CIA support personnel to a CIA facility to protect CIA assets, the State Dept.? Hello? 

            Those sent to the CIA annex were  reportedly told by the CIA command, along with Woods and the others already there, to "stand down," and not to relieve the Benghazi mission. There are many links supporting that report, and I will provide you with as many as you wish, if you actually question it. So why were the ex-seals at the CIA annex taking orders from the CIA, and not State, if they were working for State, and Hillary, as you claim?

            They were all CIA, and, therefore, were all taking orders issued through the CIA chain of command. That is the only scenario that makes any sense, despite what anyone has said at the hearings. 

            And what did they say at the hearings which leads you to believe Hillary was in charge of CIA personnel? You got anything? Anything at all?

            The CIA does not work for the State Dept. Its more like the other way around, with State tasked to assist the CIA with whatever mission they are conducting. And I would bet my life savings that the CIA’s budget in Libya dwarfs that of the embassy in Tripoli. It was reportedly a lack of sufficient State Dept. funds that State used as one of their excuses to deny additional support to the Benghazi mission, remember? State even REDUCED security there.

            fb274 – sorry, but you do not know what you are talking about.

  • John_Frank

    Steve, thanks for posting this video and h/t to SarahNet.

    Excellent interview.

  • fb274

    I believe Gov. Palin was on with Mark Levin today, also.

  • ZH100

    Excellent interview!

  • wodiej

    Awesome, just loved it.  Concise, clear, strong and positive.  

  • BrianusBerkleianus

    moved

  • BrianusBerkleianus

    My Dear Friends in Sarah,

    Happy Friday to you all!!

    Below are some highlights from and observations on her radio interview with Hannity on Wednesday.

    Emphases are mine throughout.

    THE RADIO INTERVIEW WITH HANNITY

    About Tuesday’s election: "This is the election of our lifetime, Sean."

    Joblessness has opened people’s eyes.

    People understand that looking to government for cradle-to-grave care IS NOT AMERICA.

    We have to get back to the ideas of rewarding hard work, and developing our God-given natural resources.

    My observation: This is GREAT and succinct and profound. The idea is that of making good use of our "talents" (Sacred Scripture) both as INDIVIDUALS (talents, abilities, skills, etc.) and as a NATION (oil, coal, etc.).

    There is a divine obligation and mandate to employ our talents and resources for good, both as individuals and as a country. The policies, and even more fundamentally the philosophy, of obama and his ilk go directly contrary to these divine commands: People are not encouraged to excel, to reach for the stars; the nation is STIFLED from developing its gifts and resources.

    THE OBLIGATION IS A PRIVATE ONE AND A PUBLIC ONE.

    The Presidential race is still close because the corrupt media filters what obama has done, and does not call him out on his blunders and mistakes and PURPOSEFUL FAILED POLICIES.

    She then explains the "purposeful": There has been a deliberate attempt to make people DEPENDENT on big government. What an indictment!

    The media has been COMPLICIT in the failed policies of obama.

    Then she follows with wonderful irony and even sarcasm: Re the hurricane, she is so pleased that obama NOW says that we will cut through red tape, etc. Why was it not the same re Benghazi?!?

    IF IT HAD BEEN HER SON WHO WAS KILLED IN BENGHAZI, SHE WOULD WANT TO STORM THE WHITE HOUSE RIGHT NOW AND DEMAND ANSWERS!!!

    This, my friends, this is the passionate patriot, the great-hearted fighter, the lady warrior whom we admire, honor, and love so deeply!!

    Dear Sarah, yes, yes!! LED BY YOU, WE will storm the White House one day to put YOU in the Oval Office–it WILL happen!!!

    Re Benghazi: She believes that people with a conscience will help bring out and expose the truth about this cover-up.

    Re the ’08 campaign: Until the votes started coming in, she thought that McCain would win. She thought that there was no way that America would choose someone like barack obama.

    She thinks that people will learn from the mistake made in 2008 about "the fake hopey-changey stuff as represented by obama."

    In response to Hannity’s remark that she can take a punch like no one else, and that she does not let anyone stop her, she says, "I’m not going to let anybody stop me, because I know what’s really important."

    And then she generously says, re the victims of the hurricane, and re the mothers of troops who have been killed, that THEY ARE THE ONES WHO HAVE TAKEN THE PUNCHES; the punches that SHE has taken are just VERBAL and really quite meaningless, because they have come from:

    "A PUNKY LITTLE CORRUPT MEDIA," that the majority of Americans don’t believe anymore.

    Wonderful, Governor!! Way to take on and WHACK with your nightstick these wretched PUNKS!!!

    They can keep throwing their stuff, she says in conclusion, and "We’ll always be happy, and our enemies will know it!"

    Great interview!!

    As always, the Governor expressed and incarnated the inextinguishable fighting spirit of Alaska and of America that will crush the un-American domestic enemies of our country who currently follow the filthy banner of the pompous little empty suit, the usurping liar and deceiver, the little commie "community organizer" from Chicago.

    God bless you all always!!

    God bless Sarah!

    Our Sarah Always!!

    Brianus

Open Thread