Benghazi: Lies Perpetuated by Our Own Administration

Benghazi-Cover-upABC news September 20, 2012:  “In a Univision town hall meeting today, President Obama declined to call the assault a terrorist attack, saying he didn’t ‘want to speak to something until we have all the information’.”

September 25, 2012 remarks by Obama to UN general assembly: “That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.  Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.  We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.”

September 14, 2012 Hillary Clinton remarks at the transfer of remains ceremony to honor those lost in attacks in Benghazi, Libya at Andrews Air Force Base: “We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”

These are the horrendous statements that the current administration willfully chose to perpetuate after the September 11, 2012 jihadist attacks against our Embassy in Benghazi. They even allowed and encouraged Ambassador Susan Rice to proliferate the lies on five T.V. talk shows following the attacks. A recent report by the House of Representatives investigating the Benghazi cover up, which is getting little publicity, has now proven without prejudice, that then-Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton and President Obama knowingly and willfully lied to the American people to cover up their own derelict actions.

The report says:

“Administration officials crafted and continued to rely on incomplete and misleading talking points. Specifically after a White House Deputies meeting on Saturday September 15, 2012, the Administration altered the talking points to remove references to the likely participation of Islamic extremists in the attacks. The Administration also removed references to the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa-ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya, including information about at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi. Senior State Department officials requested –and the white house approved- that the details of the threats, specifics of the previous attacks, and previous warnings be removed to insulate the Department from criticism that it ignored the threat environment in Benghazi.”

Evidence rebuts Administration claims that the talking points were “modified to protect classified information” or to “protect investigation by the Federal Bureau of investigation” (FBI). E-mail exchanges during the interagency process do not reveal any concern with protecting classified information. Additionally, the Bureau itself approved a version of the talking points with significantly more information about the attacks and previous threats than the version that the State Department requested. Thus, the claim that the State Department’s edits were made solely to protect that investigation is not credible.

How is it that no one cares to cover this? This is a huge story with much worse ramifications than Watergate but with none of the publicity. Hillary Clinton may say “what difference, at this point, does it makebut it makes all the difference in the world.

The fact is, an entire administration worked together to corrupt information.  Then they accused our own people, literally blaming Americans for a video, and premeditatedly lied about it all–thus endangering the lives of Americans.  Yes, it definitely does make a difference.

The report not only found the administration intentionally altered talking points, they also discovered signed documents from Hillary Clinton denying Chris Stevenson’s request for additional security. Under cross-examination Hillary had claimed she never received such requests. Her denial of the requests seems to constitute a breach of duty; her denial of denying the requests seems to constitute perjury.

Page 23 of the report becomes even more eye opening when they revealed what was lost by letting the FBI handle the investigation as opposed to military or other intelligence.

“Regrettably,” the report says, “the FBI simply did not have the ability to access the location of the attacks with sufficient speed to ensure that all evidence was accumulated as quickly as possible. “

As a result, the FBI was unable to access and secure the scene in a timely manner and vital information was lost. It is sickening to realize the Administration’s only purpose in using the FBI to investigate was to cover their deceit. If the military had been allowed to investigate it would have been an admission by the White House that the attacks indeed were terroristic. In addition, if the military had been allowed to follow up, the President and Hillary Clinton’s treachery would have been exposed.

The report continues on to provide insight into our current state of military readiness. It appears that President Obama’s eagerness to gut the military may have contributed to the inability to respond to the attacks in a timely manner. With his continuous and rapid base closures and cuts, we have less access to our Embassies and other interests in Europe and AFRICOM. The report highlighted the fact that response teams located in Rota Spain could not get to the site quickly “because of budget cuts that caused them to share response teams with our posts in Germany. ” There is a critical link between U.S. forward presence in Europe and the military’s ability to respond to contingencies in Northern Africa in particular, and the broader Middle East, in general.

Additional cuts to U.S. force posture within EUCOM will likely undermine AFRICOM’s ability to conduct operations on the continent.

The mainstream media’s only response to this report was that Democrats were outraged by it. Of course they were. Democrats prefer to perpetuate lies and condemn Americans than acknowledge facts and truth. These are the same people who decry the need for overseas occupation because” the cold war is over”.

When are they going to wake up and realize the war on terror is a reality and that we as Americans need to stand together? America’s safety and security should come before preferential treatment to a politician because of some shared ideology. Journalists have an obligation to report the facts. I challenge them to do so.

Amber Stivers

Kansas PolitiChick Amber Stivers is the outspoken wife of an active duty soldier and mother of five bright beautiful boys.Amber studied Political Science at the University of Maryland University Europe. Her passion is fighting for life, liberty and justice for all. Amber Stiver's blog is called Politically Propitious (or under the sobriquet "Politically Propitious Warrior Princess"). Find Amber's blog at:

Related Articles

Back to top button

Please disable ad blocker.

We work hard to write our articles and provide you with the content you enjoy. The ads on the site allow us to continue our work while feeding our families. If you'd please whitelist our site in your ad blocker or remove your ad blocker altogether, we'd greatly appreciate it. Thank you!