Remember the myth (aka lie) that the Benghazi attack on September 11th, 2012 was because of a movie? And remember a couple of weeks ago the New York Times tried to contradict its own earlier reports by claiming their investigation concluded that this attack was because of… a movie?
News this week has been coming out which does not paint a good picture for the Obama administration or for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in spite of the mainstream trying to still claim Benghazi is just ‘memes’ that republicans won’t stop politicizing. On January 13th, the Lean Forward Obama Network MSNBC host Alex Wagner referred to Benghazi as one of those “bones that can never be buried.”
On January 15th, in a response to a Senate Report on Benghazi, California Senator Diane Feinstein defended Clinton over the security situation in Benghazi, saying “it’s interesting that the first thing out of the box is something that’s political. There is no evidence that Secretary Clinton even knew about this.” She also went on to claim that some of the groups involved were ‘loosely’ connected with the international Al Qaeda group, but not with the Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
No Senator, what’s interesting is that after over a year of information trickling out about the events leading up to, during and claims made after the Benghazi attack, that you would have the nerve to politicize it by defending the woman who wants to be the next President of the United States. Sorry Senator, but Americans might have been purposely kept in the dark about Benghazi in October and November of 2012 so Obama could be reelected, but contrary to what you and others may believe Americans aren’t so stupid to fall for it now.
The Senate report is a bipartisan report and now for the first time in over a year, democrats are joining the GOP in laying blame on Clinton and the State Department. The report concludes what many of us who have paid attention to everything dealing with Benghazi have known all along, that the State Dept., then under Hillary Clinton, refused requests to boost security despite warnings from the CIA and its own staff about the danger of militant attacks. It also says that 15 people in Libya who have tried to help the FBI investigate the murders have been killed.
The State Dept. claimed that it never received intelligence indicating an attack of the ferocity of the terrorist assault yet statements made by others over a year ago proved that they were warned numerous times over a course of months before the attack, and also of an Al Qaida presence in and around the city.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, a Republican on the House Oversight Committee said the report is evidence that the State Dept. kept security minimal to give an impression that U.S. policy in Libya was a success for the Obama administration. Rep. Chaffetz said, “The bottom line is Hillary Clinton wanted the appearance of normalization… Security was not driving these decisions. Politics was.”
He also said that significant questions remain about the lack of military response to the attack, which went on for several hours after the Pentagon and the White House were aware it had begun. “You’d think that would get people out of bed — let’s get some planes ready — but apparently not.”
The Report also declared that individuals tied to Al Qaeda groups were involved in the Benghazi attack, which further contradicts what Diane Feinstein and the New York Times tried to claim. The fact that Feinstein says they were ‘loosely’ connected is a lame attempt to lead people to believe there’s a difference between Al Qaida groups. But then again, maybe people in the Obama administration believe there’s a difference since they hired Al Qaida sympathizers, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade to provide security to the mission in Benghazi.
What it all boils down to is that the Senate Report concluded that the attacks on U.S. compounds in Benghazi could have been prevented.
While people may believe Congressmen like Rep. Chafffetz are still trying to politicize Benghazi, he and others have been working for over a year to get to the truth about what happened, and newly released transcripts are proving that there are many discrepancies between what really happened and what Obama and members of his Administration have been claiming. Declassified transcripts prove Obama was briefed that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, not a protest over a video that went out of control as he, Clinton, Rice and others claimed for weeks afterwards. According to Fox News, it was Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The explosive transcripts say that he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center. He reported that this was a terrorist attack, not a demonstration.
The Benghazi bones are still worth chewing on, as we are finding that Obama and his administration lied for weeks about the nature of the attack, by telling the American people, and the families of the 4 men who were murdered that this was a demonstration. It shows that the State Department under Hilary Clinton lied about security measures.
These revelations prove that a Select Committee is needed, with subpoena powers, to expose any more lies and get to the truth of still unanswered questions. Obama was reelected because the media covered up the truth of the attacks. Now they are trying to cover for Clinton as she gears up for a 2016 run. The truth must come out before then.