So what have we learned in the last year?
That Obama Lies. Hillary Lies. Susan Rice Lies. The State Department Lies.
Everyone in the Administration lies about it.
Then the Ministry of Truth buries it.
And you get scorn and ridicule if you even bring it up to The Left.
“What Difference Does it Make?”
It’s deliberate. It’s Calculated. And it’s 1000% political.
That’s what we’ve learned in the last year.
The list of mea culpas by Obama administration officials involved in the Benghazi response and aftermath include: standing down the counterterrorism Foreign Emergency Support Team, failing to convene the Counterterrorism Security Group, failing to release the disputed Benghazi “talking points” when Congress asked for them, and using the word “spontaneous” while avoiding the word “terrorism.”
And blaming a You Tube video that had been out there 3 months prior and had had no effect in the region. But the Administration arrested it’s maker. It’s the only arrest they’ve made to date.
And that arrest wasn’t for making the video, which is a legal, constitutionally-protected exercise of free speech. It was for violating his probation in an earlier bank fraud case dating back to 2010.
Twelve months ago, the Christopher Stevens became the first US ambassador assassinated in the line of duty in more than three decades. He was murdered along with three other Americans during a chaotic, hours-long terrorist raid on two US compounds in Benghazi, Libya. Since that day, none of the terrorists responsible have been captured or killed, even though our intelligence services know where they are. Not a single government official has been fired over the historic security failures. And more than a dozen US diplomatic missions in “high risk” zones remain under-protected to this day. Nine months ago, I posed twelve unanswered questions about the Benghazi massacre; as of this writing, ten of them have yet to be adequately answered. The responses to the others reveal US incompetence and a politically-motivated cover up. Chris Stephen, the left-wing UK Guardian’s Libya-based correspondent, has meticulously reviewed the record of what really happened in Benghazi on 9/11/12, and contrasted it with the Obama administration’s “official” story. Here is the introduction from Stephen’s lengthy report:
The attack on the US consulate in Benghazi was striking for a number of reasons: the date, 11 September, the toll – four diplomats killed, including an ambassador – and the knock-on effects on the careers of senior American politicians. But what is perhaps most striking is the inconsistencies: the US version of events compared with those of witnesses and the facts on the ground. The two do not tally. And so, a year later, there remain pressing questions about what happened that night – and what the Americans say happened
Read the whole thing ( http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/us-consulate-benghazi-attack-challenge). It’s a harrowing account of terror and confusion, an indictment of the administration’s reckless ineptitude in the weeks leading up to the bloodshed, and an expose of the government’s numerous attempts at revisionism. Meanwhile, why haven’t any of the perpetrators been brought to justice? Part of the equation is the Obama administration’s dangerous obsession with treating these terrorists as common criminals. They want to build legal cases against the attackers, then try them in civilian court. Madness. But another element of the delay is the Libyan government’s ongoing efforts at obstruction, and the White House’s lack of urgency (via the New York Times):
A year after the attacks in Benghazi that killed the United States ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, the Justice Department has indicted suspects. Intelligence officials have a general idea of where they are hiding. And the military has a contingency plan to snatch them if that becomes necessary. But the fledgling Libyan government, which has little to no control over significant parts of the country, like Benghazi and eastern Libya, has rebuffed the Obama administration’s efforts to arrest the suspects…Some military and law enforcement officials have grown frustrated with what they believe is the White House’s unwillingness to pressure the Libyan government to make the arrests or allow American forces to do so, according to current and former senior government officials. Mr. Obama acknowledged last month at a news conference that the suspects had been charged but were still on the loose. “Whether he likes it or not, he is going to have to deal with this issue,” said a former senior American official, referring to Mr. Comey. “There’s a huge frustration on the issue among the agents about why nothing has happened to these guys who have killed Americans.”
In fairness to the Libyan government, they can barely keep themselves safe, and wield virtually no sovereign control over much of their nation. They live in constant fear of Islamist reprisals. It’s also possible that the Libyans may still harbor a grudge over the public humiliation they suffered at the hands of the Obama administration in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. You may recall that Susan Rice’s false talking points directly contradicted the assessment of Libya’s president, prompting the Libyans to delay the arrival of US investigative teams at the attack site. Most gallingly, American officials on the ground are venting frustration over their assessment that regardless of the Libyans’ posture, The White House isn’t applying much pressure or leadership to resolve the situation. 365 days have passed since four Americans were murdered by a gang of radical Islamists, and that outrage has gone unanswered. No arrests, no military strikes, few (if any) lessons learned, no accountability — even of the token variety — and no justice. Appalling. I’ll leave you with two video clips. The first features Hillary Clinton standing next to the Benghazi victims’ flag-draped coffins and blaming the attacks on an “awful internet video,” followed by President Obama vowing justice for the fallen. The second clip is of Amb. Susan Rice disseminating information that the administration knew to be false, days after the raid. She has since been promoted. Both spectacles speak for themselves: (townhall)
And it took almost a year to get Susan Rice her payback for her bold faced lies.
She the National Security Advisor.
Finally, someone who is nearly as good an example of the Peter Principle as Janet Napolitano.
The State Department, under the direction of Secretary of State John Kerry, is still refusing to provide requested Benghazi eyewitnesses to the House Oversight Committee for interviews about what happened one year ago today.
Yesterday, Chairman Darrell Issa sent a letter to Kerry stressing the only people who can provide a full picture of the 9/11 terror attack are witnesses who survived.
“The survivors of the attacks are the only people who can give testimony to the Committee about what happened on the ground in Benghazi,” Issa wrote in the letter. “Details provided by the survivors will not only help the Committee determine what took place during the attack, but will also help the Committee and other interested parties determine ways to prevent future tragedies.”
A request was made by the Oversight Committee on August 14, 2013 for transcribed interviews with Benghazi survivors. The State Department responded on August 23 by saying it was “not prepared to provide witnesses for those interviews.” The Accountability Review Board [ARB] has interviewed Benghazi witnesses Issa is requesting.
“The ARB considered the surviving eyewitnesses to the attack to be part of a ‘core group’ of witnesses,” Issa said. “Furthermore, the ARB recommended that the Department establish a panel of outside independent experts to identify best practices and evaluate security issues at diplomatic posts around the world. That panel, chaired by former U.S. Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan, enjoyed the Department’s full support, with unfettered access to documents and personnel. The panel met with over 200 people, including at least one individual whom the Department is now refusing to make available to the Committee.”
It is suspected the State Department has allowed witnesses to speak to the media for interviews. Issa’s letter cites a recent article in Vanity Fair in which great details are described regarding the Benghazi attack, including “details that only persons who survived the attack could possibly know.” Fox News has also been able to get in contact with some of the witnesses.
“The State Department has further restricted the Committee’s access to these witnesses, claiming that they must be insulated from congressional investigators as they ‘would very likely be witnesses in any criminal proceedings relating to the Benghazi attacks,’” Issa said. “The Department’s claims that it needs to ‘insulate’ witnesses ‘from any perception of political accountability in fulfilling their responsibilities’ actually creates the impression that the Department is exerting its own political influence to prevent survivors from speaking to Congress.”
President Obama pledged to cooperate with Congress after the attack as did Secretary Kerry.
“The State Department has not lived up to these unequivocal commitments to ‘provide answers.’ Instead, the Department has attempted to limit the Committee’s access to important documents and information, including witnesses such as the Benghazi survivors.”
Issa is demanding Kerry provide interviews with witnesses by September 24 or be issued subpoenas. (Katie Pavlich)
“We made mistakes, but without malice”–One Administration official was said to have decried.
The Justice Department says it’s “using every tool and resource available…to ensure that anyone who played any part in that attack will face justice, no matter how long it takes and no matter how far we must go to find them.” (Meanwhile, he’s suing Texas over Voter ID laws).
Well, that’s ok then, no problem…After all, “What Difference does it make?”
So the lesson to be learned here is , that if lie to cover up your bosses mistakes you will get a promotion and you get to ridicule and stonewall anyone who dares to challenge your lies.
Now, that’s Government you can trust.