Re: A visibly angry Hillary Clinton just went off on Republicans for their Benghazi i
If the Obama Administration and Hillary had cooperated from the beginning and the committee came up with nothing, then you would have a point. They didn't and you don't. Had they cooperated instead of obstructing, there would have been one investigation and it would have long ago concluded....with or without evidence of a crime. Any previous administration, democrat or republican, going back to the Nixon watergate scandal would have allowed the appointment of a special prosecuter to get to the bottom of what actually went on. The Obama administration's response to the four American deaths in Benghazi has been along the lines of: "Nothing to see here...let's move on....and no I will not appoint a special prosecuter". My point is....until the Obama Administration fully cooperates, you have no valid claim of a "witch hunt".
However, I will give you an example of a witch hunt. Remember the so-called Valerie Plame being outed as a CIA agent scandal? Early in that investigation the special prosecutor found the leaker. It was Richard Armitage. However he was not charged and the investigation continued. You see Armitage was not the target. The targets were Bush, Cheney, and Rove. When despite all of the cooperation from the Bush Administration, they could not find any evidence that their main targets had committed a crime, they had to have their pound of flesh anyway and went after Cheney Aide Scooter Libby and convicted him on perjury for making a false statement based on little more then a memory lapse. Now that was a witch hunt.
I might be willing to accept that "all is known" abut Benghazi IF there had actually been a government probe.
We cannot accept Benghazi on its face value by the very nature of what went down. It was supposed to be a air support deal, and somehow became "regime change"
We have never had that explained.
There remain open questions about who, what sect, terrorist cell, whatever pulled this off, and why, since the world was on full alert, did the US not have protections in place. That has NOT been answered.
What we do have is this.
"What difference does it make" who killed the four. A promise to investigate and bring those responsible to justice. That has been abandoned and forgotten, a message I would not want to be sending to US servicemen; your lives only matter when the president's reputation is at stake. Again, I point out that the killers, who could be anywhere from ten to 20,000 remain totally unknown and walk free boasting they can kill Americans with impunity.
There is also the fact there has been a smell of cover up since the beginning. As the London Times was publishing top secret US documents left blowing in the wind and eye witness accounts of
terrorists in full attack, as the world media was reporting that Obama and Hilary were openly stating it was a spontaneous demonstration in
support of US policy. That fact Americans are sop stupid as to have believed it is beside the point. However, with such evidence of a planned cover up, the air will never be clear, it's like JFK's shooting, too many open ends, lies and fabrications.
What we know is this: Obama was in the middle of an election that at the time was close. We know he and Hilary bought and used the demonstration story long after it had been blown out of the water. Both have an open and demonstrated habit of lying.
Ergo, the truth is not know, and likely never will be since they have had so much time to destroy the evidence.
the left can weep crocodile tears and whine all they want, but based on the above, I believe both the state department and the white house knew well in advance the raid was coming, did nothing to protect Obama's manufactured "image" as a peacemaker, and stuck with the lame demonstration story for three weeks because they know how ****ing stupid their supporters are. I believe they should be arrested and tried for criminal negligence, but they will get away with it because they can.
