Women are going to be the reason that Donald Trump is NEVER President!
The Benghazi Report and the Diplomatic Security Funding
"Although the ambassador was killed, the Benghazi 'consulate' was not a consulate at all but basically a secret CIA operation which included an effort to round up shoulder-launched missiles. In fact, only seven of the 30 Americans evacuated from Benghazi had any connection to the State Department; the rest were affiliated with the CIA.
So, from the State Department perspective, this was an attack on a CIA operation, perhaps by the very people the CIA was battling, and the ambassador tragically was in the wrong place at the wrong time. But, for obvious reasons, the administration could not publicly admit that Benghazi was mostly a secret CIA effort.
This basically was a bureaucratic knife fight, pitting the State Department against the CIA. In other words, the final version of the talking points may have been so wan [sic — wanting?] because officials simply deleted everything that upset the two sides. So they were left with nothing. From a bureaucratic perspective, it may have seemed like the best possible solution at the time. From a political perspective, it turned out to be a disaster" — "An alternative explanation for the Benghazi talking points: Bureaucratic knife fight," Washington Post, May 10, 2013
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
And then the WH decides to wait weeks before sending the FBI in (it was unsafe, they said-after repeated requests for increased security by the dead ambassador were ignored). In the mean time, the masterminds of the attack are freely and openly seen in public all over Benghazi and elsewhere, at one point seen drinking cocktails in a high end western hotel. Quick reaction forces all over the region were told to stand down when they might have made a difference-and if they didn't-we wouldnt have left the Presidents representative and 3 other heros to die alone surrounded by terrorists.
And the entire time, the spin machine of the Obama admin was running overtime. It was clear who committed these attacks but that might have hurt Obama in that election season-reminding people that AQ ISNT on the run, and on 9/11 no less-wouldnt be politically viable. So they lied, obscured, and left the families in the dark-all for politics.
And yet the silly libs of this forum want to accuse the Republicans of playing politics here. Its mind boggling. This type of thing can't happen again, and with a select committee the Obama admin is going to be pulled kicking and screaming into the sunlight. We are going to find out what they knew, and when.
Expert: There Is Absolutely No Way Military Assets Could Have Reached Benghazi In Time, Business Insider, May 9, 2013During the attack?ambassador sent multiple requests for help"The Committee has reviewed the allegations that U.S. personnel, including in the IC or DoD, prevented the mounting of any military relief effort during the attacks, but the Committee has not found any of these allegations to be substantiated." — Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 1/15/14, p. 29.Quick reaction forces all over the region were told to stand down
Even the House report, issued by the Republican majority, states that "[t]here was no 'stand down' order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi." I suppose the implication is that other force were issued such orders.In September 2012, the administration was acknowledging that Al Qaeda affiliates were involved in the attacks, and Republicans were already claiming that this was being "covered up."It was clear who committed these attacks but that might have hurt Obama in that election season-reminding people that AQ ISNT on the run, and on 9/11 no less-wouldnt be politically viable.
"They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy. ... At this point, what I would say is that a number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in eastern Libya, particularly the Benghazi area, as well we are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliates, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb." —Matthew Olson, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, testifying before a Senate committee hearing, Sept 19, 2012
"But let us be clear. What is happening inside Mali is augmented by the rising threat from violent extremism across the region. For some time, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and other groups have launched attacks and kidnappings from northern Mali into neighboring countries. Now, with a larger safe haven and increased freedom to maneuver, terrorists are seeking to extend their reach and their networks in multiple directions. And they are working with other violent extremists to undermine the democratic transitions underway in North Africa, as we tragically saw in Benghazi."— Remarks at a UN Secretary General Meeting on the Sahel by Hillary Clinton, Sept 26, 2012
In its coverage of those remarks, the Christian Science Monitor reported that "Republican critics have said the administration for too long attributed the attack to a spontaneous and unorganized mob." (Hillary Clinton drops strong hint that Al Qaeda was behind Libya attack). This was two weeks after the attack and nearly six weeks before the election. Already, it had been too long. If the administration was seeking to avoid "reminding people that AQ ISNT on the run," they weren't doing a very good job of it, were they?
These are statements made by administration officials during September in which Al Qaeda was specifically referenced. You also have Obama saying the attack was "an act of terror" on national television the morning after it occurred. He pointedly referred to this in one of the debates. You may recall this exchange:
ROMNEY: I -- I think interesting the president just said something which -- which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.
OBAMA: That's what I said.
ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you're saying?
OBAMA: Please proceed governor.
ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
OBAMA: Get the transcript.
Critics of the administration like to say that the "lame stream media" continually fails to hold Obama accountable. Here's the Washington Post fact checker setting what seems to me to be a fairly high standard: Obama’s claim he called Benghazi an 'act of terrorism'. Of course, that article appeared after the election — all part of the elaborate and clever conspiracy, I suppose.
A right-wing publication offers an interesting perspective:
"President Obama is so arrogant and narcissistic that he is just about the only person in the administration clinging to the story that the Benghazi attack was a spontaneous event due to some pathetic movie trailer no one had seen – until he promoted it.
Even though his Secretary of State, his Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, the U.N. Ambassador, and the White House spokesman have all reversed the claim and actually admitted the murders were an act of terrorism; Barack Obama is adamantly determined to accept no blame nor will he use the word ‘terrorism’. In his mind, the events in Benghazi that killed four Americans must have been another incidence of ‘workplace violence’ since the movie trailer theory has been debunked.
Shame on him!" — "Obama’s Libyan Lies – Cover-Up Peeling Away," Letting Freedom Ring, Sept 27, 2012
That rag is published by someone who describes himself as having "survived the Vietnam War protests." Our hero.That information is already known and has been ground into a fine powder. What will happen is what's been happening: the GOP will be further weakened by the reactionary extremists that its leadership is unwilling to stand up to. As an American, I'm saddened, to the point where I can't even be pleased as a Democrat. I can't see any good coming from a continuation of this circus side-show, to use the Speaker's words. Gowdy is a gentleman and a skilled investigator, unlike the ill-mannered, incompetent buffoon that's been dragging Oversight and Government Reform through a sewer for the past three years. But he's on a fool's errand and that takes away from doing the country's business.We are going to find out what they knew, and when.
Last edited by mmi; 05-09-14 at 02:23 AM.