RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Benghazi Blood is On Hillary’s Hands, She Won’t Be President

As someone who supported Hillary’s campaign for President in 2008, I am not happy to write this. I admired the woman I met in her Washington, DC Senate office when I had the chance to brief her on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the fall of 2007. But I am shocked and ashamed of her and her appalling behavior as Secretary of State, especially with respect to what she did and did not do in Libya in general, and specific handling of Benghazi. The Chairs of five separate House Committees investigating the Benghazi attack, including the prelude and postlude, issued a damning preliminary report today.

The evidence shows that Hillary lied repeatedly, to both Congress and the American people, about what she knew, about what she did and about what she failed to do. The record is shameful. She failed the diplomats and intelligence officers under her charge on 11 September 2012 and she failed the people of America.

Here are the main findings:

Before the Attacks:

After the U.S.-backed Libyan revolution ended the Gadhafi regime, the U.S. government did not deploy sufficient U.S. security elements to protect U.S. interests and personnel that remained on the ground.

Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the Department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel.

Repeated requests for additional security were denied at the highest levels of the State
Department. For example, an April 2012 State Department cable bearing Secretary Hillary
Clinton’s signature acknowledged then-Ambassador Cretz’s formal request for additional
security assets but ordered the withdrawal of security elements to proceed as planned.

The attacks were not the result of a failure by the Intelligence Community (IC) to
recognize or communicate the threat. The IC collected considerable information about the
threats in the region, and disseminated regular assessments to senior U.S. officials warning of the deteriorating security environment in Benghazi, which included threats to American interests, facilities, and personnel.

The President, as Commander-in-Chief, failed to proactively anticipate the significance of September 11 and provide the Department of Defense with the authority to launch offensive operations beyond self-defense. Defense Department assets were correctly positioned for the general threat across the region, but the assets were not authorized at an alert posture to launch offensive operations beyond self-defense, and were provided no notice to defend diplomatic facilities.

During the Attacks:

On the evening of September 11, 2012, U.S. security teams on the ground in Benghazi exhibited extreme bravery responding the attacks by al-Qa’ida-affiliated groups against the U.S. mission.

Department of Defense officials and military personnel reacted quickly to the attacks in
Benghazi. The effectiveness of their response was hindered on account of U.S. military
forces not being properly postured to address the growing threats in northern Africa or to respond to a brief, high-intensity attack on U.S. personnel or interests across much of Africa.

After the Attacks:

The Administration willfully perpetuated a deliberately misleading and incomplete narrative that the attacks evolved from a political demonstration caused by a YouTube video. U.S. officials on the ground reported – and video evidence confirms – that demonstrations outside the Benghazi Mission did not occur and that the incident began with an armed attack on the facility. Senior Administration officials knowingly minimized the role played by al-Qa’ida-affiliated entities and other associated groups in the attacks, and decided to exclude from the discussion the previous attempts by extremists to attack U.S. persons or facilities in Libya.

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 an investigation by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI). Email 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.

The Administration deflected responsibility by blaming the IC for the information it
communicated to the public in both the talking points and the subsequent narrative it
perpetuated. Had Administration spokesmen performed even limited due diligence inquiries into the intelligence behind the talking points or requested reports from personnel on the ground, they would have quickly understood that the situation was more complex than
the narrative provided by Ambassador Susan Rice and others in the Administration.

The Administration’s decision to respond to the Benghazi attacks with an FBI
investigation, rather than military or other intelligence resources, contributed to the
government’s lack of candor about the nature of the attack.

Responding to the attacks with an FBI investigation significantly delayed U.S. access to key witnesses and evidence and undermined the government’s ability to bring those
responsible for the attacks to justice in a timely manner.

I am aware of other sources that will shortly speak with members of these Committees and provide additional information that will show that a military intelligence element knew as early as May of 2012 that there was a specific and expanding threat to the American presence in Libya by Ansar Al Sharia.

What the Congressional report fails to highlight is that the special operations forces operating inside Libya prior to 11 September 2012 were under Chief of Mission authority and not COCOM authority. What does that mean? Those units primary reporting chain was thru the Ambassador and up to the Secretary of State. COCOM aka Combatant Commander in this case was General Ham in AFRICOM. The Special Ops forces in Libya prior to and during the 11 September attack was under the control of State Department.

There will be more breaking news on this terrorist attack this week. Stay tuned.

  • husou218

    tinyurl.com/cnaff79

  • Eyes Wide Open

    Benghazi blood on Obama flag?

    Why would a president of the United States attempt to sell this flag?

    For starters why change our flag, is that not illegal or at least cheap?

    Compare the two pictures and see what you see. Was it a shout out to the Benghazi attackers? Or just a very distasteful shout out to himself?

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/23/obama-campaign-flag-poster-quietly-yanked-from-website/

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Trade-Martin/1276926704 Trade Martin

    If you like my music video about this travesty, please share it as much as possible…., I recorded this in October, 2012.

    I’m confident that the truth of this blatant cover up will come to light….!!!

    Best regards, Trade.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v3fYqbrcsk

  • Pingback: Obama’s Brazen Cover-up is Unchallenged by MSM | worldOtonto

  • archimedes rpinciple

    Chris Stevens would never forgive HC… no matter wherever he is…

  • Steven Butterbaugh

    Obama has everyone around him tell lies and that ruins them. Hillary, Big Sis, Susan Rice and many, many others. Obama is deadly – really deadly. When are all of these people who have been used by him turn on him?

    • hadenough48

      Only the women on Fox News have real big balls. The worthless repub men have no balls what so ever. None of them can get together and expose that thunder thighed dike for life long evil parasite she is. She probably will be prez as our elections are super rigged. I knew it with worthless RiNO Juan McCain and then Romney who went to sleep in the last two debates. Ann Coulter was right when she said Romney should fire his campaign managers. Welcome to communism.

  • TriciaX

    Larry, I am not happy with the way Benghazi was managed by the State Department. The result was obviously a terrible tragedy. But I am unwilling to put all the blame on Hillary as a person (yes, as the head she had to fall on her sword). I consider also her accomplishments, not only as SoS but throughout her political life (and even before–what an amazing teenager, already doing good works for others.) We all screw up–sometimes badly.
    I hope she runs in 2016, and I hope you change your mind because Pat Racimora wants to do toon stories again! : )

  • HARP2

    Authorities Clarify Key Details in Chaotic Shootout and Subsequent Capture of Boston Bombing Suspect

    Police officials initially announced that officers had “exchanged gunfire” Friday evening with the surviving suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, as he hid in a boat in the backyard of a house in Watertown, Mass.
    Now several law enforcement officials say no gun was found in the boat, and officials say they are exploring what prompted officers to fire at Mr. Tsarnaev, who some feared was armed with explosives.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/25/authorities-clarify-key-details-in-chaotic-shootout-and-capture-of-boston-bombing-suspect/

    Guess he didn`t shoot himself.

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      No, he did shoot himself. How do we know? The powder burns inside his mouth.

      • HARP2

        Did you see them ?

  • Dave L.

    As incompetent as Hillery is, I still wonder if she bouldn’t be better than the asshole occupying the Whit House at the moment ????

  • MG6
  • Deapster

    Wikipedia offers a balanced explanation of the basics of sharia law and how it is practiced in various countries around the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

    • MG6

      Why not follow Cannon law from the Catholics, Hindu law, the dharma, and all other religious laws. Why discriminate?

      It sure would make a mess out of any country court system. Running two separate, or more laws to different groups makes for a divide house.

      And does this sets one group apart from all others?

      • Deapster

        Sovereign nations still get to chose their own governance, last time I checked. Just stop this global domination of sharia law hysteria because it makes anyone who says this, look like an ignorant jerk.

    • Fred82

      Well,

      Lucky for the United States, our Founding Fathers effectively ensured that we will never have to live under Sharia law, even the nicer versions of it.

      For that matter, we won’t have to live under any religions law. Ever.

      • Deapster

        The sooner the US stops claiming they are a “Christian” nation, the better for all concerned too.

        • Fred82

          I agree with that.

  • Jim Lang

    Larry, Hillary has responded to all of this right wing rubbish.

    • MG6

      No she didn’t. She danced around it though.

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

  • HELENK2
  • HELENK2
    • Deapster

      Honor killings are tribal, and have nothing to do with Islam. This is an important distinction to make, if the intent is to slur Islam.

      • Justine00

        How can one differentiate the two?
        .

        • Deapster

          You could try reading up on the topics. Or visiting an Islamic country like Pakistan where both are followed. It quickly becomes obvious.

          • MG6

            I have read it and heard from Muslim who do not want it.

            • Deapster

              We are talking about distinguishing tribal from Islam.

      • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

        That is a big load of BS. Under Sharia Law, women have no rights and are no better than slaves. Over 20,000 terrorist attacks under Jihad in recent years…that is like 20,000 more times than Christian “terror” attacks.

        http://shoebat.com/2013/04/22/epic-liberal-smackdown-on-islamic-terrorism/

        • Deapster

          You have a very oafish cartoon version of sharia law and Islam. I suggest you independently study sharia. In fact, it offers women more protection, than many US laws and was most likely the basis for our own western state’s community property laws brought in from Moorish Spain at the time of the Spanish explorations.

        • Deapster

          The US conducted a massive attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan, and incursions into Pakistan – all Islamic nations. Does that count as only one “terrorist” attack by the US, or is each incident killing innocent non-combatants to be counted one by one?

          • MG6

            World Trade Center?

            • Deapster

              3000 plus dead in the US versus 300,000 dead in Iraq? What did 911 have to do with Iraq? Why did we not retaliate on Saudi Arabia who provided the manpower and funding for 911? Why bomb the heck out of a country that had no association? Blood is on our hands for that one and you cannot wash it off.

  • HELENK2
  • HELENK2

    off topic

    http://weaselzippers.us/2013/04/24/report-cia-wanted-boston-bomber-on-terrorist-watch-list/

    does big sis have a problem listening to the CIA as well as the one she has listening to ICE agents?

  • HELENK2
  • Popsmoke

    LJ no body gives a fuck …. In three years if she runs this will blow over and be seen as a republican attack..

    • Deapster

      Memories are very, very short. 2016 is such a long way away it is stunning anyone is even talking about it now.

    • Fred82

      Well,

      If the media ends up being as in the tank for Hilary as they have been for Obama, then I must admit you are correct.

  • HELENK2
  • doc99

    Hillary Rodham Clinton – Born Chicago, 10/26/1947. Died Benghazi 9/11/2012

  • HELENK2
    • Deapster

      Watergate took years to finally percolate and bubble over. And leaks from the inside.

    • KlugerRD

      It still may be.

      If the GOP can gain a majority in the Senate in 2014, then you will see it become more substantial.

      As is, it destroys Hillary’s “3 AM Call” standard and any chance of her running for office again.

  • HELENK2

    off topic

    http://www.therightscoop.com/armed-and-dangerous-glenn-beck-reveals-new-information-on-ali-al-harbi-and-his-govt-event-file/

    Larry, what can you find out about this? the Saudi kid that meeeschle visited in the hospital and was being deported.
    not a Glenn Beck fan but this sounds pretty serious

  • HELENK2
    • Deapster

      The Democrats still can’t figure out what to do with Chicago so their concentration is not global at this point.

  • HELENK2
  • Barb Bf

    I was a Hillary supporter also..BUT..when she gave up and decided to work for Obama..that was the end of all hopes I had for Hillary becoming the first female president.

    • DianaLC

      Since I live in the Denver metropolitan area, I gave up on her when she didn’t fight at the national convention. She left many of her supporters in the lurch.

      • Deapster

        I was there to march for her in Denver. I have never seen a more hostile environment already in the tank for Obama. The scariest place I have ever experienced during those DNC days. At every turn her own party treated her life dirt. And on every corner an Obama thug hawking Obama swag.

        To even wear a Hilary button was tantamount to getting reviled as a racists in their eyes as one had to walk the 100% Obama gauntlet in those mean streets of Denver that year. It was not your city’s finest hour.

        There was nothing for her to fight. May we never be forgotten, and certainly never blatantly betrayed. I keep reading the “findings” and I still see far more moralistic bleating, than unraveling facts.

        But I also think this has not been deeply investigated and a cover up is still going on that points the finger far more directly to Obama and his inner circle of campaign advisors.

        • Justine00

          Yet, Hillary jumped in bed with Obummer — to do his dirty work. I can’t forgive that.
          .

          • Deapster

            I am glad she at least got to be a very active SOS, and now has plenty of material for a noir memoir.

  • foxyladi14

    WOW

  • HELENK2

    http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/05/18/wh.hillary/

    remember when…. hillary clinton waving newspaper around on senate floor saying ” Bush knew”

  • HARP2

    How about all those media types that are on record as calling Hillary a racist.
    They will make some wonderful commercials.

    • marvgoux1

      No worries, lib media will say that bringing up Hillary’s shameful record of incompetence and lies is misogynist.

  • KenoshaMarge

    I hope you’re right LJ and that this finally finishes the Clintons in public life. At least this generation.

    I thought her remark, “what does it matter”, would have brought her down. It didn’t.

    Will have to see if the media covering her ass and endorsing her will work as well for her as it did for Obama.

    A public that doesn’t know the truth cannot vote intelligently. A public that doesn’t want to know the truth seems to be what we have.

  • Fred82

    Larry,

    Since Clinton is officially not deserving of the Presidency, despite a strong likelihood that she will run, who would say is the best candidate out there that can turn around the current mess we are in?

    • Deapster

      Mitt Romney.

      • foxyladi14

        I agree but will he run again. I really thought he win this time.

        • Deapster

          The whole time the Obama forces were smugly counting on their ground troops (aka union members) to deliver the final vote count on Election Day, while the rest of the nation was gradually warming to the man.

          Considering where Romney had to start, he did an excellent job and his appeal was growing every day. But the union member GOTV machine is hard to crack in both local and national elections.

        • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

          He did win. They flipped the votes in various databases and had Democrats voting multiple times.

  • Lemuel Vargas

    So what do you think of Sarah Palin? She has a nice set of platforms, as seen below:

    1.fighting the legal corruption (or as Sarah said nicely, crony capitalism)

    2. An end to expanding the federal government via a respect for the Tenth Amendment

    3,Repealing Obamacare.

    4. No more runaway debt. This necessitates prioritizing and cutting spending.

    5. Energy independence, an “all of the above energy policy.” She distilled it down to this: “America’s economic revival starts with America’s energy revival.”

    6. Making America the most attractive country to do business. Included in this is eliminating all federal corporate taxes, which frees up job-creators but requires that they “stand or fall on

    [their] own.

    I know, they are general in nature, but they could easily be dealt with in details, if need be.

    So what are your opinions of Sarah Palin?

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      I respect what she did in Alaska when she took on the embedded interests. However, she made an awful decision in resigning as Governor before the end of her term. It weakened her voice on the national stage. She is no longer on Fox and the other networks are ignoring her. I don’t think that is a good thing.

      • Deapster

        Palin was getting ripped apart by whomever her dire enemy was in Alaska, that woman who was her political rival (daughter of the long term displaced elected official who Sarah took down?) who was going to keep Sarah tied up in lawsuits and hearings for the entire rest of her 2 year term.

        That was a tough call since she was going to accomplish nothing and create nothing but a huge state expense and total gridlock for her state during those last two years.

      • foxyladi14

        Agree a lot of folks are calling her Quiterrela

  • akaPatience

    Big Media was hellbent on getting an African American into the WH and they achieved their goal. Now they’re hellbent on getting a woman in. So it’s going to take a LOT to knock HRC out. Mistakes she made in Benghazi will be downplayed/ignored/hushed-up unless and until she ends up on the ropes due to the beatings of a worthy and effective Democratic foe in the primaries.

    • KenoshaMarge

      And the same dimwitted females that kissed Obama’s ass will NOW believe it’s a woman’s turn. So long as it’s a Democrat woman dispensing all those lovely freebies of course.

      Just like getting the vote, we wimmenfolk have to wait our turn until all the menfolk get theirs. Ain’t we the patient little girls? AKA useful idiots.

      • Deapster

        Democratic women did in Hilary a lot swifter and with more venom than anyone else. The classic, “yes I want a woman as President but not THAT woman.”

        • KenoshaMarge

          The classic, “yes I want a woman as President, but not THAT woman” is a legitimate response. But not if it’s used to demonize a woman who you would have happily supported if the great O hadn’t come along.

          The comments from many on the left were far worse, and more misogynistic than those coming from the right. After all, dislike of Hillary Clinton was nothing new from the right, whereas from the left and especially from the AA community it was new and vicious.

          I would like to see a woman president. But only if that woman has competence, character and a genuine love of this country. Come to think of it, it’s the same damn thing I want from a male president.

          • Deapster

            Exactly, let’s get competence rather than emotional biography in the White House.

    • Deapster

      They are equally hell-bent to get a gay person in. This drove the media obsession for Obama more than previously understood. Hispanics are not yet on their radar. Identity-politics instead of issue politics has gripped the US for some strange reason. But that is who we are right now; the land of the infamous melting-pot.

      • JohnnyTwoDog

        So, if Hillary gets in who will be her First Dyke?
        Sorry… I know that may be offensive to some but I could not resist. That’s how they refer to themselves after all….

  • HELENK2

    words that will follow her forever
    “What Difference does it Make”

    • TeakWoodKite

      From her? nothing at all.

  • buzzlatte3

    While my admiration for Hillary died when she rolled over for the Obama nomination in 2008, my contempt for her was firmly set into place when she lied and then covered for Obama over Benghazi. I wonder if she and Bill even sit in the same room at this point.

  • notyourprincess

    I still remember that fall she had from ‘exhaustion’…then it turned out worse…then she was hospitalized. This whole administration is like a very bad reality show along with the ‘scripts’ and ‘diversions.’

    • Deapster

      I think she had a face lift. She looked great at that last hearing as SOS.

  • notyourprincess

    I still remember that fall she had from ‘exhaustion’…then it turned out worse…then she was hospitalized. This whole administration is like a very bad reality show along with the ‘scripts’ and ‘diversions.’

  • Justine00

    I pray you’re correct that Hillary won’t be president, Larry.
    .

  • HELENK2
  • Retired_from_SPOnaj

    Hillary may not be criticized, she is off limits. She is not accountable to the American people, being enlighted and intellectually superior to us. All animals are equal, but some animals, like Hillary, are more equal than others. OK, Hillary supporters, have at it.

    • HELENK2

      I was one who made calls and contributed money to her presidential campaign. It hurts to have to look in the mirror and know I was so wrong. She is a very smart lady, but knowingly putting yourself in the position of being a victim is one of the dumbest things any person can do. she knew backtrack would throw her under the bus and chose to be thrown. Helping with the coverup is unforgivable

      • Deapster

        I think Hilary had plenty of things on O’Bambi. But what does he have on her that would make her fall on her sword for him?

        I still want a tell-all book from her but if she is serious about 2016, I can see there is no reason to make any more waves than necessary because O’Bambi is still loved by too large a portion of the world’s and the US populace.

        We travel a lot overseas, and Obama remains a god in most people’s eyes. I love deflating that bubble but not sure how successful it is. Mainly because they delight in the fact that Obama is sticking it to the US. So how is that for irony.

        • HELENK2

          question all those who would delight in having the USA fall, what are their plans for after? what other country would support half of these loads? China? do not think so they have enough of their own people to take care of. Islamic countries, they would not even take care of their own. that has always puzzled me, what happens after the USA falls

          • Deapster

            I do question them and they come up with nothing. Who else do they want to go to bed with? That stops them cold. They are more like squalling kids who don’t think much beyond their own egos.

            There are plenty of Islamic countries who do not deserve to be painted with same brush one reserves particularly for the excesses in Saudi Arabia. But even in their case since we have fallen into the role of their protector, who else do you want them to be in bed with?

            Hold our noses and carry on is about the best we can do right now. But please don’t sweep all Islamic countries who do very much take care of their own which is obvious when one visits them. Pick the easy ones to like: UEA and Singapore. Then move on to Malaysia and Indonesia. Then Oman and Jordan. Let’s hope we always remains friends with all of the above.

          • elizabethrc

            That will be killing the golden goose. How ever will those America hating countries survive without our welfare payments to them?!!

            • Deapster

              See above. They are surviving right now making money off of China. Our foreign aid is not all that much in the big picture, and it more often than not comes with strings to buy certain American made products.

              Basically it is US corporate welfare diverting US money to favored US companies with the foreign country receiving the “aid” only being pass through entity. Foreign “aid” mainly benefits the US military-industrial complex right here in the good old, peace loving USA.

          • http://twitter.com/JeannesTweeting Jeanne N

            I have asked myself that often about Congress, the Press, and idiots like Occupy Wall Street. I just don’t know what the heck they think would come after America.

        • Deapster

          The other question is what happens when China falls. Right now there are a lot of countries making a lot of money being friends with China, even Australia who is easily moving into the role of Great White Hope vis a vis China.

          Everywhere there are commodities to be had, China is getting a welcoming embrace regardless of prior US loyalties or ideologies. Money is talking and China is the one with money to spread around – all for China’s self interests only.

          So if money is getting spent by China, is it also in everyone else’s interests to get as much of it as they can, friendship or no with the US.

          While we were boycotting Myanmar, they were selling their timber via Singapore out the back door and on to the massive building boom going on in China.

          I have long marveled that the Iron Curtains and other US boycotts we have set up were only one-way mirrors that worked to our own trade detriment; and not against those who were allegedly suffering from our rejections.

          They were healthier and more resilient despite our efforts to choke them and force our unilateral will upon them. We kept our ideological purity but they ate our economic lunch at the same time. China has no such ideological scruples because they do concern themselves with themselves only.

          No judgement one way or the other, but perhaps we can work out a better economic and moral value balance, because it is also immoral for us to dig a hole for ourselves when someone else is running off with the prize anyway.

          • HELENK2

            during WW2 my dad was in what was called the CBI China Burma India theater. Helping build the Ledo Road. As a young kid when he came home , I remember him telling me we had more trouble with the Chinese than the Japanese in raiding our convoys and killing our soldiers. The government never made it public because China was an ally. The only time I ever heard of this publicly was an old movie called Never So Few.
            So the fact that China would work against us has never surprised me

            • Deapster

              China is working for China. They are not even interested in working against us. Just how the chips fall.

              • Fred82

                Actually China is interested in working against us.

                As long as working against the US is in the interests of China, they will do it.

                Agree with your implication that China pursues a Machivellian foreign policy though.

      • DianaLC

        I am with you here, very ashamed of my support for her. She didn’t put herself in the victim position. She did a business deal. She knew where his skeletons were/are, and he knew the same about hers. Two manipulative people manipulating each other.

      • Madame_deFarge

        Hillary is not a victim. She’s a volunteer and utterly disgusting. She did at least accomplish one thing for me. I stopped justifying and trying to explain for her behavior.

    • Deapster

      Truth will always out. Not sure we are still getting the full story until there are actual transcripts naming names and actual quotes. (Okay, yes I was a Hilary supporter but this really does not motivate my continued skepticism here.)

      Still looks more like O’Bambi getting off the hook by getting to blame Hilary, and no small part of Hilary getting shot down because she is currently the 2016 Democratic “front-runner”.

      An Obama Two-fur? And even making poor Susan Rice look like she was had by Hilary too, while taking a fall for her former compatriot? I think bad things happened, but I am still more likely to pin the blame on Obama, Valerie Jarrett and his domestic policy team (aka his re-election campaign team)

      They should have named names. I await a proper rebuttal. I am just shooting from the hip here.

      • elizabethrc

        Yesterday, Krauthammer indicated that there are documents with her signature on them. These documents are said to have requested help in Benghazi because of the dangerous situation (my word,not theirs). She is said to have refused the help.
        Let these docs become public.

        • Deapster

          If you have ever worked at the top of any large organization you know your “signature” is on a lot of things that have actually passed under your own personal radar.

          Like it or not, no CEO can be on top of 100% 24/7. Her “signature” also refers to a pre-agreed plan for reduction in forces. More needs to be learned about that to get the full picture and context.

          However the buck does stop at the CEO 100% of the time. It is a hell of a position to be in, which is why it takes big bucks to try and get the best talent you can find that can walk that thin line being responsible for everything, yet only having 24 hours in each day to manage 100% of the oversight.

          • elizabethrc

            So far our “big bucks” have bought us mediocrity in government.
            It seems to me that for so important a thing as safeguarding and at the very least, being aware of the dangers inherent in having a consulate in such a dangerous area to be rubber stamped by anyone is a dereliction of duty. I am not so willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. She spoke with clarity about how she had seen nothing, heard nothing, signed nothing (nothing came across my desk!) and there are enough people who have covered their butts here that she needs to convince me of her innocence in this matter. I believe the documents reviewed by the committees before I believe her.
            The American people deserve people who are ‘hands on’ and yes, while the buck does stop with the President, Clinton obviously felt she had a free hand to deceive the American people and willingly did so.

    • Fred82

      Right on.

      You know………..

      I have gone through psychological profiles of American presidential candidates and found that the Leftists tended to score highest on the narcissism scales. In fact, Hilary scored higher than Obama regarding narcissism.

      I think Peggy Noonan was right about the Clintons. Instead of a belief in service to the people, the Clintons tend to believe that there position in government entitles them to service from the people.

      Though if we think about, the Clintons were involved with the 60s movements. Care to guess what fueled that movement: Narcissism.

      • Deapster

        Naw, they were just born baby-boomers. Nothing personal about that narcissism; just generational.

        • DianaLC

          Give the stereotyping a break. I am a baby boomer, and I have not been told that I’m a narcissist.

          The ones who went to college on their parents’ dime or on trust funds from grandparents and who were therefore able to sit around and take some drugs, experience free love, and then dabble in politics, thus developing an irrational hate for their parents’ generation (though those parents were paying their way) who might be labeled that.

          I and many more of that generation worked our way through school, or were drafted, or signed up for military service. We came from good, loving families–my parents the children of poor immigrants.

          First, it’s the American females you slur, now a whole generation.

    • Popsmoke

      The problem here is that th Gang of 4 at the min and at max the Gang of 8 had to know these details as well. Besides this still does not answer the issues of weps and why a so-called DIP facility was used as a ops base…

      • Retired_from_SPOnaj

        The Gangs of 4/8 didn’t HAVE to know. They should’ve known. What if they weren’t notified? Against the law? Sure. But who will challenge Obama if he broke the law?

        • Popsmoke

          What are the odds of either the 4/8s not knowing something like this? Why is everyone so focused on the response and not the real issues?
          Lets see we have CIA using a DIP facility as a cover for a weapons operation. We got the Saudis involved, the Turks involved, The Brits involved and operational at the annex. We have SOC elements reporting to the ambassador as part of a operational controler along with Ham and you think that with all these players involved the Gang of 4/8 were out of the loop?
          Either we have a Gang of absolutely stupid 4/8s or they are up to their necks in this and blowing smoke….

          • Retired_from_SPOnaj

            Why do you assume that it was the CIA using a diplomatic facility as cover? It looks like there were at least three separate operations in Libya, and only one of them was CIA operating under Title 50, which would have to be disclosed to the Gang of Eight under the Congressional oversight rules applicable to Title 50.

            After 911, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld established the precedent, presumably with White House approval, that certain DoD activities which mirrored CIA intelligence and covert action activities could be conducted by DoD under Title 10 without the same Congressional oversight required for Title 50. Who is to say that the diplomatic facility wasn’t being used for undisclosed Title 10 covert operations? And there were a third set of people there, but that’s for another time when, and if, the press decides to disclose it.

            • Popsmoke

              Except that Title 10/50 does not give SECDEF or D/CIA (or for that matter anyone else) the authority to use a State Department facility for as cover or a base for covert operation…. Without approval of SecState and the WH…

              Now you are an experienced retired officer as well as knowledgeable enough of the ways of the Hill… Something this large cannot be hidden from the 4/8s for long without leaking out. One of the groups knew if not both. Otherwise McCain, Rogers and the rest would be screaming for a special prosecutor… Lets not mention that this was a really fucking bad idea…to start with…

              • Retired_from_SPOnaj

                That is absolutely correct, it can’t be hidden “for long.” And Libya wasn’t hidden for a particularly long time. In fact, Libya wasn’t hidden for nearly as long as Iran Contra, and the Contra part of Iran Contra (by a strange coincidence of timing, I got to see both ends) was considerably more logistically complex and high profile.

                • Popsmoke

                  I completely understand. This was no Ollie North Op.. But … Unlike Iran Contra republican leadership is backing this bullshit against Syria and so we play our games of deception and focus on ONLY the response and nothing else.

  • Deapster

    Interesting the only person named was Susan Rice. Who pray tell are:

    1. Senior State Department officials
    2. The Department
    3. The highest levels of the State Department
    4. Senior US Officials
    5. The Administration
    6. Senior Administration officials
    7. Administration officials
    8. White House Deputies
    9. The Administration
    10. The Administration
    11. Senior State Department officials
    12. Administration
    13. State Department
    14. State Department
    15. Administration
    16. Administration
    17. Administration

    Heck, their don’t even put a real name on President, as Commander in Chief. How differently this would have read had there been names instead of vague euphemisms used, and why curiously was only Susan Rice named specifically playing her role in all of this.

    • Retired_from_SPOnaj

      They got the word from Jarrett: Rice was the sacrificial lamb. Her blood ran down the gutter and she was cooked on the rotisserie, sliced onto flatbread and sold to the hungry Congressmen. Sorry for the Near Eastern analogies, but it seemed apropos.

      • Deapster

        So this “investigation” and its conclusion was a sham? Krauthammer sounds less than impressed that it did not go deep enough and really did not bring in the fact a re-election campaign was also going on that could distort anything on the table at that time.

        • JohnnyTwoDog

          It’s an ugly word, this “sham”. This is the oval office, and in the oval office this is what you do.

      • buzzlatte3

        Why is Jarrett so protected from scrutiny?

        • foxyladi14

          and why does she have a security detail?

        • Retired_from_SPOnaj

          Who is Jarrett? Officially, she’s a houseguest of POTUS and FLOTUS who serves as an informal advisor not subject to the advice and consent of the Senate? What lack of accountability are you going to investigate her for?

      • TeakWoodKite

        Love the flat bread.

      • JohnnyTwoDog

        If that image does not make you go vegan nothing will.

  • JohnnyTwoDog

    I’m shocked, shocked that lying goes on in the highest levels of government.

    • Deapster

      Uhhhhh, ………….. I’m not. Remember the good old Reagan watchword: Trust, but verify

      • JohnnyTwoDog

        It was a play on “Casa Blanca”. You got it. Almost.

  • TeakWoodKite

    So we have a CIA operation being run out of a State department facility and tasked out of Motel 1600, none of whom want to pay the freight? Meanwhile we have military assets not under the control of the combatant commander but being run out of Foggy Bottoms. Yet, when the FUBAR re-enters the atmosphere, State won’t call out for a military response? The call was BO’s to shut down any response, not Nillary’s.

    As you pointed out, one does not lase a target unless the package is inbound and nearly final. Even now I hear the pilot cursing after Motel 1600 gave the abort command . The commander of the Stennis group and few others including Ham got sacked because they thought BO negligent. A correct assessment.
    As much as Hillary is not gonna be POTUS, the current POTUS is a massive turdblossom with American blood on his lying hands. Whoever runs next better have a grasp on reality, because the fools running this administration are living in lala land. /rant off/

  • HELENK2
  • HELENK2

    is this why Hillary was not put under oath when she testified?

    • Retired_from_SPOnaj

      Yes. Technically, Hillary never lied, because you can only lie under oath (thank you, Bill). That was a condition of her appearing before Congress to bring her Cabinet secretaryship to closure before her 2016 exploratory campaign started.

      • Popsmoke

        As the question was once asked…. What is truth?

  • chrissy

    I watched the bodies of 4 Americans return to Dover. Hillary told the families gathered there that it was a video. She lied to the families and to the American citizens. That to me is unforgivable.

    • DianaLC

      I so agree with you on this. When I watched her doing that, I nearly screamed. There was no sincerity in her behavior toward those people.

    • Retired_from_SPOnaj

      You don’t honestly believe that HOTUS (Hillary of the United States) really considers herself accountable to the families, do you? They are peasants.

  • elizabethrc

    The problem remains: other than those who lost their family members during the Benghazi fiasco, and a few politicians who have something to gain by actually doing something about it, who really cares? That is the deplorable state of our nation. We have been fed low expectations for over 4 years and now, for the majority, that seems to be okie – dokie.
    I am ashamed of what we have become.

    • buzzlatte3

      We’ve been fed low expectations for over 40 years starting with the breakdown of standards in education and teacher preparation otherwise known as Affirmative Action. Hillary is just a product of more liberal arrogance. The “What difference does it make!” crowd.

      • elizabethrc

        So true.
        Yesterday I heard that Arkansas is going to name an airport after their “First couple”. It will probably be called the Bill and Hillary Clinton Airiport, but some have suggested an even better name: The Hillbilly Airport.

  • HELENK2
  • Deapster

    How far does the State Dept go to protect a CIA cover?