Benghazi Takeaways, Part II

The House Benghazi report is a treasure trove of information, not that you would know that from listening to the Lame Stream Media.

Why, two weeks after the Benghazi terrorist attack, did Obama go on ABC’s “The View” with his repellant wife, to pitch the lie that he didn’t know it was terrorism? You know the answer; that is, to appeal to the low-information fools who watch this ridiculous PC hen party.

What we know as reported here last night in Benghazi Takeaways Part I:

  • The primary objective on the day of the attack was damage control and protecting Obama’s pre-election narrative about terrorists being “on the run.” (“Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place.”)
  • Hillary and Obama knew that the Benghazi attack was just that, and had NOTHING to  do with some silly YouTube video that no one had heard of, and no one in Libya had seen, yet they continued to try to sell that spin, even telling the families of the fallen the video lie.
  • Our government NEVER TRIED to save these 4 brave Americans. THEY NEVER TRIED!
  • The White House refused to cooperate in the investigation.
  • The existence of Mrs. Clinton’s illegal outlaw email server existed NOT for “convenience” as ridiculous as that is on its face, but to protect her from having her email subject to FOIA requests and exposure of “the personal.” (In Hillary’s case, the old Leftist mantra “the personal is political” is absolutely true.) Remember we wouldn’t know about the existence of this server if it weren’t for the Benghazi investigation, which in itself should be very revealing.
  • Susan Rice was selected to appear on 5 Sunday shows to explain what happened in Benghazi precisely because she was completely uninvolved, an uninformed person,  and had no knowledge about Libya or our policy there, and she was put together by political operatives David Plouffe and Ben Rhodes.
[amazon template=wishlist&asin=1455568872]

Now more from the Jordan-Pompeo supplemental report, as restated in the Washington Examiner,

“What we did find was a tragic failure of leadership — in the run up to the attack and the night of — and an administration that, so blinded by politics and its desire to win an election, disregarded a basic duty of government: Tell the people the truth. And for those reasons Benghazi is, and always will be, an American tragedy,” it concluded.

It strongly pushed back on administration claims that Clinton and her team did everything to help those under attack at the U.S. embassy and CIA facility on Sept. 11, 2012, just weeks before the presidential election.

“Those in Washington decided that once the initial attack at the State compound had ended and our men moved to the Annex, the enemy had retreated as well. For those fighting for their lives in Benghazi that night, however, it was one long battle for survival. But the terrorists did not retreat. This view from Washington that the fight had ended is a lapse in judgment that may well haunt our nation for years to come. At the same time Secretary Clinton appears to have concluded that the attack was over, the men on the ground knew better. In the end, two men died from smoke inhalation at the State Department’s compound during an initial attack involving dozens of extremists. Two more died from mortar fire at the end of a continuous, hours-long siege by approximately a hundred heavily armed and highly trained fighters at the CIA Annex,” said the report.

It provides a timeline of the crisis, and counters Democratic claims that there was nothing the military could have done to save those who were killed.

“What has also emerged is a picture of the State Department eating up valuable time by insisting that certain elements of the U.S. military respond to Libya in civilian clothes and that it not use vehicles with United States markings. Both restrictions appear to have been concessions to the Libyan government that did not want an identifiable U.S. military presence on the streets of Libya. We will never know exactly how long these conditions delayed the military response but that they were even a part of the discussion is troubling.

“And at the same time the State Department appeared to waste time on what our soldiers would wear, it also appeared to waste time and focus on the YouTube video that the administration would later blame, falsely, for the attack. It has emerged that during an emergency call at 7:30 p.m. on the night of the attack involving Secretary Clinton and other high-level officials from the Department of Defense, State Department, and CIA that a full five of the eleven action items from the meeting related to the video.”

It’s not surprising that the woman who dismissed the reason for the murder of 4 Americans, including the first U.S. ambassador killed on duty since 1979, on her watch by yelling  “what difference at this point does it make?” at a Senate committee would want to “move on.” (Recall that was founded by people who wanted to “move on” from the fact that Pres. Bill Clinton, the chief law enforcement officer in the land, had flouted the rule of law by lying under oath. Perfect, isn’t it?) How can this woman say, as she did yesterday in Denver, that no one has lost more sleep over the lives of the 4 Americans who died in Benghazi. Watch:

Are you buying that? Please let me know in the comments.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The Teri O'Brien Show

%d bloggers like this: