One Year Ago Today: Hillary’s Infamous “What Difference At This Point Does it Make?” Testimony

Here’s an interesting thought experiment that you might want to try. Imagine the same facts of the Benghazi scandal, with one difference; specifically, that a Republican administration was in power. For two weeks after the murder of four Americans on the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in American history, an attack that occurred in a very dangerous place where many previous incidents foreshadowed the terrible event, the President, the Secretary of State and various other administration officials tell us a lie about a ridiculous video being the cause of the tragedy.

Then that same Secretary of State testifies before the Senate. The families of the murdered Americans and most of the rest of the country wanted answers about how this could happen. Her answer is “What difference at this point does it make?” Rather than reacting with shock that she would try to deflect responsibility with this ridiculous question, the Jurassic media swoons over her feistiness. Even today, we still don’t have answers to the questions that we had a year ago.

Gregory Hicks, former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, and the last person to speak to Ambassador Stevens, not Edward Snowden, was the Whistleblower of the Year for 2013. His op-ed in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal is a must read. It explains the truth about the lack of security in Benghazi, and it wasn’t what we heard some liberal hacks in our soundbites during last weeks’ show, concerned only about Hillary’s political prospects, say on last week’s show. I’m not surprised that these shills would try to blame the dead guy who can’t speak up. Mr. Hicks is speaking for him, and setting the record straight.

On Aug. 1, 2012, the day after I arrived in Tripoli, Chris invited me to a video conference with Africom to discuss changing the mission of the U.S. Special Forces from protecting the U.S. Embassy and its personnel to training Libyan forces. This change in mission would result in the transfer of authority over the unit in Tripoli from Chris to Gen. Ham. In other words, the special forces would report to the Defense Department, not State.

Chris wanted the decision postponed but could not say so directly. Chris had requested on July 9 by cable that Washington provide a minimum of 13 American security professionals for Libya over and above the diplomatic security complement of eight assigned to Tripoli and Benghazi. On July 11, the Defense Department, apparently in response to Chris’s request, offered to extend the special forces mission to protect the U.S. Embassy.

However, on July 13, State Department Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy refused the Defense Department offer and thus Chris’s July 9 request. His rationale was that Libyan guards would be hired to take over this responsibility. Because of Mr. Kennedy’s refusal, Chris had to use diplomatic language at the video conference, such as expressing “reservations” about the transfer of authority.

At a memorial service for U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens in San Francisco, Oct. 16, 2012. Reuters

Chris’s concern was significant. Transferring authority would immediately strip the special forces team of its diplomatic immunity. Moreover, the U.S. had no status of forces agreement with Libya. He explained to Rear Adm. Charles J. Leidig that if a member of the special forces team used weapons to protect U.S. facilities, personnel or themselves, he would be subject to Libyan law. The law would be administered by judges appointed to the bench by Moammar Gadhafi or, worse, tribal judges.

We were fortunate to have his attorney, Victoria Toensing, on the show right after his riveting testimony. She told us that Hillary sent Ambassador Stevens to Benghazi.

I guess it would be different if something really really terrible had happened, say if her aides had caused a traffic jam in New Jersey.

Just in Time for Benghazi Anniversary, Jeb Gives Hillary “The Liberty Medal”

I am NOT making this up. Even I can’t make this stuff up anymore. What difference does it make, right?

Four Americans were murdered one year ago tomorrow under her watch. No one has been arrested, the United States filed charges against Ahmed Abu Khattala last month. Mr. Khattala has been interviewed by CNN, the New York Times and Reuters, but apparently the F.B.I. can’t find him and arrest him.

Meanwhile, yesterday Hillary Clinton, who has been conspicuously absent from the public radar, resurfaced to make a comment about Syria, and apparently to receive an award from Jeb Bush, specifically, as the Christian Science Monitor reports:

“Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a possibleGOP2016White House contender, has agreed to honorHillary Rodham Clinton, a leading Democratic presidential hopeful, with an award from the National Constitution Center, for which Mr. Bush is chairman of the board of trustees.

“Former Secretary Clinton has dedicated her life to serving and engaging people across the world in democracy,” Bush said in a statement. “These efforts as a citizen, an activist, and a leader have earned Secretary Clinton this year’s Liberty Medal.” …

The National Constitution Center “seeks to illuminate constitutional ideals and inspire active citizenship,” according to its website, and it is the only nonprofit that exists to honor the US Constitution. In 1988, President Reagan signed the Constitution Heritage Act, which established the center.

Seriously? I guess we can forget about Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty and Sean Smith, and their “active citizenship.” Jeb, how exactly has this incompetent, self-important leftist Hillary Clinton illuminated constitutional ideals? By helping keep her horn dog husband in office after he was caught diddling an intern in the Oval Office? By lying about being under fire in Bosnia? By claiming she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, who wasn’t famous for climbing Mt. Everest until she was 5 years old?

What an embarrassment! Jeb is clearly suffering from an extremely severe case of ECBR (East Coast Brain Rot) and needs to get help for that. Running for president in 2016 is not the cure.

 

 

Open Letter to My Congressman: Don’t Get Sucked Into Barack Obama’s Latest Fast and Furious Operation

Dear Rep. _______,

I wonder if you were as taken aback by President Obama’s sudden desire, announced on Saturday, to seek your advice about his plans to lob some missiles into Syria as I was.  It seemed particularly bizarre coming only hours after he sent Sec. of State Kerry before the cameras to make a very impassioned case in favor of immediate action. I was stunned. President Obama knows that there is U.S. Congress? His numerous actions doing an end run around Congress because “we can’t wait!” demonstrates that, at best, he considers you guys some sort of ceremonial body with slightly less importance than the United Nations. I mean after all, back in March 2011, President Obama unilaterally decided that Libya’s Muammar Qadhafi had to go, and to make that happen, he fired 100 cruise missiles and committed 12 U.S.Navy ships in the Mediterranean, and 75 U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft including B-2 bombers. Unlike Saddam Hussein, Qadhafi hadn’t used any chemical weapons, and Obama didn’t use you for political cover in that case. He just felt “the fierce urgency of now,” and did what he pleased. Now, after only a year in office, Barack Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood pal Mohamed Morsi was ousted from power and is about to be put on trial. As we get ready to commemorate the murder of four brave Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, Libya is a disaster.

The Syrian civil war began in March 2011, and shortly after that, President Barack Obama said that Bashar al-Assad must go, but did nothing. In August, 2012, he took out his crayon and drew his infamous “red line” about chemical weapons. Supposedly in April, 2013, the Assad regime used chemical weapons, and in June, 2014, after confirming that 100-150 people had been killed by them, the Obama regime decided to arm the rebels. Apparently that silly half-measure was less than a speed bump to Assad, because, if the Obama regime is to be believed, the Assad regime killed over 1400 people with chemical weapons last month.

So, that’s where we are, and the situation is obvious. Any member of Congress who votes for the President’s plan is being played. If you disagree, please answer the following questions for me because I’m a little confused:

  • Sec. of State Kerry says we “know” from “independent” sources that it was the Assad regime who used these chemical weapons. How do we know that? Is from the same intelligence services that Mr. Kerry and President Obama derided for their failures to be accurate about Iraq? Some have suggested that it’s far from clear who used these chemical weapons. What’s the truth?
  • Assuming for the sake of argument that Mr. Assad is the perp, if we lob these missiles into Syria, how will that action deter Bashar al-Assad’s future use of chemical weapons?
  • If the use of chemical weapons is such an unspeakable breach of international norms, why didn’t we take more aggressive action back in April of this year when Bashar supposedly used them?
  • How do we know that the Syria rebels we are seeking to assist aren’t affiliated with the same guys we are killing with drones in other countries? The Obama regime asks us to trust them, but given their history of being truthful, do you really think that’s wise? Remember the Obama regime’s “Fast and Furious” operation, which armed the bad guys ostensibly to “track” them down? Unfortunately, the weapons weren’t tracked and eventually ended up involved in the murder of at least two American police officers and hundreds of innocent Mexicans.
  • How does telegraphing our plans to the Assad regime and then waiting ten days to do anything guarantee a successful military operation?
  • What is the exit strategy?
  • If, after this surgical “a little bit pregnant” strike, Assad continues to behave in a way that the Obama administration finds unacceptable, then what?

The most compelling evidence of what this Syria melodrama is about is the fact that all of sudden, Barack Obama’s new obsession is Syria. The time to do something about Syria was back in 2011, but that wouldn’t do, would it? That was before last year’s election. If he were really concerned about Assad, who he said in 2011 had to go, that wouldn’t have mattered. So ask yourself, when does Barack Obama ever focus all of his time and energy on anything? Is it when he is acting to advance America’s standing in the world? To strengthen and grow our economy? To free the dynamic energies of the American people and create prosperity? NO! The only time he focuses like a laser beam is when he is trying to advance his own power so he can deliver the coups de grace to unfair, racist Amerika. This idea is all about the 2014 elections. Remember, Barack Obama defeated the allegedly invincible Clinton political machine because he never had to vote on the Iraq war. He used Hillary’s vote in favor of the Authorization of Force as a cudgel against her. Now, as he did over 100 times as an Illinois state senator, he is voting “present” so he can take all the credit if there is any to take, and none of the blame. His Chicago sleaze meister David Axelrod let the cat out of the bag with his tweet on Saturday.  They are going to tell you that this is a vote about Israel, about America’s place in the world, or any other justification that they can use to scare you into going along. Don’t fall for it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Politics, Pop Culture, the Hottest Issues of the Day, and Your calls. The Teri O’Brien Show, featuring America’s Original Conservative Warrior Princess, Live and in color, Sundays 4-6 pm Central time  at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Teri-OBrien. Daring to Commit Common Sense, Fearlessly, and More Important, Cheerfully, in the Age of Obama.

Make My Day: Text “FAN TOBCWP” to 32665

Can’t listen live? Download it from iTunes and listen on demand. 

As one listener wrote “one of the most insightful and entertaining pundits in America. Also, her voice is magical.”

Serious Ideas, Irresistible Entertainment. Warning: listeners may become hopelessly addicted.

 

Attorney for Benghazi Whistleblower: 400 US Missiles Stolen In Benghazi

Have we found the reason for the Benghazi cover up?

If Joe DeGenova, is correct, what happened in Benghazi makes previous US government gunrunning look like smuggling water pistols. Is this the reason that the Benghazi survivors are being secreted away in government safehouses, given new identities, and hidden from Congress? From The Freedom Outpost: 

Mark Thomspson, one of the Benghazi whistleblowers who testified before Congress earlier this year, acquired the services of Joe DiGenova as his attorney. DiGenova has now come out and said that he’s been told that some “very ugly people” had stolen upwards of 400 surface-to-air missiles and that the Benghazi annex played a key role.

“I do not know whether [the missiles] were at the annex, but it is clear the annex was somehow involved in the process of the distribution of those missiles,” said DiGenova in an interview Monday with Washington’s WMAL.

WMAL reports:

How did DiGenova get this information?  He told WMAL that ever since he and his wife and law partner, Victoria Toensing, (Editor’s note: Victoria appeared onThe Teri O’Brien Show on May 12, 2013 to discuss her representation of another Benghazi whistleblower, Gregory Hicks) began representing the Benghazi whistleblowers last spring, they have been contacted by several people eager to share information about what really happened the night of September 11, 2012, when four Americans were killed in the Consulate attack, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens.

“This information comes from a former intelligence official who stayed in constant contact with people in the special ops and intelligence community,” said DiGenova, “and it is pretty clear that the biggest concern right now is that 400 missiles, which have been diverted in Libya and have gotten into the hands of some very ugly people. And they are worried, specifically according to these sources, about an attempt to shoot down an airliner,” he added.

 

From The Daily Mail:

‘We have learned that one of the reasons the administration is so deeply concerned’ is that ‘there were 400 surface-to-air missiles stolen, and that they are … in the hands of many people, and that the biggest fear in the U.S. intelligence community is that one of these missiles will be used to shoot down an airliner. 400 missiles, surface-to-air missiles, taken from Libya.’
Asked if the missiles are now ‘in the hands of al-Qaeda operatives,’ DiGenova replied, ‘That is what these people are telling us.’

From The London Telegraph:

Up to 35 CIA operatives were working in the city during the attack last September on the US consulate that resulted in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, according to CNN.
The circumstances of the attack are a subject of deep division in the US with some Congressional leaders pressing for a wide-ranging investigation into suspicions that the government has withheld details of its activities in the Libyan city.
The television network said that a CIA team was working in an annex near the consulate on a project to supply missiles from Libyan armouries to Syrian rebels.

 

Is it time for a Select Committee in Congress to get to the bottom of what really happened in Benghazi on 9/11/12? What say you?

Confuse, Distract and Obfuscate: Obama Administration Sends Jack Lew Out to Sunday Shows Do a Susan Rice

As we discussed on yesterday’s edition of The Teri O’Brien Show, Treasury Sec. Jack Lew appeared on several Sunday shows, which I watch so you don’t have to, and repeated two discredited talking points about the IRS targeting of American citizens. We aren’t sure if this outrageous abuse of the most feared federal agency is one of the “phony scandals” that Barack Obama has been bleating about for nearly a week, but it seems doubtful, since it’s only been two months since he vowed to “get to the bottom of it.” He even delegated responsibility for the task to Mr. Lew.

Yesterday, Mr. Lew resuscitated two debunked Obama talking points about the IRS scandal; specifically, (1) that the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups was conceived and carried out by a few “career people” and not directed from Washington, D.C. and (2) that the IRS was an equal opportunity targeter, in that they also went after “progressive” groups. Both of these fairy tales are false, as testimony before Rep. Darryl Issa’s (R-CA) House Oversight Committee, Rep. Dave Camp’s (R-MI) Ways and Means Committee and the audit from J. Russell George, the “TIGTA” (Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration), have proven.

If you heard the show, you heard Chris Wallace, as thunderstruck as any reasonable listener would be, ask Mr. Lew if he had ever asked IRS Chief Counsel William Wilkins, one of only two political appointees at the IRS, about the testimony of Carter Hull. Mr. Hull is an IRS attorney retiring after 48 years with the Service, and he testified that Obama appointee Mr. Wilkins, who represented Rev. Jeremiah Wright when he jeopardized his church’s tax-exempt status by inviting Sen. Barack Obama to give a political speech, was one of his supervisors who wanted to review some of the Tea Party applications. Remember, Barack Obama said he putting Mr. Lew in charge of making sure that someone was accountable for behavior that he himself considered unacceptable. And Mr. Lew doesn’t even ask Mr. Wilkins about Mr. Hull’s  bombshell testimony?

So why would Mr. Lew put on this lame performance? Clearly this a political calculation by this bunch. Everything they do is about consolidating and increasing their power with zero concern for doing what is beneficial for our country. Much like Susan Rice’s performance last year six weeks before the presidential election, designed to paper over the Obama administration’s incompetence and the subsequent cover up of the Benghazi debacle, this routine is designed to confuse people, especially the low-information types that are the primary consumers of Obama baloney.

We still don’t know what Lois Lerner is doing on her paid summer vacation. Does she have any government property while she’s at home? How long are we going to continue to pay her to stay at home? If she did “nothing wrong,” why did she take the 5th?

Perhaps this week we will learn which of the many Obama scandals are the “phony” ones. Benghazi, in which 4 Americans were murdered? “Fast and Furious,” in which at least one American agent, Brian Terry, was killed, and about which Eric “You Are a Race Coward” Holder continues to stonewall?

Stay tuned.

Let Me Say It Again. Hillary Has Some ‘Splainin’ to Do About Benghazi

Hillary Rodham Clinton, Miss Pggy Miss Piggy

The Weekly Standard reports on the State Department’s release of its annual Country Reports on Terrorism 2012 survey yesterday. There were 11 terrorism related attacks in Libya prior to 9/11/12, the date on which our ambassador and 3 other Americans were murdered, including:

• On May 22, assailants launched a rocket-propelled grenade at the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)’s building in Benghazi. The violent Islamist extremist group Brigades of Captive Omar Abdul Rahman claimed responsibility for the attack. The ICRC evacuated Benghazi in mid-July.

• On June 6, violent extremists attacked the U.S. facilities in Benghazi with an improvised explosive device (IED). The group claimed that the attack was in retaliation for the assassination of Abu-Yahya al-Libi, the second highest ranking leader of al-Qa’ida.

• On June 11, a convoy carrying the British Ambassador to Libya was attacked in Benghazi.

• In August, there was a series of attacks against security personnel and facilities, including the bombing of the Benghazi military intelligence offices on August 1…

• On August 10, Army General Hadiya al-Feitouri was assassinated in Benghazi.

• On August 20, a car belonging to an Egyptian diplomat was blown up near his home in Benghazi.

Yet, as Victoria Toensing, attorney for the whistleblower Gregory Hicks told us on the May 12, 2013 edition of The Teri O’Brien Show, Hillary Clinton herself sent Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens to Benghazi. Why? And why have the same level of security in this flaming war zone as we have in Paris?

If Mrs. Clinton thinks she’s going to run for president and not have to answer these questions, she’s got another thing coming.

Do yourself a favor, Hillary. Come clean. Even if Scarlett Johansson plays you in an upcoming movie. (What-Miss Piggy isn’t available?)

VIDEO: Bob Schieffer to White House Mouthpiece of the Week, Dan Pfeiffer: “Why are you here?”

VIDEO below As we noted during yesterday’s edition of The Teri O’Brien Show, the Obama administration’s designated mouthpiece of the week, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer made a complete horse’s rear end of himself during his full Ginsberg (all 5 Sunday shows) yesterday. From announcing that “the law is irrelevant,” to saying that Susan Rice deserves an apology because the infamous talking points confirm that she was absolutely telling the truth when they show no such thing, his appearance was a disaster. Check out Mr. Pfeiffer’s appearance from yesterday’s “Face the Nation.” At ~6 minutes, Bob Schieffer asks him about the lack of transparency. Then at 6:46,

When the executive branch does things right, there doesn’t seem to be any hesitancy of the White House to take credit for that. When Osama bin Laden was killed, the President didn’t waste any time getting out– getting out there and telling people about it. But with all of these things, when these things happen, you seem to send out officials many times, who don’t even seem to know what has happened. And I use as an example of that Susan Rice

And then at 8:22, the coups de grace:

But what I’m saying to you is– to you is that was just PR, that was just a PR plan to send out somebody who didn’t know anything about what had happened. Why did you do that? Why didn’t the Secretary of State come and tell us what they knew and if you knew nothing say we don’t know yet? Why didn’t White House Chief of Staff come out? I mean I would, and I mean this is no disrespect to you, why are you here today? Why isn’t the White House Chief of Staff here to tell us what happened?

I I don’t think that the LSM is turning on their messiah. I think that this is just a lovers’ spat, but it’s clear that even they are sick of being force-fed a steady diet of lies from this administration.