Media Uninterested In Benghazi Coverup

In June 2013 Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the State Department. The most transparent administration in history has largely refused to respond to FIOA requests concerning Benghazi. Judicial Watch had enough and filed suit. The result is fairly substantial evidence that the administration made up the anti-Mohammed video protest to save face for Obama. Jay Carney continues the charade, pretending the emails don’t actually mean what they say. The most transparent administration in history wants us to believe that straight forward emails aren’t at all straight forward. This shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. After all, this administration lied about Benghazi to protect Obama’s re-election campaign.

Benghazi was a complete disaster for the United States. The administration deflected all of the attention off of Obama, who you’ll recall went to bed before finding out what happened. Within a day the Obama campaign was pointing the finger at Mitt Romney, even getting debate moderator Candy Crowley in on the blame Romney act during a debate. Over the last year and a half more information has trickled out. (read: gun running with our enemy al Qaeda, switching sides on the war on terror etc. )Had this information been supplied in the first place, Obama probably wouldn’t have been re-elected. This makes finding out what happened even more important, because the President shielded himself from criticism with lies in order to get re-elected.

In order to find out what actually happened the public is dependent on an overtly ideological organization such as Judicial Watch. It was Judicial Watch that filed FIOA lawsuits against the State Department. We know Sheryl Atkinson at CBS filed FIOA requests but CBS refused to file suit when the Federal government unjustly and illegally denied those requests. We know that there are other reporters out there at the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN who filed FIOA requests that were similarly denied. Why didn’t their companies file suit against the Federal government? Why did it take an ideological organization such as Judicial Watch to force the release of these emails?

Supposedly FIOA lawsuits have increased under Obama. What we aren’t seeing though are media outlets filing FIOA suits, especially concerning important matters like Benghazi. (or Obamacare for that matter) This is a pretty big shift for the media. The press went hard after Bush during his two terms, especially so after Iraq and Afghanistan became more problematic. With Obama, Benghazi was a disaster that left an ambassador and three other Americans dead. Nothing was done to help them, the President was asleep while the assault was taking place and the administration lied about the origins of the protest. (read: the obscure You Tube video) With all of this, the mainstream press isn’t interested in covering the story much less filing FIOA lawsuits.

While some journalists, such as Atkinson, have put aside their ideological convictions to press the administration, editors and management have not. Benghazi showed us just how poor Obama is at handling a foreign crisis. Worse, it showed how much he really doesn’t care. What kind of President goes to sleep while an ambassador is under siege? There are some individual journalists who want an answer, unfortunately their editors and management aren’t interested in sharing anything negative about this President. The mainstream press likes to pretend they’re the people’s watchdog in Washington. In reality, it’s partisan and ideological organizations like Judicial Watch who are willing to file suit against an administration that is as transparent as the moon. Benghazi is a major scandal, where is the press?

My question is ... what's FIOA?

Top Intel Chief Testifies: ‘We Should Have Sent Help For Americans in Benghazi’

Katie Pavlich | May 01, 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-QfULYQ_po8

Testifying in front of a House Oversight Committee hearing Thursday on Capitol Hill, retired Air Force Brigadier General Robert Lovell said the military should have and could have done more to help Americans who were killed in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Lovell is the former deputy director for intelligence at Africa Command. His testimony today is the first testimony from a member of the military who was at Africa Command during the time of the Benghazi attack on the U.S consulate. [Bolding is mine]

“Many with firsthand knowledge have recounted the heroism displayed by the brave Americans in Benghazi that night. They fought the way they trained. That is in the record. Outside of Libya there were discussions that churned on about what we should do. These elements also fought the way they were trained. Specifically, the predisposition to interagency influence had the military structure—in the spirit of expeditionary government support—waiting for a request for assistance from the State Department. There are accounts of time, space and capability discussions of the question, could we have gotten there in time to make a difference. Well, the discussion is not in the “could or could not” in relation to time, space and capability—the point is we should have tried. As another saying goes: “Always move to the sound of the guns,” Lovell said. “It is with a sense of duty as a retired General officer that I respectfully submit these thoughts and perspectives.”

Lovell also confirmed again that the 9/11 Benghazi attack was not a result of a demonstration but instead was a well planned out assault and said the situation of holding back help made the military feel “desperate.”

“The military should have made a response of some sort,” he said.

Further, Lovell said people on the ground that night knew it was an attack from al Qaeda almost immediately.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.