Posted on 11/20/2012 3:00:10 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Tightly spun accounts of when and what the president and top administration officials knew and did prior to, during and following the deadly 9/11 terrorist attack on our Benghazi consulate are unraveling at warp speed. While the mainstream media has previously ignored the entire debacle, don’t necessarily expect that selective indifference to continue. Now, with the election over and their candidate victorious, the seductive allure of key party sex and security scandals are already becoming irresistible news features.
As Congressional investigations and a rising torrent of informed leaks continue to reveal disturbing new information, there are some major questions that will frame critical inquiries. The public deserves answers, and Congress, under full authority of constitutional law, must immediately demand them.
Did the White House Blackmail General Petraeus to Support a Cover Story?
For six weeks following the tragedy that killed U.S. Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, White House representatives steadfastly parroted a story that the carefully planned attack on the 9/11 anniversary was a spontaneous mob action precipitated by an obscure anti-Muslim U Tube video. Yet testimony presented to the Congressional Oversight and Government Reform Committee reveals that the White House knew from Day One that al-Qaeda terrorists were responsible.
Days after the attack CIA Director General David Petraeus supported the Obama administration’s spontaneous mob cover story. In doing so, he was at odds with a report based upon eyewitness accounts which was sent to Langley within 24 hours of the attack by his own Libya station chief. Inexplicably, CIA briefing points submitted to Congress said only that: “…demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault.”
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Trying to find where to plant their presidential kneepads has the LSM wandering all over the place.
The MSM won't care about the party sex unless democrats TELL THEM to care about party sex. Remember Clinton? The MSM didn't even care about a credible rape charge. The New York Times sold out their integrity years ago...
Wouldn't it be easier if 0bama and his administration just told one lie and stuck to it? Worked for the clintons.
5.56mm
The media refuses to criticize Jimmy Carter’s third term. Get used to it. The new normal is mainstream media WORSHIP of Obama.
“It is now evident that al-Qaeda recently hit four, not just one, embassies, with none of the other three ever attributable to a video either.”
Deeper and deeper and still digging.
Ping
So now Panetta and Holder are talking about staying. Obama must have had the “We must hang together or we shall surely hang alone” talk with them.
I've noticed that the 0bamabots are getting louder and more shrill each day with their insistence that “there's no scandal here.”
Funny. They didn't feel the same way about the Valerie Plame nonsense.
The way information is dispensed to the citizens must be modified.
Who gave the order to the military to “stand down” and NOT rescue the Ambassador and our other three brave men?
When did they give the order?
Why?
Surely Glen Beck’s admonition to “watch the other hand “ is operative here.
Are Even Larger Cover-ups Being Hidden From Congress?
We’ll get to the bottom of this right after we get to the bottom of F&F....which will be right after we find out who hired Craig Livingstone.
MY biggest question is: Would we even have heard of the REAL Benghazi story if the media and Ambassador Rice were successful at sweeping it under the rug with the “video” excuse?
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.