Posted on 07/02/2014 12:53:49 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
A legal filing prosecutors submitted in advance of a hearing set in federal court in Washington on Wednesday for Libyan militia leader Ahmed Abu Khatallah is vague about his role in the 2012 attack that killed four Americans at a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.
Abu Khatallah was captured in Benghazi last month by U.S. military special forces and FBI personnel. He was brought across the Atlantic in a Navy ship before being helicoptered into Washington on Saturday morning for an arraignment in federal court on an indictment charging him with conspiring to provide material support to terrorists in connection with the assault on the U.S. compound two years ago.
The filing submitted Tuesday appears intended to persuade U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson to order Abu Khatallah's detention pending trial. However, it's short on evidence or even allegations that the Libyan militia leader took part directly in the violence on Sept. 11, 2012.
Prosecutors assert that Abu Khatallah is a leader of Ansar Al Sharia, a group designated as a terrorist organization by the State Department. In addition, he personally was designated as a terrorist by the department. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
What do you suppose are the chances that he was not even involved or at the location of the attack? Perhaps he has been bribed to “go through this”, knowing that no sufficient charges can be made. IIRC, this was all over the news for a couple days, not too long ago, when it would have been great for the 0bama WH and crew to have some diversions and successes in the MSM headlines.
I heard he was caught holding an editing computer and in the process of trying to CGI a pair on Lindsay Lohan’s panties atop a copy of the Satanic Verses.
He may be a wannabe who was on the periphery of the attack; one of the first looters.
I really didn't expect anybody to be brought in because of what the defense attorneys would discover and then turn it against the government—gun running to Turkey and the speculation that Hillary or the White House was supplying Stingers to the Libyan rebels.
I've also thought it possible that Assad, Iran or even the Russians may have hired this local group, through an intermediary, to knock out the gun running project being run out of the consulate and the annex.
Supposedly (FOX News) the indictment is written to suggest the conspiracy to attack the U.S. installations was all hatched and executed in a 24-hour period. This allows room to say the jihadists were motivated by the anti-Islam video.
It's a big can of worms which may mean, as you suggest, Holder has the whole thing wired.
His first defense witness will be Hillary wailing:
“What difference at this point does it make?”
Why hasn’t Hillary Clinton testified under oath? It’s been years and still no testimony. Why is that?
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.