Posted on 05/06/2014 1:34:38 PM PDT by xzins
Every day seems to bring another revelation that highlights the duplicity of the Obama administration in reporting to the nation on what went wrong in Benghazi.
As we’ve already documented, the talking points for Susan Rice’s serial prevarications on the Sunday morning shows on September 16, 2012 were coordinated by Ben Rhodes. From what we know now, there was at no point at which anyone in the US government thought the attack on the Benghazi consulate was caused by a the internet video Innocence of Muslims. To the contrary, immediately everyone knew it was a planned and coordinated attack.
Regardless of the fact, the Ben Rhodes email establishes the lie about the internet video as the main theme of all government responses and Jay Carney persists in saying this memo reflected their best information at the time.
In a story from Breitbart.com, we have better insights into what the administration knew, and, to quote someone famous, when they knew it.
On September 12, 2012, the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce had a meeting. The keynote speaker was scheduled to be CBS Evening News anchor, Scott Pelley. Pelley, as it turned out, could not make the engagement and was replaced by CBS News president David Rhodes. By coincidence, David’s brother, Ben, was at that very moment cobbling together the guiding lie for the administration. (This, of course, goes a long way towards explaining why CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson found little interest in her investigative pieces on the Obama administration.)
Rhodes gives and address and at 25:00 the first question is asked, it concerns the elections. At 25:26 Rhodes segues to how the Benghazi attack may affect campaign news coverage.
“Now we don’t think that’s going to last, as far as it being about the people we lost and the unfolding situation which is pretty remarkable in our life time. Our government thinks that, you know, there’s a really good chance this was not just a spontaneous mob reaction to what some thought was an offensive film but actually a coordinated effort timed to the 9/11 anniversary.”
Who do we think told Rhodes what the government was thinking? My bet is on the guy who was writing the memo blaming a “spontaneous mob reaction.” Regardless it demonstrates that on the day after the attack the dominant theory was that the attack was a coordinated assault timed to commemorate 9/11. In other words, the truth.
As this story unfolds we will find several moving parts:
1. Hillary Clinton was involved in turning down Ambassador Chris Stevens’ request for more security for our diplomatic facilities in Libya.
2. The extra security was declined because it was essential for the Administrations’s narrative that Libya be seen as being secure.
3. When the crap hit the fan on September 11, Hillary recognized the danger a coordinated al Qaeda attack presented to Obama’s re-election and the danger it represented to her 2016 presidential ambitions.
4. She resorted to her best friend to save her: THE BIG LIE.
5. The press release issued by the State Department around 11pm EDT on September 11 locked in the story of the internet video even though Hillary knew at that time it was a lie.
6. During the week leading up to Susan Rice’s television appearances on September 16, Ben Rhodes, with the assistance of Jay Carney, David Plouffe, and others, drafted a set of talking points which were patently false. The purpose being to freeze interest in investigating Benghazi until after the election in less than two months.
Hopefully, Trey Gowdy will provide Hillary Clinton with the answer to the question she asked of the Congress:
Issues:
1) There was ample intel to avoid this attack - there were several pervious attacks which caused the UK to pull out.There are only 15 facilities around the world rated "high" or "critical" - out of almost 300. The Benghazi site was rated "critical" (the highest threat) and needed H.R. Clinton's authorization to operate it while at the officially documented, legally deficient state of security , before the attack.
2) The State Department had the necessary budget
3) wanted Benghazi to become a permanent consulate
4) was 1 of only 15 sites out of 300 globally to be rated at the 2 highest levels, is legally required to conform to upgraded security standards, and the Secretary of State (Clinton) must sign off on operating at substandard levels
5) and MOST DAMNING – Clinton ignored multiple formal requests to bring it up to legal standards after multiple, serious security incidents
6) The false narrative of a protest based on a YouTube video caused irreparable harm to the newly elected Libyan leader and caused a delay of the FBI getting to the scene by 18 days or more
H.R. Clinton told Stevens, presumably ordered by Obama, that this admin's goal was to make Benghazi a permanent consulate. But, career state department employees were threatened, and demoted, for using official channels to make basic requests for security before the mid-term election.
“0bama was shipping weapons from Libya to AL QAEDA IN SYRIA.”
I have a strong feeling that Trey Gowdy is going to get to the bottom of way more than “who changed the talking points.”
bkmk
I remember that. It was almost as if the film was “pre-planned.”
Oh come on, your remember Hitlery’s first words “We did not have anything to do with making that video”. So there ya go.
However.... because of the obvious bias shown by Candy Crowley in that 2nd debate, as a result the liberal moderator of the 3rd debate (CBS Bob Schieffer) OPENED up the debate by asking Mitt Romney if there were any more questions that he wanted to ask 0dumb0 regarding Benghazi, and Romney flat out intentially dropped the ball and stated he had no further comments or questions regarding Benghazi or 0dumb0's lies which were obvious even at that early stage.
Mitt Romney dropped the ball big time, I could see the visible relief in 0dumb0's face, that Romney just let him off the hook and lost the election right then. Romney was a sniveling coward, and it was obvious that his strategy at that time, was to just coast the rest of the way and hopefully win the election by evading any difficult questions or issues.
I am not a fan of liberal Bob Schieffer, but I will give him his due & credit on the 3rd debate, for stepping up and giving the first pitch to Romney, and Romney didn't even swing & miss the pitch, he just meekly put the bat down. We have had 2 successive, moderate-liberal RINOS as our presidential nominee, and in both of the last 2 presidential elections, 0dumb0 and even the dumbest guy in Wash D.C., Joe Biden, have thrashed the Repub candidates handily.
YIKS..that is scary
If she said that you can be 100% positive the opposite is true.
Well Romney dropped the ball because he didn’t have enough information on Benghazi. If he had read FreeRepublic then he would have. ;-)
Bump
I dunno. When Hillary’s involved there is a “lot of bottom” to get to.
This explains Jay Carney's fascination with Soviet propaganda art.
Like I said, I’m no fan of Mitt. I also agree that he failed to engage on so many areas (unless he was busy saying something to p___ off social conservatives like ‘health of the mother’)
But, the point is that Crowley and the Obama team probably set up that Benghazi engagement knowing the subject would come up.
I distinctly remember reading about the Blind Sheik swap soon after Benghazi happened. I believe ALL of our news people know of the deal with Morsi for the Blind Sheik. Didn’t the attackers yell, “Don’t shoot! Morsi sent us!”? Wasn’t that exact scene recorded?
This is CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR from Hillary and Barry!
... and probably many others.
HF
Question - has it been confirmed that the events in Egypt prior to the Libra attack were in response the the infamous video on YTube?
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.