Posted on 10/24/2012 8:43:36 PM PDT by bd476
Ed Klein: Bill Clinton ‘Urging’ Hillary to Release Benghazi Documents That Would ‘Exonerate’ Her, Destroy Obama’s Re-Election Hopes
Posted on October 24, 2012 at 10:48pm by Jason Howerton
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered additional security for the U.S. mission in Benghazi ahead of the terrorist attack but the orders were never carried out, according to “legal counsel” to Clinton who spoke to best-selling author Ed Klein.
Those same sources also say former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.
Appearing on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” on Wednesday night, Klein told host Andrew Wilkow that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been having “big fights” for “two or three weeks” about the issue, according to his two sources on Clinton’s legal counsel.
While Bill Clinton wishes his wife would “exonerate” herself by releasing the documents that show she wasn’t at fault for the tragic security failure in Libya, the secretary of state refuses to do so because she doesn’t want to be viewed as a traitor to the Democratic party.
On Glenn Beck’s radio show earlier on Wednesday, Klein said his information comes from two “very good” sources.
Wilkow pointed out the obvious, that the Obamas and the Clintons have a “very behind the scenes, tense relationship” — to put it lightly.
“I said to you last night, and I think I stand corrected, that it seemed like Obama out-Clintoned the Clintons,” Wilkow said. “But Clinton seems to have gone along with all of this because he knew that Hillary would be exonerated in the end.”
He then asked Klein whether he thought Clinton would resign over the Libya scandal and expose the truth.
“No,” the author said immediately. “I can’t imagine that she would resign. It would bring down the entire administration. [Obama] would lose the election and she would be essentially blamed by the left-wing base of the party.”
“She will not be tarred with the blame for bringing down this administration,” Klein added.
In an exclusive interview with TheBlaze, Klein confirmed that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been engaging in “heated discussions” where the former president has urged his wife to “release the documents that would exonerate her.”
He reiterated that Clinton has refused to do so because she fears she would look like a “Judas,” or a traitor, in the administration and it might hurt her chances for a presidential nomination in 2016.
If the claims turn out to be true and Clinton did suggest more security be sent to Benghazi, it is appropriate to ask: why didn’t it happen?
Klein said Clinton’s request for beefed up security would have to go through CIA special ops and or the Pentagon.
“But none of that would happen with the National Security advisor to the president of the United States Tom Donnellan going to the president and saying, ‘We want to send reinforcements to Libya because our ambassador is in jeopardy,’” Klein explained.
Ultimately, he indicated the ultimate authority would have been President Obama.
Wilkow and Klein also discussed what role Obama’s closest advisor, Valerie Jarrett, played in the Benghazi cover-up.
By Obama’s own admission, Klein said, the president never makes a big decision without first consulting with Jarrett.
“We have to assume that Valerie Jarrett, who is also by the way hooked into the Chicago campaign…that she was part of this cover-up in the White House.”
He continued: “The CIA got cables, the Department of Defense got cables, the NSA got cables during the attack on Benghazi, in addition to the emails that have since been made public. We know that there are cables that we haven’t seen yet, confirming the State Department cables that this was an al-Qaeda linked attack.”
These new revelations, following Tuesday night’s explosive report that 300 to 400 national security officials received emails detailing the Benghazi terrorist attack as it was happening, raise fresh questions about the truth behind the Benghazi attack.
The emails revealed that the Libyan radical Islamic group Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility for the attack just two hours after it began. White House officials told CBS News that an unmanned Predator drone was sent over the U.S. mission in Libya, providing Washington with a live feed to the chaos that unfolded.
“Do the right thing now, Hillary. Just do it.”
We can hope, right?
BJ:They don’t call me “slick” for nothin’
Bump
WSJ has a front page article on how she was thinking about retiring after the election, but that a lot of people are urging her to stay for the sake of stability in terms of not only the election, but the Middle East in general. So whatever that means.
And ‘behind the scenes’ my rear-end. Bill and Hillary want this so-called argument public so it looks like she’s trying to be ‘honorable’ while being in the right the whole time. Blehh.
I just keep thinking about how those poor people died. Horrible.
I doubt anything about Libya was simple. At first I regarded the “Radicals Kidnap Stevens/October Surprise” theory as way out there. As more facts come out, I’m hard put to come up with any other theory that explains Obama’s actions (and lack thereof).
My understanding is that there was a drone in the area and administration officials watched this in real time. I bet it is all recorded, somewhere. Whether Obummer can have all the copies destroyed is the question. But if a copy survives, it will be a real eye-opener for some of the public.
That just about says it all, doesn't it? These people don't care about America, or the truth, or their duty to Americans. They care only about themselves and the "Party." - Disgusting!
I don’t know what is wrong with some of you. We have just had the second worst President in HISTORY! Carter was worse and now you are bashing Hillary over Obama? I would take Hillary over Obama any day of the week. She at least places her hand over her heart during the National Anthem regardless of reasons. I think she loves America. I can’t believe you are bashing Hillary over Obama...that is my only issue. Yes they all suck, but Hillary sucks less. Obama is a complete and utter disaster!!!!
Obama campaigning with Clinton this week I understand
*
"The right thing" for them is, has always been, and always will be anything that redounds to their personal benefit and nothing else.
How soon we forget.
Thank you so much for remembering the DSL and the character of that administration!
“I think she loves America. I can’t believe you are bashing Hillary over Obama..”
Don’t be fooled by old Hill. She wouldn’t be Sec of State under Obama if she wasn’t in line with his ideologies. Both of them are in the same league and they are fellow travelers (commies).
The Clintons love themselves and Obama hates all of us. These people should be subjects in some Psychiatric studies and not sitting in the highest offices in our Govt.
As far as bashing Hillary over Obama, nawww...they are all equally despicable and they are dangerous.
And, if they aren’t stopped in this election, we have no chance of saving our country and what’s left of our liberties.
BTTT!
HYPOCRISY thy name is Hitlery.
WHAT an ugly enabling weasel this witch is. From semen soaked blue dresses to bloody fingerprints on pillars, she always supports her ‘daddy’ figure.
and THIS is supposed to be a ‘woman’ FOR women?
SHE is the enemy to the feminine and to the truth. B*tch.
TRUST NOT anything from this enabler.
That said, I believe their ideologies are the true concern. Billy is a minimalist socialist; Hillary is a true socialist; Obama is a hardcore socialist verging on communist. I would bet that in the back of Obama's mind he believes the Marx saying, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
The failure that is communism, and more recently socialism in Europe has been apparent for some time, not to mention historically. From American history, even the starving Pilgrims found their perfect collectivist commune didn't work and gave into capitalism.
Faced with potential starvation in the spring of 1623, the colony decided to implement a new economic system. Every family was assigned a private parcel of land. They could then keep all they grew for themselves, but now they alone were responsible for feeding themselves. This change, [Governor William] Bradford wrote, had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. Giving people economic incentives changed their behavior.
Here is my own personal experience with communism:
I was a rebellious teen in the 1960's. I watched the hippie movement grow and didn't want any part of it.
Reason: I watched others join communes. I watched as some would work hard to make their utopia grow. I also saw that others of the same commune didn't carry as much weight for their perfect world. Eventually, all those communes disintegrated. Why? Because of the human characteristic of wanting to be rewarded for efforts. I saw this at 17 years old and having a couple of brain cells it was obvious to a young punk teen the outcome. I went on to work various menial jobs until I joined the Navy.
I have seen nothing to change my mind after 62 years about socialism and/or communism. Those ideologies may work on feel good collegiate papers, but they don't work within the human mindset of self-accomplishment, self-worth, and yes, desire for advancement (greed to some).
Thanks to you, Alamo-Girl, for your Herculean effort memorializing the evil, dysfunctional history of these two grifters!
Ok, enough fun. Or not, your pleasure.
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.