Gitzo Loc: Indiana

The White House's Cover-up of Benghazi

Article by; / Chuck Norris | May 13, 2014


The Obama administration continues to suppress documents that could finally explain why U.S. officials lied to the world that the September 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, occurred as a protest over an American-made anti-Muslim video. And the families and friends of the four brave Americans murdered there continue to suffer without answers, reasons or justice. Is there not a shred of heart left in Washington?

USA Today explained this past week how the watchdog group Judicial Watch blew the whistle on the White House's withholding of documents and obtained a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice under the Freedom of Information Act. In it, the Justice Department tries to justify its withholding of further Benghazi documents.

The 35 pages' worth of withheld documents was described by Justice trial attorney Robert Prince as including "internal strategy discussions relating to the drafting of an official response letter" from then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to answer a variety of congressional questions about the Benghazi attack.

Just for the record, those documents include, but are not exclusive to, the following, according to USA Today:

--"A seven-page e-mail exchange consisting of 16 messages between State and other administration officials ... on Sept. 27 and Sept. 28, 2012, with an original subject line 'FOX News: US officials knew Libya attack was terrorism within 24 hours, sources confirm.'

--"Originally designated 'sensitive but unclassified,' the document was withheld to protect the formulation of a media strategy with respect to an ongoing sensitive matter under a FOIA exemption that protects the deliberative process, Prince wrote.

--"A one-page e-mail exchange, consisting of three messages, dated Sept. 11, 2012, with the subject line 'UPDATE: Clashes at U.S. consulate in eastern Libyan city (Reuters).'

--"A three-page e-mail exchange between State and other U.S. officials, dated Sept. 28, 2012 and originally designated 'unclassified.' The subject line of the first five messages is 'Statement by the Director of Public Affairs for National Intelligence Shawn Turner on the intelligence related to the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.'"

This withholding of documents comes on the backside of another discovery by Judicial Watch: several emails that exposed Obama aide Ben Rhodes' tutoring Rice on how to play the blame game with the anti-Muslim video on television appearances only five days after the attack.

Moreover, Fox News revealed this past week that documents "show there are differences between Benghazi emails released through the federal courts to ... Judicial Watch and emails released to the House oversight committee as part of its investigation into the attacks. The discrepancies are fueling allegations the administration is holding back documents to Congress."

As far as why the White House continues its suppression of documents, Alec Gerlach, a State Department spokesman, explained that "additional documents are being processed for response to congressional inquiries." The key term there is "processed." Never mind the fact that the "process" has been going on for 20 months.

Even more evasive is State spokeswoman Marie Harf, who explained that documents will be forthcoming "on a rolling basis." That is code for "as they fit the Obama administration's political and selfish agenda."

Isn't it amazing? The White House can pump out 10,000 talking points and pages of documents trying to justify every angle of Obamacare, but it still can't answer four fundamental questions about the lives lost in Benghazi posited by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who will spearhead a new congressional committee looking into the terrorist attack: 1) Why was security at the consulate so lax? 2) Why were repeated calls for more security disregarded? 3) Why was the U.S. military not more positioned and ready to pounce in that powder keg part of the world? 4) Why did the Obama administration contrive a duck-and-dodge response in word and deed to this vicious terrorist act immediately after it happened?

ABC News reported that retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell testified at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's fourth hearing on the attack that he and other U.S. military officials never believed that it was related to the anti-Muslim video. He was stationed in Germany at the time of the attack. He told Congress that he and other commanders strategized about what to do and that they waited for commands to come from the State Department, but those orders never came.

"There are accounts of time, space and capability, discussions of the question, 'Could we have gotten there in time to make a difference?'" Lovell said. "The discussion is not could or could not of time, space and capability. The point is we should have tried."

Benghazi-gate remains one of the greatest and most tragic commentaries on the White House's flagrant disregard for American human life for the sake of political expediency. I hope Gowdy's committee gets to the bottom of what really happened in Benghazi and what roles the Obama administration had in its cover-up.

The truth lies in what Republicans cited by USA Today say: "The White House claimed the attack arose from a protest against an anti-Islam video to protect the president's 2012 campaign message that al-Qaeda was in retreat."

President Barack Obama may repeatedly tout a decimation of the terrorist group's leadership, but Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos, with whom I traveled to Iraq in 2007 to visit our troops, told Business Insider: "We may think we are done with them. But they are not necessarily done with us. ... You can't ignore (that part of) the world. ... You can't turn your back on it."

And what about Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency in 2016? She was secretary of state during the attack. Could it be that the Benghazi documents, which would shed light on the real truths behind Benghazi, are still being withheld to help her presidential campaign and prospective appointment to the Oval Office?

One thing is certain: Someone in the White House is continuing to heed the slimy advice of Rahm Emanuel, former White House chief of staff and now Al Capone-mayor of Chicago, who said, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."
End of article


Comments;

Here are a few questions; why are the Obama ass-kissers and lap-dogs on this forum so concerned about the new House Select Committee "wasting money"? Why aren't they even more concerned about the hundreds of millions that have ALREADY been squandered on failed Obummercare "exchanges"?

And why are they all so concerned about sweeping all of this Benghazi dirt "under the rug"? Are they worried about it making der Hildebeeste "look bad"? if so, they needn't worry........(she already looks about as "bad" as it's possible to "look"! )

Here's another question; why would anyone with any common sense call himself a "dog", yet post an avatar that suggests that he's a "bird-brain"?

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Chuck Norris? He's 6 years into his predicted "1000 Years of Darkness. A has been C-rate actor.

dljen Loc: Central PA

Questions were asked about Benghazi, questions were answered about Benghazi.

Bottom line: If you don't like the answers, you just keep asking the questions until you find an answer you like.

[Republican "logic"]

smh

gym Loc: Athens, Georgia

If this were a Republican president, dealing with the same crisis in the same way, would you respond differently?

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

Leftist fiction is just that. Which Obamas lies do you like today?

dljen Loc: Central PA

You don't get it. Under a Republican president, there were 60 people killed, 13 Benghazis. Nothing was said.

George Bush and crew could have been tried for war crimes. Nothing was done. Obama chose to take the high road. This is pure and simple a scam to try to tarnish Hillary Clinton. The Repubs are a party at war with themselves. They have no candidates, no ideas. So...they attempt to Benghazi Hillary, the one person they're most afraid of. They'll get their hearings but at what cost for the posturing? They're a stupid party grasping for straws. They don't ask themselves that question while people (Repubs) in government are asking they not pursue this. #Losers

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

#1. Quote; "You don't get it".

I'm afraid it's YOU who "doesn't "get it".

#2. Quote; "Under a Republican president, there were 60 people killed, 13 Benghazis".

Now that you have made that ridiculous charge, please list all 60 people who "were killed", and since you're so certain that "it was all George Bush's fault", please be good enough to explain to us exactly "why" it was George Bush's fault.

#3. Quote; "George Bush and crew could have been tried for war crimes".

Only in the mind of a liberal "wacko" such as YOURSELF!
I would LOVE to hear YOU make the case to back up your preposterous statement.

#4. Quote; "This is pure and simple a scam to try to tarnish Hillary Clinton".

Like ALL libtards, you are very "long" opinions, and completely "lacking" in FACTS.


Fact #1. It has now been proven that Hillary Clinton is as big a LIAR as your darling, B.O. is;

Fact #2. It has now been proven that Hillary Clinton KNEW the terrorist assault in Benghazi that murdered 4 Americans was exactly that, yet she aided and assisted in the COVERUP and in the "invention" of the huge lie that was created to "cover it up".

Fact #3. It is crystal clear to people with common sense, (which YOU obviously are completely lacking in ), that Hillary Clinton, just like her "boss" at the time, was far more concerned with HER "agenda" than she was for the lives of the four Americans who were murdered by Muslim terrorists.

Fact #4. It is also crystal clear to people with common sense that people like YOU and the rest of the Obama boot-lickers here, are also far more concerned with your liberal ideology than you are about the the four Americans who were murdered by Muslim terrorists.

I can assure YOU that no "scam" is needed to "tarnish" Hillary Clinton! Hillary Clinton has been doing "things" to "tarnish" herself ever since she became a "campus radical" whn she was in college. The ONLY thing needed now to show Hillary Clinton in her "true colors" is "the truth"; (something that "you liberals" seem to be completely un-acquainted with. )

#5. Quote; "The Repubs are a party at war with themselves. They have no candidates, no ideas".

A very typical, very common, and completely dogmatic personal opinion, and one that I totally reject.
The "Repubs" have plenty of candidates, and more than enough "ideas", but hopefully none that a liberal such as yourself would ever agree with! (Or else I would never consider ever voting for them. )

Second Biggest Liar Ever To Live In The White House


"At This Point, What Difference Does It Make"?


der Hildebeeste "Up a Tree" on Benghazi

dljen Loc: Central PA

Suffice it to say that if you want to find out who died and where, you'll look it up for yourself. I don't do other people's homework, I don't have to satisfy others, I know and to me, that's enough. Get a life, Gitz.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

dljen - nice to make accusations, but we want facts ......

I also find it interesting that when we find a issue with BO & Hil that you either claim racism or try to justify the act because GB did it ..........

Sort of like if I broke the law and say I should get off the hook because others might of dine so too ........ real logic there ..........

dljen Loc: Central PA

If you can't see this Benghazi hearing for what it is, guess we can't agree...again. :)

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

So.....being a liberal, you can just "toss out" meaningless BS, and call a "fact".....and it becomes a "fact", right? Not in my book! And BTW.......I already "have a life".....and a pretty damned good one at that! (How about YOU? )

Like every liberal here, you make all kinds of preposterous accusations that you can't back up, then you think it's someone else's responsibility to make your case for you......I rather think it's YOU who needs to "get a life"........

gmcase Loc: Galt's Gulch

Using high road and Obama in the same sentence is the epitome of naïveté.

dljen Loc: Central PA

Yes, Gitz, we all know you're an authority on everything...perhaps you should get a clue that *nobody cares*.

If you think by calling me a liberal, you're insulting me, you're wrong. I'm proud to be a liberal.

I'm not making up preposterous info, I told you if you wanted to know, you look it up. I never look up anything for anybody. I do for myself.

How about Karl Rove saying Hillary had brain damage...another republican bs lie. Now, he's backpedaling. Hahahahahahaha #IdiotRepublicans #Losers

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

He can see the Benghazi hearing "for what it is", and so can everyone else who cares anything about the truth; it's only YOU libs who "care" more about your liberal political agenda than you do about other Americans lives that can't "see it for what it is"!

The woman that YOU and the rest of your fellow libtards are so determined to "stick up for" has blood on her hands! In my book, (and there are quite a few million more American citizens who agree with me on this ), Hillary Clinton is guilty of dereliction of duty.......she not only didn't do anything to help those Americans in Benghazi, she actually prevented military units who could have rescued them from doing so! Which in my view, should see her standing trial for treason! (And all YOU can worry about is that it may "tarnish" her chances of becoming the POTUS; ) Yet YOU have the audacity to tell ME to "get a life"? When it's YOU who is so blindly attempting to support someone that many American citizens regard as being a criminal?

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

That's probably the understatement of the year, but I love it anyway!