White House struggles to respond to new Benghazi revelations

Washington Times ^ | 5-9-13

[JohnHuang2]

The White House on Wednesday stood by its story that the Obama administration remained unsure exactly who was responsible for the attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi nearly five days after it occurred even though new revelations show Ansar al-Sharia’s direct involvement.

Gregory Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya and a self-described whistleblower, testified before a Congressional committee Wednesday that the body of Ambassador J. Christpher Stevens was missing for hours during the attack after being dragged out of the diplomatic post in Benghazi.

Full article here

==================================================================

The Benghazi hearing today provided vivid evidence that the only way Obama would've seriously considered military intervention is if one of the people at the consulate was named "Jason Collins".

According to Democrats, there was nothing the most powerful military in the world could have done to stop a bunch of heavily armed movie critics in Benghazi.

Democrats were all over the airwaves complaining hysterically that today's hearing was a waste of time because there were no new revelations. They did this not long after the hearing began.

Democrat Rep. Matt Cartwright insisted "there was nothing new today. There was nothing today that we didn't already know about."

Democrat Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger claimed "Most of the information I've heard so far is not new."

At the hearing, Democrat Rep. Elijah Cummings defended Obama's lack of a response to the Benghazi attacks. He insisted Obama had to allow Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans to get killed because U.S. forces were too far away to intervene in time -- a claim already thoroughly discredited since military assets were close enough to repel the second wave of terrorist attacks (or, as Obama insisted at the time, premeditated movie protests).

(Cummings's stance is a variation on the theme, "What difference does it make?" -- which will be Hillary's exciting 2016 campaign message.)

In fact, among the 'no new revelations' revealed at the hearing, whistleblower Gregory Hicks said that special forces were "furious" when ordered to stand down in response to the Benghazi attacks. Hicks was Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya.

Another new non-revelation revelation was an email sent the day after the attacks from State Dept. honcho Beth Jones, indicating the hail of bullets, grenade attacks and the burning down of the consulate was not an organized film protest.

According to Jones, "The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists."

More:

-- Hicks testified that the administration's false claim that a non-existent movie caused movie-goers to go bananas with grenades hampered the FBI's probe of the attack.

-- Whistleblower Mark Thompson, acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Counterterrorism, told the committee that no one from the Accountability Review Board, most of whose members were appointed by Hillary to investigate Hillary & co., had interviewed him.

-- During the course of the FBI's exhaustive investigation of the attack, Gregory Hicks wasn't interviewed either.

-- Hicks also said that Hillary's chief of staff was furious at Hicks for cooperating in the investigation with a Republican Congressman, primarily on the grounds that the Congressman was a Republican.

At the time the media first installed Obama into office four-plus years ago, no one would have thought it a good bet that the crusading anti-Watergate set would happily don their clean-up crew uniforms, but here it is: "Benghazi: Incompetence but no cover-up". The National Journal article title serves as a proxy for the broader media response to Benghazi. Biden's 2016 slogan: "We're not criminals, we're just incompetent!" And if that doesn't work, there's always the pithy, "Death is a part of life: So what difference does it make?"

Good luck selling either of those.

Anyway, that's...
My Two Cents...
"JohnHuang2"

[Kharis13]

the body of Ambassador J. Christpher Stevens was missing for hours during the attack after being dragged out of the diplomatic post in Benghazi

Was the Ambassador dragged from the post ALIVE? I've seen the video of his (?) body being pulled through a window, but not sure if he was alive or dead at that point. Killed at the consulate or elsewhere later?

[JudgemAll]

Damn, they had guns to defend themselves a bit in Ben Gazi, can’t repeat that mistake, it was supposed to be a totally gun free zone, heck, cut the damn phone line.
(sarc off)

In the context of gun rights and jailing the guy making the “incendiary video” that triggered the riots:

When Biden advocates the shotgun for us and not the rifle, it is because the Tparty has a political edge in precision.

Tea tax activists went after materials and not people. They went after purely material targets that funded the greed of a King willing to enslave people or destroy them.

The lesson is not lost on elites learning of history.

Thus they want to look good with rifles and muskets, while we get the shotgun (almost banned by the Geneva Convention in WWI by the way).

Check this out. This is their language.

The terrorists they support attack human, not material targets.

Democrates are just like Somali warlords, stealing the grain meant for the poor... and idiots keep voting for warlord Reid and Pelosi.

[Prolixus]

...killing three birds with one stone: deflecting criticism of Muslim murder, simultaneously justifying their terror, and attacking American's First Amendment rights all in one fell swoop.

Also let's not forget that the Obama Administration was blaming an Egyptian Christian's video for the attack. The Administration was probably hoping that this would trigger an increase of Muslim on Christian violence in Egypt.

The Administration's cynicism knows no bounds.

[Carriage Hill]

They won’t. It’s all going to disappear down another “rabbit hole”, no matter what the hearings reveal. 0scumbag & Hitlery are secure; underlings will be blamed and disciplined. JMO.

[Liz]

Ascribing jihadist motivations to the killing of Americans is anathema to the occupant of the WH....it does
not comport w/ his illusions that he is one of them---and can control 100 million America-hating Islamics.

Dennis Miller nailed it on O'Reilly----If American soldiers had killed four Benghazi jihadists,
the WH would not have hesitated---would have thrown them in jail, and publicly disgraced them.

===============================================

NOT PHOTOSHOPPED---A photo trip to his Kenyan homeland---when Obomba was age 23-24.
2008 primary candidate Hillary had these pics but Teddy Kennedy warned the Clintons not to use them

Obama's brother Malik holds up photo.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

Excellent job, although I don’t believe there’s enough Sodium Pentothal in the world to get Jay Carney to tell even a minor truth.

[N. Theknow]

At the hearing, Democrat Rep. Elijah Cummings defended Obama's lack of a response to the Benghazi attacks. He insisted Obama had to allow Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans to get killed because U.S. forces were too far away to intervene in time -- a claim already thoroughly discredited since military assets were close enough to repel the second wave of terrorist attacks (or, as Obama insisted at the time, premeditated movie protests).

Yes, and Cummings felt so strongly about it that he had to read his "heart-felt" opinions / feelings from a sheet of paper.

[Liz]

What's the dumbest thing the little twit ever said?

"Even though Hillary 'signed off' on Benghai security,
that does not mean she actually 'knew' about it."

[Up Yours Marxists]

I would guess it’s more quid pro quo than anything. “Ignore that little problem in Libya and you’ll get what you want on (fill in the blank)”.

Rule #1 of politics. Same with the courts.

[JoeProBono]

[Truth29]

This appears in the Washington Times. How much major critical coverage is there in the MSM? Boehner needs to stop being a wet blanket and form a select committee and get the investigation in the headlines every day for months. He should read the history of the media reporting during Watergate for guidance.

[JoeProBono]

[shineon]

Boy Scouts honor.

[ripley]

The whole crew is going to receive skating lessons.

The problem is ice-skating or roller-skating lessons.

/s/

IMHO

[DooDahhhh]

And we have to suffer this kind of government because the takers outnumber the makers. H and O are sorry sacks of sh!t.

[don-o]

claim already thoroughly discredited since military assets were close enough to repel the second wave

That's true in hindsight. Worse is that the no go decision was a conscious abandonment of Americans in harms way to their fate. The default action for ALL Presidents is to GO, not wait and see. I know what Reagan, Bush - hell even Carter and Clinton would have done.

This pathetic CYA attempt that it would not have mattered misses this point. On 9/11/12, what was our readiness for ?reaction to a possible terrorist attack. How has The Dear Leader's declaration of victory in the WOT changed our defensive posture around the world?

9/11!!!???

HELLO!!!???

[Jimmy Valentine's brother]

As with all things Clinton, “Nothing to see here, time to Move On.org.

[don-o]

The Dear Leader is grateful for the defeatist attitude. If the right wing can demoralize, the left wing can continue to demonize, and he then can continue his magnificent reign.

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[stevie_d_64]

I saw a conservative pundit state that these revelations (right), will not bring about any impeachement procedings, it will not hurt Hillary Clinton’s bid for the White House in 2016, nor will it bring any additional critisism on the military, you know the ones (not all of us) holding the water for this administration, and nothing criminal will be brought up as well...

So you have to ask yourself two questions...

Why proceed with this inquiry at all??? Because if you say the truth needs to be made public??? That is already happening, well before this hearing conviened...Or some version will be finally made public record...Besides we already know what the truth is...(yes, I left this as a dangling participle)

And...

Who stands to gain when the ranking democrat on this committee does want to get to the truth??? He desires to keep this inquiry going for as long as it takes??? As a few other dems on that committee say as well...

Who stands to gain from an ongoing “congressional” investigation???

That was probably 3 questions, I apologize...

If the conservative convention is already throwing in the towel on this...Why are the democrats wanting to drag this out???

Thats 4, but who’s counting...

What else is coming down the pipe that when FoxNews is so tied up in this that these (potential) things might go un-noticed???

That’s not really a question, but an observation...The public haqs been duped so many ttimes in the past during times like this, you’d think that we might have learned our lesson...

But no...