Will Benghazi cause the wheels to fall off the Obama bus

Bloody fingerprints in Benghazi

(I wrote another post yesterday for Mr. Conservative that is pure Bookworm Room — so much so that I almost hesitated to put it on the Mr. Conservative site.  I did, though, because I had deadlines.  And now I’m publishing it here, in slightly modified form, so that I can have the conversation I always enjoy so much with you guys and gals.)

Will Benghazi be the Obama administration’s Waterloo? From Day One, the Obama administration has been trying to sweep under the rug a terrorist attack on American soil – and yes, it was on American soil since the consulate was a small piece of America in the middle of Libya. Obama breathed the word “terror” once, in an undertone aside, and then the administration, with the mainstream media’s help, got down to its responsiblity-avoiding narrative: the attack was all because of an obscure YouTube video. Nothing to see here, folks. Just move along.

The administration’s cover-up might have been successful were it not for three things: (a) Special Forces kept the the pressure up, because they refused to see former SEALs’ Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty’s deaths go unavenged; (b) Republicans in Congress began to push hard for hearings, and announced that attack survivors, who have been discretely hidden away, would finally appear in public to testify; and (c) Fox News’ aired an interview with a whistle-blower who revealed that American intelligence has long known who did the attack and could have taken the attackers into custody or otherwise acted against them.

Suddenly, things started moving. First, the FBI finally released photos of three suspects. Second, CNN reported yesterday that those who doubted the administration and media narrative about a film review run riot have been proven right. According to an unnamed senior U.S. law enforcement official, “three or four members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula [AQAP]” were a part of the attack.

Once having started with a few tumbling rocks, the Benghazi avalanche started going full force. Retired Navy SEAL Billy Allmon wrote a column for The Western Center for Journalism stating that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama deliberately left four Americans to die in Benghazi. Hillary did so by failing to give them adequate security (and then lying about events to Congress). Obama, though, is the one who really has blood on his hands because he refused to send readily available help over to rescue the besieged Americans – despite the fact that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, former SEALS who died at the scene, provided a steady stream of usable information. Instead, he got a good night’s sleep while they were fighting and dying, and then went campaigning the next day.

Today, information came out suggesting that the Benghazi avalanche that may be the thing that finally buries forever the Obama administration’s “bad video” Benghazi spin. It turns out that the State Department whistle blowers who will testify before Congress aren’t low level desk jockeys. They are, instead, extremely highly placed officials who have first hand knowledge of what happened in the lead-up to the terrorist attack and during the attack itself:

• Gregory N. Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attacks and, at the time, the highest-ranking American diplomat in Libya;

• Mark I. Thompson, a former Marine and now the deputy coordinator for Operations in the agency’s Counterterrorism Bureau; and

• Eric Nordstrom, a diplomatic security officer who was the regional security officer in Libya, the top security officer in the country in the months leading up to the attacks (although, as someone who had previously offered testimony, he does not consider himself a whistle-blower).

Nordstrom’s October 2012 testimony before the House oversight committee was an early indicator that the Obama administration wouldn’t be able to run away from its gross culpability. Hillary’s State Department, according to Nordstrom, absolutely refused to provide security for the consulate in the months leading to the attack. As far is Nordstrom was concerned, “For me the Taliban is on the inside of the [State Department] building.”

All these stories, which will continue to grow bigger with Congressional testimony, reveal that something rotten was (and is) happening in the White House. Doug Ross, who runs the Director Blue website, has put together a timeline of everything we know with certainly about the Benghazi attack. His analysis reveals “four inescapable conclusions”:

a) Hillary Clinton lied under oath to Congress.

b) Barack Obama went to sleep knowing that a U.S. Ambassador and other Americans were under terrorist attack.

c) Barack Obama awoke refreshed the next day to begin fundraising.

d) The entire Executive Branch lied repeatedly to the American people to save Obama’s chances for reelection.

Since the attack on the consulate, the administration has lied and the media has run interference. It will be interesting to see how these two branches of the Democrat machine handle earth-shaking testimony establishing that the administrative could have prevented the attack from ever happening and that Obama deliberately left Americans to die. And it will be even more interesting to see whether the American people actually care that their president was responsible for these shocking practical and moral failures.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • dustoffmom

    Well thank the heavens! I made a big bowl of popcorn back when this first happened and settled in to watch the fallout show.  And I’ve been munching it for a long time now and frankly, I’m about sick of popcorn.  As one old enough to have avidly watched and engaged in following the Watergate fiasco all these many years ago now I have repeatedly said to watch for the Butterfield….he would appear and the house would fall.  I’ll admit I was starting to get discouraged with the waiting, and the hints, but here we are.  I’ve no idea now when the “moment” will happen, when that one statement will sound that will throw open the windows on the tragedy of what happned but I’ll be watching for it.  Much like that seemingly innocent question and answer about being aware of any ‘recording system’ fell like a thunderclap then….something will smash into this too.  Obama and Clinton are criminallly responsible here, jail is too easy for them and if they think (as they seem to believe) they can succeed where Richard Nixon could not then it is going to be even more delightful to watch them fall.  With a gigantic thud!  What made them think America’s Special Forces would remain silent after the unnecessary death of two of their own??  Congress and the Press may be willing to roll over and play dead……SEALS not so much.

  • lee

    I still think that with so much of the media in the tank for him, plus his fan base thinks he wlks on water, nothing ,uch will happen. Frankly, most of those who actually voted for him probably would have still voted for him no matter what happened. Hell, if he had wlaked out the morning of the election and annonced he was Osama bin Laden’s right hand man, thet STILL would have voted for him. (Not to mentioned the fake votes that were engineered for him.)

  • SADIE

    In a word. NO.
    The Obama/Clinton bus is classified as  “Special Needs” transportation. It comes equipped with bullet-proof glass manufactured by the MSM – they will in fact, double-down on defending them. After all … Hillary appears to be their “chosen one” for 2016. If you don’t like Obama – you’re a racist and if you don’t like Hillary – you’re sexist. Body count on our borders, Benghazi and Boston don’t.

  • Danny Lemieux

    I’m not so sure. If it was only Benghazi, then probably not. But we have a rising tide of scandals…not just Benghazi but also Fast & Furious, the aptly named Pigford scandal, green energy-related crony capitalism, massive voter intimidation and fraud, etc. etc. I get the sense of a dam about to burst.
    I am beginning to suspect that the history of the Obama Administration will make the Teapot Dome scandal look like child’s play.

  • http://vinnysrants.blogspot.com vinny

    I will be very surprised if the MSM doesn’t bury this, as they’ve buried so many important stories before. They are part of team Obama and if he falls, what will happen to them?

  • http://OgBlog.net Earl

     
    I really do want Danny to be right!! 
     
    But Watergate doesn’t count, because the only reason it “worked” was that the media kept up the drumbeat until the American people could NOT ignore it.
     
    I really do want Danny to be right!!
     
    The rest of y’all are making me depressed…….

  • dustoffmom

    Face the Nation had this as the first story today.  The Democrat was forceful in saying it was a lie, a cover up, etc.  CBS Evening News used it as the lead story.  They appear to be committed to the story now.    The MSM is beginning to NOT bury it and I look for others to start now that one of the alphabets has led the way.  I disagree…..the similarities to Watergate are eerie.  Back then it was The Washington Post standing alone for months with the story, this time it has mostly been Fox.  It’s building to a crescendo and it’s not going to go quietly away any longer. 

  • skullbuster

    Unfortunately, lee and Sadie are right on the money.  If the scandals get to the point that there is a hint that mid-terms might not go their way, they will bringout the 50% of the voters that are takers in droves to protect their gravy train. 

  • Mike Devx

    As long as we get compelling, *CLEAR* testimony outlining what really happened, I’ll be happy.  Let it be clear that Obama went to bed knowing the embassy was under terrorist assault, and then woke up and went fundraising.  Then the outrage should grow, and I actually hope it grows slowly over a year or so, until Americans are ready to issue the Obama Administration a big middle finger in 2014.
     
    If we can get clear testimony contrasting against Hillary Clinton’s statements, such that yes, she did lie under oath to Congress, all the better.  Damn difficult to run for president in 2016 if you’ve *provably* lied under oath.
     
    It’s not the original mistake that gets you… it’s ALWAYS the cover-up.  Oh, just dessert, please! Please!
     

  • http://OgBlog.net Earl

     
    My big hope is that they’re not called “low-information voters” for nothing…..I’m not sure that many will make the connection between treachery in high places and a threat to the gravy train – at least, not enough to fuel a huge turnout among that crowd. 
     
    Too many fascinating TV shows to watch, and I think it’s a slam dunk that nobody is going to come out and tell them frankly that they need to re-elect liars or they’re likely to lose their free stuff.
     
    Have been wrong before, though….expect to be again, too – just not on this.  We’ll see.

  • SADIE

     
    Mike, you made me chuckle “compelling clear testimony”. Why, you ask … a name that came to mind was Sandy Berger. Did he steal copies or originals? Was the material hidden in his coat or his socks? You get the idea, you go into the National Archives, you remove papers that could .. hmm could distress for your former boss and your future boss. Berger was, foreign policy advisor to Hillary in 2008. In the end no problem for the well connected, you pay a fine, do some bullshit community service, give up your attorney’s license you weren’t using anyway, kinda like the Obamas, come to think of it and voila – no problem.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Obama gets a bit fat grin on his face whenever Americans die or are tortured. Make no mistake about that.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Sadie, the ruling class of America can’t be held to the same rules they designed for the peasants. That would be unworkable and completely backwards.
     
     

  • Mike Devx

    Hi Sadie,
    I said that about “compelling clear testimony” because that is the only thing that might cause all the clueless (low information voters) to sit up and pay any attention.  And it not only will have to be compelling and clear, but it MUST also be on video.  Text won’t cut it.
     
    IF the testimony is vague or uncertain – if the voters have to think and connect the dots for themselves – then it’s not going to have any effect.
     
    AND we will probably have to organize a vast media campaign to get it out there to the point where the clueless will actually absorb it.  It’s sad, but that’s the way I see it.
     

  • SADIE

     
    Mike, I hope you’re right, but… between political cataracts and excessive ear wax – the Left is already void of two senses. I watched C-span during the hearing last October and found Eric Norstrom’s testimony compelling. The worst part of the day was the posturing of both parties, abusing the time to enhance themselves rather than focusing on follow-up questions and exacting hard information. If the politcians can, just once, bury the speech, we may get some decent video. It is certainly important that vague answers be challenged on the spot – no hemming or hawing.