The true Benghazi cover-up means asking the right question

You should take the time to read the State Department account of the attack on our consulate in Benghazi. You can read it here –

The cover-up by the Obama Administration has been the focus, but that won’t be resolved prior to the election. More interesting to me are the events that led up to this attack and why it was allowed to happen. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has publicly acknowledged responsibility for the attack as security for our overseas diplomats around the world fall under her jurisdiction. More directly it would appear that  Charlene Lamb, who is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, made the decision not to increase security at the compound. Her testimony is here –

U.S. security officer Eric Nordstrom has claimed that Lamb tried to keep security at the compound in Benghazi “artificially low” –  He has also claimed that members of the Libyan February 17th martyrs movement who were assigned security of the compound were only being paid a $30 per day food stipend and hadn’t been paid for months.

When reading the background briefing linked above, I found this sentence.

At this point, the special security team, the quick reaction security team from the other compound, arrive on this compound. They came from what we call the annex. With them – there are six of them – with them are about 16 members of the Libyan February 17th Brigade, the same militia that was – whose – some members of which were on our compound to begin with in the barracks

Questions. Over 200 security incidents at our Libyan compounds in a one year period. 48 at Benghazi. Lamb repeatedly denies extra security requests. The Libyans assigned security not being paid. And on the night of the attack, the 9/11 anniversary, the 6 members of the SST and the 16 members of the Libyan February 17th Brigade are all located at the secret CIA compound (the annex) and not the consulate. What’s it all add up to? Set-up anyone?

The media firestorm is all about the Obama cover-up of the response. It should be focused on why this ever happened because it stinks to high heaven. Ambassador Stevens is dead and it appears to me that it was intended to be that way. The testimony supports it. The events leading up to it supports it. The real question is why?

8 thoughts on “The true Benghazi cover-up means asking the right question”

  1. Why they kept security low will probably never be answered and no one will be fired. The fact that the State Department knew there was no protest and it was an organized terrorist attack can be proven. Obama, Clinton, and Clapper would have been briefed on the testimony of the surviving agents immediately. Clinton testified to the whole Senate and lied about the event. This is a criminal offense. Ed Klein said sources tell him that Bill Clinton has been getting legal advice for Hilary and I believe this makes sense. If only the Republicans had asked the right questions at the hearings, the lid would have been blown off Obama’s deception. Greta Van Susteren has been hammering away at the fact that the State Department’s first hand intelligence should have blown away any other intelligence which said that there might have been a protest.

  2. Good points. Obama wants the debate on the fallout and not what led up to the attack. Talk about criminal offense. We just witnessed the CIA allowing our Ambassador to be taken out. How complicit were they?

  3. This is what Ed Kien says his source told him.
    “After the Clinton legal team had a chance to review the State Department cable traffic between Benghazi and Washington, the experts came to the conclusion that the cables proved that Hillary had in fact given specific instructions to beef up security in Libya, and that if those orders had been carried out — which they weren’t — they could conceivably have avoided the tragedy.

    Clearly, someone in the Obama administration dropped the ball — and the president was still insisting that it was not his fault.

    In the end, then, Hillary decided to assume responsibility to show that she was acting more presidential than the president.”

    The White does not get involved in security at 99% of the embassies. If Hillary had to ask, it was because Obama had special policies applied to Libya.
    Both the safehouse and the compound were attacked. So, did our people die for Obama stupidity or was something more sinester a work? I hope someone gets to the bottom of this.

  4. So, did our people die for Obama stupidity or was something more sinester a work?

    I’ll take option B. On June 6, a huge hole was blown through the gate in what was obviously the test run and Obama didn’t know? That’s just the tip of the iceberg, of course they knew. The bigger question is did they let Stevens die or want him dead?

  5. […] Spellchek: The true Benghazi cover-up means asking the right question TMGGB: Lawrence O’Donnell…Wannabe Tough Guy… FCBZ: Billions of Dollars Later… Lengthy List of Obama’s Costly Green-Energy Losers That Taxpayers Have Funded MTTM: National “Rebuild America – Defeat Obama” Tour Reloads & Comes To Michigan Again! Gator: What do Democrats do when the race card, and class warfare card, and the gender card max out? Jen: Will Obama negotiate with Iran? […]

Comments are closed.