Congressional hearings, White House damage control, endless op-eds, accusations, and defensive denials. Controversy over the events in Benghazi last September took center stage in Washington and elsewhere last week. However, the whole discussion is again more of a sideshow. Each side seeks to score political points instead of asking the real questions about the attack on the US facility, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
Republicans smell a political opportunity over evidence that the Administration heavily edited initial intelligence community talking points about the attack to remove or soften anything that might reflect badly on the president or the State Department.
Are we are supposed to be shocked by such behavior? Are we supposed to forget that this kind of whitewashing of facts is standard operating procedure when it comes to the US government?
Democrats in Congress have offered the even less convincing explanation for Benghazi, that somehow the attack occurred due to Republican sponsored cuts in the security budget at facilities overseas. With a one trillion dollar military budget, it is hard to take this seriously.
It appears that the Administration scrubbed initial intelligence reports of references to extremist Islamist involvement in the attacks, preferring to craft a lie that the demonstrations were a spontaneous response to an anti-Islamic video that developed into a full-out attack on the US outpost.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
I, for one wants to hear the truth regarding Benghazi.
ReplyDeleteThere are three confirmed truths about Benghazi.
ReplyDelete1. The Obama regime ignored and denied specific and desperate requests for more security many months before the Al Quaeda/Ansar Al Sharia coordinated attack.
2. The regime knew 2 hours into the attack that Ambassador Stevens last known words were "We are under attack!" The regime could not speculate how long the attack would last but refused to send a response team or offer any assistance whatsoever. They let them die even though a multitude of military assets were in place ready to kick some Al Quaeda butt.
3. The cover up has been proven as the Regime's story was edited 12 times to reflect the very OPPOSITE of the truth creating a false narrative about a video they promoted that did even more damage in the arab world against us.
The bonus truth, Hillary recorded an apology for the video with Islamic voice overs that was distributed in Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan so as to infiltrate through Muslim social media. ALL with your tax dollars.
The movie director is still in jail on some seriously trumped up charges. NDAA in action.
No one really needs to know any more than the megalomaniac President, his corrupt regime, political hacks, terrorist and hollywood lowlife friends and communist mentors are not a good thing for America.
Very few have asked the question, What EXACTLY was the ambassador, diplomatic and CIA apparatus doing in Benghazi? Is it possible the regime knew before hand?
ReplyDeleteIs it possible the regime WANTED the result it got to cover for some other sinister and illegal actions?
Maybe missile running? For the Jihadists that are obliterating Syria with radical Islam?
This regime has extended corrupt Chicago Marxist politics onto the international stage.
How many more impeachable offenses does this clown have to do before impeachment proceedings are started?
ReplyDeleteTime distorts the truth.We will never know exactly what happened because too much time has passed and the dead don't talk.
ReplyDelete