The Seven Scandals of Benghazi

benghazi 3


This is really starting to piss me off:

Pathetico:

The Benghazi-Industrial Complex
Will the pseudo-scandal be enough to stop Hillary from running?

Perhaps if the Republicans can’t beat Hillary Clinton fairly in 2016, they can make her so disgusted by the prospect of running that she’ll stay out of the race.

That’s where the Benghazi-Industrial Complex comes in.

Clinton’s 20-year sojourn in public life has been bracketed, jarringly, by two pseudo-scandals, both involving the tragic and less-than-fully-explained death of an important man in Hillary’s orbit. In between there have been assorted smears and public humiliations, including real traumas like Monicagate, the cumulative effect of which has been to make Hillary reluctant to reenter the political game. Or so many of her friends and aides say, and so Republicans must be hoping.

It all began in 1993 – just six months into her term as first lady – with the death of her close friend, deputy White House counsel Vince Foster, whose shocking suicide on a grassy knoll outside Washington fed a never-ending meme of Clintonian perfidy. (Rush Limbaugh still sometimes makes jokes about Hillary’s opponents ending up “in Fort Marcy Park.”)

As Clinton left Foggy Bottom two decades later, she was hounded by angry right-wing allegations in the final months of her tenure as secretary of state that the Obama administration had covered up the real reasons for the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, in the early morning hours of Sept. 12, 2012—in part to fend off Mitt Romney’s campaign criticisms and perhaps even, in the more elaborate version of this conspiracy theory, to protect Hillary’s 2016 ambitions.


I am not a Republican and I am not trying to stop Hillary from running in 2016. I campaigned and voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996. I voted for Hillary in 2008. Once upon a time I assumed I would be voting for Hillary again in 2016.

Not anymore, and Benghazi is the reason.

Benghazi is indeed a scandal. Just because there is no sex involved doesn’t mean it’s not. Actually, it’s several scandals rolled into one big FUBARed clusterfuck.

First there is the scandal of our intervention in Libya. This was part of the Obama-Clinton “Arab Spring” foreign policy initiative. We decided to help overthrow poor old Muammar Gaddafi, who had been a toothless tiger for years and a de facto ally in the region since 9-11. So we gave weapons and assistance to some rebels in Libya. It turns out that some of those rebels were Islamic extremists affiliated with al Qaeda. Libya is now in chaos and armed militias exert control over a divided country. That’s a failure of policy and Scandal Number One.

The second scandal has to do with the lack of adequate security at our Benghazi consulate. Warnings were sent to Washington and ignored. The meager forces we had in Benghazi were reduced. We basically hired some locals to provide security, and they either helped with the attack or skedaddled as soon as trouble started. That’s incompetence and Scandal Number Two.

The third scandal concerns what our people in Benghazi were doing there in the first place. Seymour Hersh:

In January, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on the assault by a local militia in September 2012 on the American consulate and a nearby undercover CIA facility in Benghazi, which resulted in the death of the US ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and three others. The report’s criticism of the State Department for not providing adequate security at the consulate, and of the intelligence community for not alerting the US military to the presence of a CIA outpost in the area, received front-page coverage and revived animosities in Washington, with Republicans accusing Obama and Hillary Clinton of a cover-up. A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria. A number of front companies were set up in Libya, some under the cover of Australian entities. Retired American soldiers, who didn’t always know who was really employing them, were hired to manage procurement and shipping. The operation was run by David Petraeus, the CIA director who would soon resign when it became known he was having an affair with his biographer. (A spokesperson for Petraeus denied the operation ever took place.)

The operation had not been disclosed at the time it was set up to the congressional intelligence committees and the congressional leadership, as required by law since the 1970s. The involvement of MI6 enabled the CIA to evade the law by classifying the mission as a liaison operation. The former intelligence official explained that for years there has been a recognised exception in the law that permits the CIA not to report liaison activity to Congress, which would otherwise be owed a finding. (All proposed CIA covert operations must be described in a written document, known as a ‘finding’, submitted to the senior leadership of Congress for approval.) Distribution of the annex was limited to the staff aides who wrote the report and to the eight ranking members of Congress – the Democratic and Republican leaders of the House and Senate, and the Democratic and Republicans leaders on the House and Senate intelligence committees. This hardly constituted a genuine attempt at oversight: the eight leaders are not known to gather together to raise questions or discuss the secret information they receive.

The annex didn’t tell the whole story of what happened in Benghazi before the attack, nor did it explain why the American consulate was attacked. ‘The consulate’s only mission was to provide cover for the moving of arms,’ the former intelligence official, who has read the annex, said. ‘It had no real political role.’


That’s Scandal Number Three.

The fourth scandal is the lack of a timely response when our consulate fell under attack. The White House was aware within minutes that it was an organized attack. According to some reports they were able to watch part of the attack via a drone. Hours after the attack on the consulate there was a second attack on the “CIA Annex” whose existence and purpose has never been explained.

The two attacks lasted hours, but no military assets were dispatched to Benghazi. In a time for quick action the White House basically did nothing. No one has ever accounted for Obama’s whereabouts and activities during the attacks, but we do know he wasn’t in the “Situation Room” at the White House. We also know that he left for a fundraiser in Las Vegas early the next morning. That’s Scandal Number Four.

The fifth scandal is the cover-up. Even though the White House was aware from the beginning that what took place was an organized terrorist attack the story was spread that it was a spontaneous demonstration caused by an obscure YouTube video. Obama, Hillary and Ambassador Susan Rice all participated in disseminating a lie to the American people and to Congress. Of the three, Susan Rice is the only one who can plausibly claim that she did not know it was a lie. That is Scandal Number Five.

The cover-up efforts continue to this day. That is Scandal Number Six.

(As far as I am concerned, Scandals Five and Six are impeachable offenses.)

Perhaps the most outrageous and harmful scandal is the seventh and (so far) last scandal. That is the abject failure of the U.S. news media to investigate and report the truth about Benghazi. They aren’t merely incompetent, in many cases they are complicit in the cover-up. That is Scandal Number Seven.


The Forgotten Four

The Forgotten Four


Advertisements

About Myiq2xu™

Peaceful coexistence or mutually assured destruction. Your choice.
This entry was posted in Arab Spring, Barack Obama, Benghazi, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, How Stupid Do They Think We Are?, Media, Media Zombies, SCOAMF, Shit That Pisses Me Off, Susan Rice, Syria and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

130 Responses to The Seven Scandals of Benghazi

  1. Lulu says:

    I started “turning” from Hillary when she CHOSE to become Sec of State. She knew what these hacks were and are. She had a perfect perch in the US Senate to maintain a political presence and as an independent voice. Her tenure as SOT was an absolute disaster as everything associated with this administration has been. This scandal is so awful on so many levels that she is a relatively minor side side actor as evidence suggests she was “managed” during her entire tenure. I think it ruined her health. I know it ruined her reputation. I do not want to see any more of the Clinton’s butt covering for the Democratic Party. It is demeaning to them and negates all of the good that they have accomplished. When someone like me, who was one of their biggest supporters for many, many years, wants them to retire it is time to go away. Or spill the beans which I do not think she has the guts to do. I have zero sympathy because she was stupid enough to involve herself with these monsters.

  2. The Klown says:
  3. abc says:

    Excellent post. I don’t follow BenG anywhere near as much as I should. You summed it up nicely. Thank you

    • cynic says:

      I agree. Excellent post. #1 does it for me. Why suddenly do we have to overthrow Gaddafi? I’d like to understand that one better. Then, I see the interview with Hillary where she’s laughing with glee and saying, “We came, we saw, he died.” I just watched that clip again, and it totally disgusts me. Yes, Gaddafi was bad, but how she acted, was awful. I really don’t think I could watch or listen to a President Hillary. I hear this quote, and the “What difference does it make? quote, ugh. I don’t trust her. She has too much baggage.

      • votermom says:

        At the risk of sounding paranoid, Qaddafi & Assad have one thing in common – they both are/were secular dictators opposed by Islamist rebels.
        Such a coincidence that Obama’s admin tries to take them both out.

        The future does not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.

        • foxyladi14 says:

          honk

        • 49erDweet says:

          Exactly the point that must never, never, never, never, never be allowed to stand because it’s so, so, so VULGAR.

        • Somebody says:

          They have that in common and also they both wanted to move away from the US dollar to gold or at least gold backed when it came to oil and the reserve currency.

          I just thought I’d throw that into the mix because it’s out there.

        • angienc says:

          And don’t forget Mubarak in Egypt — whatever he *was,* he helped US interests in the region. While it wasn’t the same kind of armed conflict as in Libya & Syria, the Obama admin certainly sat back and allowed Morsi & the Muslim Brotherhood take over — and when the people of Egypt got tired of Morsi, Obama was making all kinds of noise about how wrong that was, Morsi was “democratically elected” blah, blah, blah.

          • Dora says:

            Obama didn’t sit back and watch. He had his agitators over in Egypt stirring things up just as he does now in Ukraine.

      • Somebody says:

        Cynic that statement and the laughter is even more chilling when you take in to account the way Gaddafi met his fate.

        • cynic says:

          During the Bush administration, they caught Hussein. He was tried and executed. Under Obama, there were no trials, only the executions of Gaddafi and Bin Laden. I have no doubt that these men were tyrants, and deserved to die, but I think it’s interesting that the Left has an issue with the Death Penalty and they celebrated executions without trials.

          • lyn says:

            Progressives no longer have credibility. They are Obama’s ass wipes.

          • leslie says:

            “. . . Under Obama, there were no trials, only the executions of Gaddafi and Bin Laden.”

            Under Obama there have been no trials only executions – under the cover of darkness using US special forces, and/or at other times using US drones.

            Trials … we don’t need no stinkin’ trials.

  4. driguana says:

    Don’t always agree with Larry but this is pretty thorough and easy to understand.
    http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/77051/understanding-why-benghazi-matters/

  5. driguana says:

    I don’t like any of the Clintons and never have…especially since the Arkansas days. Almost accepted the Planning Director job in Hope, Arkansas back in the 90’s and sure got an earful then that lead me to do a lot of Clinton research….no respect from me.

  6. Lurker says:

    Could it be that Hillary is on the same page as Obama? I thought i read that Hillary was a lot lefter than Bill.
    I also thought Gaddafi was amending his ways, turning over nuclear stuff, etc.

    • Constance says:

      Hillary was a Republican before she was a Democrat. I doubt she is more left than Bill.

      • 49erDweet says:

        I thought her initial healthcare push was quite a bit further left than his.

        • Constance says:

          We will never really know because Ted Kennedy (Mr Chappaquiddick) couldn’t stand to have her accomplish his goal of health care for Americans so he organized to shut Hillary care down.

    • 49erDweet says:

      He had become an almost toothless circus tiger, and had stopped being a direct threat to the west. As votermom mentioned, he was a threat to Islamic forces.

    • cynic says:

      I still will never completely understand the whole overthrow of Libya thing. I was at a private fundraiser for my congressman in the late summer of 2011. We hadn’t gone in to Libya yet, but there was approval by some in congress, with my congressman in a position to approve it. I asked him about it during the Q&A time, and he said that we had to help our friends, France.

      Mind you, this is what our newspapers were reporting on in March of 2011. Doesn’t sound like someone that we would want overthrown. Am I missing something here? It just doesn’t make sense.

      (snip)
      Col. Gadhafi also crushed his country’s Muslim militants, including those who fought in Afghanistan alongside Osama bin Laden, and banned clergymen from expressing political opinions in their Friday sermons. Col. Gadhafi also has helped the United Staes track al Qaeda and other terrorist suspects in the region.

      Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/13/al-qaeda-commander-calls-islamic-rule-libya/?page=1&utm_medium=RSS&utm_source=RSS_Feed#ixzz30roCpTBP

      • The Klown says:

        The idea of getting rid of Daffy Gaddafi didn’t bother me that much, even though I didn’t see the point. He was owed payback for the stuff he did back in the 70’s and 80’s. But it made no sense to help Muslim extremist groups and then leave Libya in chaos. What we did didn’t help the Libyan people, it made things worse.

        Yes, there are worse things than dictatorships.

        • Somebody says:

          Making things worse seems to have been the purpose of the “Arab Spring” or at least that’s all it seemed to accomplish.

  7. Constance says:

    Great article. I knew I was disgusted with the Obama regimes Benghazi narrative but I didn’t have it so laid out and organized as to why. I hope this article gets widely circulated.

  8. helenk3 says:

    I stole this from a commentor at No Quarter. he put together a timeline of the video story

    http://jbjd.org/2014/05/04/mohammad-video-sleight-of-hand/

  9. DandyTIger says:

    HONK! Great article. The seventh is the one that bothers me the most as well. I think it’s a fair analogy, heard on one of those news panels but can’t remember, that this is like when Watergate was moving very slowly, not much traction, and then the tapes were discovered. Now we know what would have happened if those tapes were discovered but Nixon were a Democrat. Really sad.

    • angienc says:

      The media was so concerned about where those 19 minutes of missing tape was yet don’t give a flying fig where Obama was the entire night of 9/11/12.

      • votermom says:

        Even if the left succeeded in turning Sharyl Attkisson into a weather girl, her shows would be like:
        “Tonight we look back at the weather on the night of Sept 11, 2012, in Benghazi, when coincidentally four Americans were killed in a raid on the US Embassy.
        Did bad weather prevent the US military from mounting a rescue? In that case, why didn’t rain put out the fires at the consulate?”

    • DandyTIger says:

      I saw that. Jane was pushing the party line that this is crazy talk about benghazi, it’s over, there’s nothing there, stop asking questions, etc. Sadly most everyone in the media and on the left is saying the same. With all the obvious questions and open issues, you’d think someone in that tribe would be the least bit curious.

      • lyn says:

        Love how Jane brings up Vince Foster and aliens in Area 51.

        • cynic says:

          They have received their talking points. This is just more of those conspiracy theories from those crazy Right Wing Extremists. Black Helicopters anyone???

      • leslie says:

        I know this is going to sound like I am stupid… Maybe I am. But WHY IS the MSM COVER BRONCO’s A$$ ?? Who is really pulling the strings?

        • The Klown says:

          The MSM is covering for Obama because they are afraid it’s all true. The media were reluctant to believe Watergate at first too, and they didn’t like Nixon.

  10. swanspirit says:

    I fail to understand , what is so difficult to comprehend about these scandals . Especially Hillary’s culpability , which is completely obvious. Even IF , and that is a big if , action was required in Libya , it was her baby and she should have been completely and constantly aware of everything happening there . For an Embassy to beg for more security for months , in a volatile country ,where there is known terrorist activity , leading up to 9/11 , and be denied , is unconscionable ; how many other embassies go begging? To leave our men, without help when they were being attacked is treasonous .
    I think it is obvious to anyone who gives this entire debacle even a cursory glance , what happened , and we still cannot get straight answers from this administration .
    When Hilary lied directly to the faces of the families , standing by their coffins , i was personally devastated, that someone in whom I had had such faith , could commit such an act . I also noted , that Obama very carefully left it to her to mention the video , so that he didn’t have to .
    Just sickening .

    • Constance says:

      I remember seeing Hillary fake it in the face of grieving relatives too. Disgusting. I was also sucked in and donated a lot of money to her campaign in 2008.

      • votermom says:

        I totally fell for her tears after Benghazi when the coffins arrived. I’m so gullible.

        • Somebody says:

          I didn’t, I screamed at my TV on 9-12 when she gave a statement from her office the next morning. She immediately left her office following that statement and headed for the WH where she and Obama made their statements in the rose garden.

          I was online the night of the attack and as it just so happened I was on a site where the people commenting were aware of and following the attack. They were posting all sorts of links and I was following them furiously. The links were to social media postings, videos taken with cell phones, that kind of stuff…….much of it graphic and real time or close to real time. I saw things that night I’ll never forget. I also saw stuff disappear almost as quickly as it appeared, big brother was in full swing that night scrubbing the internet, it was creepy.

          The next morning I was irate at the statements being made. I literally screamed and yelled at my TV, something I’m not sure I’ve ever done before except during a football game. I never fell for any of the fake tears or promises, the coverup was on immediately and it hasn’t relented yet. I was especially enraged by the claims of the heroic Libyans bravely taking Stevens to the hospital for medical help…….by dragging him through the effing streets you lying b*#ch???

          I’m nobody and if I saw what I saw; I can’t imagine what those in the halls of power saw that night. There was never any doubt what happened that night in Benghazi. I think Obama put it best when he referred to “bumps in the road”, because honestly that’s all those four brave men were and all they will ever be to anyone in this administration.

          • swanspirit says:

            I watched that “ceremony” for the families ,deliberately , just waiting for Obama to mention that stupid video , because I thought he was crass enough to do so, and when he didn’t , I was relieved , and figured someone at least advised him correctly . I thought at least someone gave the families and the dead that much respect , because i was convinced Hillary would never mention it , and then she did . I screamed at the TV too . I said OH YOU BITCH !!! and continued a stream of choice expletives .

          • 49erDweet says:

            “Taking one for the team” is vastly overated when the team is a lying sack of putrified whale dung. Next she needs to accept an appointment as Adjunct Professor of Ethics and Morality at an Ivy.

        • The Klown says:

          She was crying over her dying ambitions.

  11. The Klown says:

    An aide from Re, Louie Gohmert’s office just contacted me via twitter re: the media incest chart I used the other day. She wanted the original source. I hope I was helpful.

  12. SHV says:

    “First there is the scandal of our intervention in Libya. This was part of the Obama-Clinton “Arab Spring” foreign policy initiative.”
    *******
    The person who wrote the Cairo speech, pushed the policy of “Arab Spring” with intervention in Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc., is Ben Rhodes. He also appears to be the person who coordinated the initial coverup. A masters degree in creative writing got him a job on the National Security Council and apparently Obama’s primary foreign policy advisor.

    “Worldly at 35, and Shaping Obama’s Voice”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/16/world/middleeast/benjamin-rhodes-obamas-voice-helps-shape-policy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    • The Klown says:

      He was one of Obama’s speechwriters. That qualifies him to do anything.

      • Lulu says:

        He worked for Lee Hamilton first and assisting in writing the Iraq Study Group fairy tale.

        • votermom says:

          Let’s be honest – probably his primary qualification for a job in the WH is the fact that his brother runs CBS.

          • Lulu says:

            True that. And he hopped on the Obama train very early. It does seem that the administration got stuck with the dud family members of the elites though. It is like they got the “always a bridesmaid” sort with the more talented and successful wives, husbands, cousins and brothers working somewhere legit and the duds getting shuffled off to the government to fuck up as they had all their lives. It is the administration of the “not quite good enough” brigade. Hillary is starting to look like that too as the wife of Big Dog.

  13. foxyladi14 says:

    So many scandals so little time. 😦

  14. votermom says:

  15. The Klown says:
  16. The Klown says:
    • The Klown says:

      The Farce is strong in this one.

    • Somebody says:

      I think that is a true sign that Obama is now officially a lame duck in every way. When OS sees no value in Michelle’s brother, the Obama’s aren’t on their way out, they’re past that. Oregon State got plenty of limelight from the connection though. That is NOT to imply that Robinson didn’t get his job based on merit he in fact did as far as I know. He landed that job before O won the primary as far as I recall.

      Robinson will be just fine; with his 4 million severance pay he can take care of his family quite comfortably, if he doesn’t find another position.

  17. SHV says:

    “all the president’s dudes starting justin beiber”
    ******
    I think that I saw the “cattle call” for that movie. Two Sundays ago, the wife and I were walking past the “Old Glory” bar on M Street in Georgetown. The place was packed with loud, drunk, creative class Obots. Apparently Tommy (dude) Vietor, John Favreau and other current/former members of Obama’s brain trust were there, holding court, drunk and shirtless. Our tax dollars at work!!

  18. SHV says:

    “WASHINGTON, DC – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) announced today that he has chosen Representative Trey Gowdy (R-SC) to serve as chairman of the select committee to investigate the 2012 tragedy in Benghazi, Libya. -”
    ******
    http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/boehner-taps-gowdy-lead-select-benghazi-panel

  19. Somebody says:

    Klown this is a very good post. You did a great job laying out the various issues in a clear and concise manner, without diving into any of the “rabbit holes” some seem intent on exploring…..KUDOS!

  20. The Klown says:

    Digby has a regular column at (where else) Salon:

  21. The Klown says:
  22. 1539days says:

    I’m thinking of responding to Benghazi dismissals by vile progs with #thirdrateburglary except many won’t have any idea what that means.

  23. The Klown says:
  24. The Klown says:
  25. DandyTIger says:

    Here’s what I would do if I were speaker of the house. If the Dems decided not to participate on the committee, I’d decide they didn’t need to participate in any committee of any sort. I’d remove Dems from every single house committee. Also, I’d have balls and play hardball with the WH and defund the crap out of everything. Then I’d take names of organizations that towed the party line for Obama/Dems, and esp. going along with no scandal, and I’d put a ban on any communications with them from Repubs.

    • helenk3 says:

      I was reading yesterday about just putting empty chairs in place of the democrats. while playing Clint Eastwood’s speech. does seem to fit

      • Lulu says:

        They have to participate to know what evidence Gowdy digging out. If they don’t participate they won’t be able to tell the WH what is going on so they can hide stuff. They won’t know what deposed witnesses are saying under oath. They have to participate or the Repubs won’t have to tell them or show them squat. It is like a defense attorney refusing to look at the prosecution evidence. It would be totally incompetent of them. The Dems are squawking because they don’t want to serve on the committee. It is a lot of work, summer in an election year and this is not how they want to spend their time. They are also thinking of Cummings and his ethics violation complaint. You can’t run from Obama if you are defending him on live TV during hearings about terrorism and murder.

  26. driguana says:

    Interesting….it now appears that for the last several decades lying is a presidential characteristic…Clinton lied, Bush lied and Obama lied.

    • DandyTIger says:

      Politicians lie. Many people, esp. politicians and the king makers behind them will do almost anything for that amount of power. Iran-Contra? Reagan/Bush told the biggest bold faced lies to win. Nothing new here. JFK, a lot of dead people voted to get him across the finish line. Think about how much that position is worth for the person and mostly their backers, and then think what many would do to get it. That power is worth trillions.

  27. angienc says:

    Great post. You missed one scandal though — some guy who made a YouTube video sits in a prison in the United States of America for this.

Comments are closed.