Defense & National Security

Declassified testimony exposes the depth of the Administration’s Benghazi flapdoodle

Declassified testimony exposes the depth of the Administration's Benghazi flapdoodle

I know, I know: WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?  But here’s yet more proof that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were deliberately, vigorously, and copiously lying about the nature of the Benghazi attack, courtesy of James Rosen at Fox News:

Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation’s top civilian and uniformed defense officials — headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama — were informed that the event was a “terrorist attack,” declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president’s Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.

Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, told the House in classified testimony last year that it was him who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The tense briefing — in which it was already known that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens had been targeted and had gone missing — occurred just before the two senior officials departed the Pentagon for their session with the commander in chief.

According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Ham — who was working out of his Pentagon office on the afternoon of Sept. 11 — said he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center.

General Ham’s testimony makes it blindingly clear that absolutely no one in the defense or intelligence committees ever thought Benghazi was a “spontaneous video protest,” as the Administration would go on to claim for weeks, including that infamous marathon round of the Sunday shows by then-UN Ambassador Susan Rice.

Perhaps the media knew General Ham’s testimony would soon be declassified when they tried to stir up a little cloud of disinformation a few weeks ago, with stories about how people in Libya were aware of the YouTube Video of Doom, so maybe it’s understandable that Obama and Clinton thought an impromptu demonstration got out of hand, suddenly someone said “Hey, let’s go home and get our heavy weapons and see if we can kill the U.S. Ambassador,” and the next thing you know, mortar shells were raining all over the place.

No, it’s clear there was never any logical reason for anyone in the Administration to entertain that absurd scenario, but there were plenty of political reasons to concoct the story.  Benghazi revisionist history ignores Obama’s clear motives for pushing the “spontaneous protest” line: he was scared to death he’d be asked about his conduct on the night of September 11, 2012, he desperately needed to keep his “al-Qaeda decimated” line alive, and he wanted the attack to look like a bolt from the blue that Hillary Clinton and her State team could not possibly have anticipated.

The morning of September 13 saw growing terror from the Administration that Mitt Romney was going to hammer Obama over the sacking of the embassy in Cairo, and the embarrassing way it was handled; the truth about Benghazi might have finished them off.  Obama and his political team are great believers in the danger of scandal intensity – they think they can survive anything if they drag it out long enough, give their partisans a chance to rally in the media, and keep the public from reaching a critical mass of white-hot outrage.  They said whatever crazy things were necessary to drag themselves through a few crucial news cycles, without any great concern for the drafts of history that would be written after Obama’s re-election.

Don’t forget, Hillary Clinton promised the families of the Benghazi dead she would nail the guy who made the awful video that got them killed.  President Obama went on to give a speech to the United Nations in which he famously declared, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” rather than railing against the filthy terrorists who dared to slaughter an American ambassador and his heroic defenders on the anniversary of 9/11.  Those aren’t modest, understandable errors made while analyzing a mass of conflicting intelligence.  It’s pure politics, and an insult to the slain.

The declassified testimony reveals that General Ham was specifically asked about unrest related to the “Innocence of Muslims” video by House Armed Services Chairman “Buck” McKeon (R-CA):

“In your discussions with General Dempsey and [Defense Secretary Leon] Panetta,” McKeon asked, “was there any mention of a demonstration or was all discussion about an attack?” Ham initially testified that there was some “peripheral” discussion of this subject, but added “at that initial meeting, we knew that a U.S. facility had been attacked and was under attack, and we knew at that point that we had two individuals, Ambassador Stevens and Mr. [Sean] Smith, unaccounted for.”

Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, a first-term lawmaker with experience as an Iraq war veteran and Army reserve officer, pressed Ham further on the point, prodding the 29-year Army veteran to admit that “the nature of the conversation” he had with Panetta and Dempsey was that “this was a terrorist attack.”

Defense Secretary Panetta does not seem to have been under any illusions about a “spontaneous video protest,” and neither were senior State Department officials, one of whom curtly informed the House Armed Services Committee “that was not our conclusion” when asked if they ever bought the protest story.  Alas, none of these individuals saw fit to speak up and inform the American people, back when it would have made a difference.

The sheer pettiness of the Administration’s political spin helped them escape the consequences of this scandal.  A lot of people don’t want to believe the President and his top officials would blatantly lie about something like this, for the most unlovely of reasons.   White House spokesman Jay Carney is still lying furiously about what he said, claiming in response to today’s Fox News story that his Administration was always honest about the nature of the attack, when there is copious video footage to the contrary.  Just forty seconds into the video below, you’ll see Jay Carney claiming on 9/14/2012 that the Benghazi attack was a response to the YouTube video… but now he’ll look you straight in the eye and claim he never said any such thing.  (Hat tip to John Sexton of Breitbart News for the video.)

It matters that these people said the false things they said, back when this was a white-hot story they needed to cool down.  It matters that they lied to the American people, for no purpose relating to the security of anything but their jobs.  You can bet they’ll do it again, given an opportunity.  The only lesson they learned from Benghazi was how to keep the truth locked away in a cellar until it starves to death.

Update: There’s news about the media’s other attempt to obfuscate the truth of Benghazi for the benefit of the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign, as no less a Democrat partisan than Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) declared herself unwilling to buy the New York Times’ effort to make it look like al-Qaeda had nothing to do with the attack.  She added that the “spontaneous video protest” story “doesn’t jibe with me,” although presumably it jibed during the months of September, October, and November 2012, at least well enough to keep her quiet.

Sign Up
  • Borghesius

    State of the Union Address coming up. Maybe Joe Wilson can lead the assembled personages in a “You Lie” chant through the whole thing.

    Because the OFFICE is deserving of respect, the current OCCUPANT deserves scorn and mockery until driven out of public view into his Chicago Mansion with adjoining 1$ Tony Rezco supplied lot, where he can resurrect The Star magazine and hobnob with the nouveau communist intellegensia. Because I can’t stand to look at his lying face as he signs a series of executive orders and rules over an executive branch regulatorocracy.

    Mock him, and I want the republican that follows him to overturn EVERY SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER with the stroke of the same presidential pen. No more bi-partisanship, no more kissy-face political niceties, no 2-3 debate Romney, no Karl Rove drive to the squishy middle, GET SERIOUS and drive those who would send our country and the world to chaos into the political turf.

    For some reason Bonnie Tyler’s “I need a Hero” is running through my head. “He’s gotta be strong, and he’s gotta be fast, and he’s gotta be fresh from the fight.” Or she.

    And no, Chris Christe is NOT it.

  • Rick_Kalifornication

    Let me see if I can channel our resident trolls on here:

    “It never happened”
    “There is no scandal”
    “It WAS a result of the video protest”
    “Nobody saw it coming”
    “Al Queda IS on the ropes thanks to Obama”
    “Issa is on a witch hunt with absolutely no proof”

    How am I doing so far?

  • Kurt NY

    Ah, but why would you believe our intelligence services and people on the ground when many of those actually involved in attacking our embassy thoughtfully told that NY Times reporter it was that nasty video the provoked them and it had absolutely nothing to do with al Qaeda? After all, who is more likely to tell us the truth, those trying to protect us or those trying to murder us? Thank God for the NY Times working overtime to represent the latter while covering the administration’s butt.

  • Borghesius

    “What difference does it make at this point?”
    “Obama won, so he gets everything he wants, and you haters are on the wrong side of history.”

  • abc2xyz

    Patented, impeachment-ready liars / traitors .

  • Rachel McAuley

    my&nbspbuddy’s&nbsphalf-sister&nbspΜ­­­­­­а­­­­­­K­­­­­­е­­­­­­ѕ&nbsp$­­­­­­­­69&nbspհ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ս­­­­­­rly&nbspon&nbspthe&nbspl­­­­­­а­­­­­­ρ­­­­­­τ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ρ.&nbspShe&nbsphas&nbspbeen&nbsplaid&nbspoff&nbspfor&nbspseven&nbspΜ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­հ­­­­­­ѕ&nbspbut&nbsplast&nbspΜ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­հ&nbspher&nbspρ­­­­­­а­­­­Уcheck&nbspwas&nbsp$­­­­­­­­13684&nbspjust&nbspW­­­­­­ο­­­­­­r­­­­­­King&nbspon&nbspthe&nbspl­­­­­­а­­­­­­ρ­­­­­­τ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ρ&nbspfor&nbspa&nbspϜ­­­­­­е­­­­­­W&nbspհ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ս­­­­­­rs.&nbsplook&nbspat&nbspհ­­­­­­е­­­­­­r­­­­­­е&nbspnow,…&nbspWW&#x57&#46Googleprojects2014activityreceiptget&#x2E&#113&#114&#46&#x6E&#x65&#x74&#47&#109&#x4Bl&#x6A/

    ❉❉❉❉ ❉❉❉❉❉ ❉⿗❉❉❉ ❉❉❉❉❉⾑❉he had with Panetta and Dempsey was that “this was a terrorist attack.

  • Mike_in_Wasilla

    “Flapdoodle” There’s a word I have not heard in a long, long time. I will start using it myself.

  • Ksmith_Tx

    Okay! We now KNOW that the Obama gang knew that the Benghazi attack was a TERRORIST attack from the get-go and they covered it up.
    Now the question is WHY!

    Why was Ambassador Stevens meeting with a TURKISH government official in Benghazi and what was the meeting about?

    And why were they meeting in a terrorist controlled section of Libya WITHOUT complete military security?

    Why would this meeting and the attack have to be COVERED UP?????

  • justinwachin

    Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Susan Rice are corrupt, incompetent and liars. Their idea of the truth is whatever is the most convenient thing to say at the time.

    The Obama administration makes the Nixon administration look like a bunch of saints.

  • globalcrap

    America ,remember Benghazi, and who was responsible for the deaths of these four brave Americans., When these Americans needed help , they were asleep at the wheel. Obama, and Clinton turned their backs ,when they needed help.

  • marigold1960

    Whatever happened in Beirut in 1983?? I demand answers for Beirut. Over 240 of our troops were killed. Where is the outrage??!?!? Those families need to know the truth. There were 13 embassy attacks during President Bush’s terms in office. Where was that outrage then?

  • marigold1960

    Funding for embassy protection keeps getting cut—by Republicans. Where is the outrage?

  • proquci

    quote “he desperately needed to keep his “al-Qaeda decimated” line alive, and he wanted the attack to look like a bolt from the blue that Hillary Clinton and her State team could not possibly have anticipated” .

    nope… The Ambassador was sacrificed, for he was the weapons dealer. The killers AL CIAeda are operated by the US.. It is that simple.

  • IT OUT IT 22

    And STILL no one in Tavistock mind control
    FAKE spectrum media dares ask, much less
    examines, how it could be that sensitive military
    ordinance, in hot zones no less, —is NOT chipped
    for tracking and remote disablement?

    —Afterall —-everything we touch now is!

  • Tomas de Torquemada

    Benghazi constitutes incontrovertible evidence that much of the media made a conscious and deliberate decision to become Obama’s PR firm from the moment he appeared on the national scene. The press, in the aggregate, is among the most disgraced and disgraceful institutions in this country — along with academia, the entertainment industry, Corporate America…

  • arturo

    It was Reagan’s term. The attack on our Marines was carried out by Hezbollah. The same folks whose “widows” are funded by the Heinz Foundation; through third parties to avoid direct guilt.

    French peacekeepers were also killed in the slaughter.
    Either way, the common factor in all of the attacks, is violent islam.

  • jlbs

    Does this come under military cuts?

  • mark

    Remember this when Hillary runs for President and know what she says and promises is so far from the truth is isn’t funny!!! It will always matter when our American brothers die and the Secretary of State lies to the public!!!!

  • rennyangel2

    Is CBS, NBC, or ABC or any other Lamestream media going to report the declassification?

  • Dustoff

    You are not up to speed on the real info are ya.
    It was a Peace keeping mission, not combat.

    The group who did is funded by Iran.

  • Jonathan

    What does that have to do with incompetence on a grand scale coming from the White House?

  • GomeznSA

    They were lying then, they are lying now and they will CONTINUE to lie (and get away with it) until the ‘media’ gets off their collective hind quarters (or the cows come home, whichever comes first). If you’ll buy that, I’ll throw the Golden Gate in for free……………….
    The problem is that WAAAAAY too many of the low info voters simply do NOT care. Period.

  • GomeznSA

    Someone suggested recently that we all get duck calls (no specific make or model cited) and every time barry or one of his cronies lies (pretty much every time they open their mouths) we ‘quack’ them. That might even be more effective than a Joe Wilson chant. Of course it would only be a matter of time before duck calls and quacking would be banned………

  • GomeznSA

    I’m not sure you got their ‘character traits’ in the correct order but I suspect you got most of them, well except for them being out and out criminals. (Fast & Furious, see – for at least 2 of the ones you listed).

  • GomeznSA

    True, but they had already made the CONSCIOUS choice to create his mythology and have now invested so much effort into that creation they now have to continue propping him up. Benghazigate is one of the most graphic pieces of evidence for that.

  • GomeznSA

    Absolutely nothing, that is just how they roll – point out an alleged ‘failing’ of the loyal opposition (without giving specifics of course) to deflect the conversation away from the topic at hand. The level of security at the site is not the point, the (non)reaction is what is.

  • GomeznSA

    ‘mari’ probably wasn’t even born when the Beirut Barracks was bombed – or else she/he/it would remember that the French Peacekeepers were also attacked – at the same time. Hmmm perhaps THAT was ’caused’ by a video as well (of course it would have been Betamax back then).

  • GomeznSA

    Ya beat me to it regarding the French Peacekeepers – but it was a separate attack – several miles away as I recall but happening at essentially the same time.

  • GomeznSA

    Yeah, makes about as much sense as continually calling these high crimes and misdemeanors ‘scandals’ (ooops I meant ‘phony scandals’)

  • Layla

    Liars, all. Impeach.

  • ewljr

    Could it be that Obama & Hillary had to have Ambassador Stevens killed because he saw to the illegal arming & training of the terrorists to overthrow the strongholds of Mubarak in Egypt and Qaddafi in Libya? As such, he could give dates, times, locations and names involved in these treasonous activities and win prison terms instead of elections for his bosses…….