Is The Lid About To Come Off The Benghazi Scandal?

My good friend, Steve Dennis, at America’s Watchtower grabbed my attention with his post last night. Steve was reporting on a breaking story at P J Media where they had just interviewed two former diplomats who are planning to become whistle blowers on the Benghazi scandal. According to the P J Media article, the two ex-diplomats are not fully covered by the whistle-blower protection laws, so they are lawyering-up, as they say. They plan to reveal the real reason Ambassador Chris Stevens was in Benghazi and they claim to have knowledge of the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), to not send reinforcements to Benghazi.

With regard to Ambassador Stevens, this what they will reportedly say: (emphasis added)

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”

This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.

There was speculations about our government buying back weapons from the Islamic militant groups, including al-Qaeda, within in days of the attack. Many of us reported on that speculation. What is new to this humble observer is that it was the State Department (Hillary Clinton) that had given the missiles to the militants and not the CIA, as I had presumed. If these accusations are true, if these former diplomats are credible, it seems to me that Hillary will have to fall on her rubber sword. I have no doubt that President Barack (Always-In-The-Dark) Obama will claim it’s all news to him.

The second revelation by the ex-diplomats has to do with General Ham:

Regarding General Ham, military contacts of the diplomats tell them that AFRICOM had Special Ops “assets in place that could have come to the aid of the Benghazi consulate immediately (not in six hours).”

Ham was told by the White House not to send the aid to the trapped men, but Ham decided to disobey and did so anyway, whereupon the White House “called his deputy and had the deputy threaten to relieve Ham of his command.”

The White House motivation in all this is as yet unclear, but it is known that Ham retired quietly in April 2013 as head of AFRICOM.

Again, if these whistle-blower are credible, the smelly stuff id going to hit the fan. But, do not expect that any of it will stick to President Obama. He has an alibi. He was sleeping. So, who in the “White House” could have ordered General ham to stand down? Defense Secretary Panetta? Co-President Valerie Jarrett? I don’t know. But, what these former diplomats are claiming to be the truth would go a long ways toward explaining the “why?” of the attempted cover-up.

At any rate, if these men do testify before Isaa’s committee, it will be interesting to see how the media tries to protect Hilary and Barry.

Steve Dennis wrapped-up his post on the question of the “why?’ with this unnerving thought:

Could it be that dead men tell no tales, or so Barack Obama thought…..

Sadly, I do believe that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are capable of such cold and calculated deeds. They are both true believers in the meme: The ends justify the means.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

20 thoughts on “Is The Lid About To Come Off The Benghazi Scandal?

  1. Wow. Not surprised by any of that. Just when you think you can’t get any more cynical, we find a new level. Only 3.5 more years of these a**holes.

  2. Hillary and Barry will come out of this alive. The press will protect them at all costs. The official story from the State run media will be that low level staffers ordered the stand down and that Republicans are trying to use Ambassador Steven’s tragic death for partisan purposes.

    And the public? Probably stupid enough to believe the State run media.

  3. Hope I’m wrong, but Benghazi doesn’t look like much more will come of the investigation and it will slowly fade away.

    If the Administration gets into hot water over anything it will be over coverups involved in any of a number of current scandals.

    I have little confidence that the mainstream media has the desire to watchdog this Administration.

    1. You are probably right, AZ. Look at this from Kirsten Powers in USA Today

      “These scandals can’t possibly be blamed on liberalism because liberals are good, virtuous people. Therefore the Republicans who are claiming these scandals indicate flaws in big government are unfairly twisting the truth for political advantage. Big government is clearly wonderful when run by virtuous liberals.”

  4. The regime made a fatal mistake taking on the military and the press. Sooner or later someone was going to squeal. They have gotten rid of many of the military leaders. Why?

  5. Thanks for the link Jim. I had assumed we were trafficking weapons which were captured but it now appears as if we were actually giving them American weapons. I think the lid is about to blow on this whole scandal and I hope it takes both Hillary and Obama down, but especially Hillary at this point because it should prevent her from ever becoming president.

    1. That would be interesting.I’ve been thinking that “Team Obama” may have a different idea about who should be the Demcrat candidate in 2016. We’ll stay tuned to see what happens.

  6. I highly doubt that Defense Secretary Panetta would have ordered our North African forces to stand down without a conference with the commander-in-chief.

    Obama is indeed the Teflon Man. But he might be teflon enough with at least three scandals brewing.

    Hillary, if she has the electronic trail to prove the the commander-in-chief ordered her to do something snaky will definitely toss Obama under the bus. Watch for it!

  7. I hope the lid does blow off Benghazi. I am sick of hearing “nothing to see here, move along”. Obviously, something was afoot, but no one is willing to admit to what it was. I find it amusing that so many liberals are scared of what the scandal may do to Hillary Clinton’s chances of running for President in 2016. They seem to be more worried about that than what it will do to Obama’s reputation.

    1. I’m convinced there was a political element to the cover-up to protect Obama’s reelection chances, but I also think there was an element to it due to what the CIA was really doing there.

  8. On the Hillary vs Obama thing… If Soros is calling shots like we think he is, he will be happy either way. If both of them go down, he just keeps feeding the next recruit. He wins because it furthers the destruction of trust in government…assuming there is any left anyway. He snd Hillary go way back, though. We lose no matter what…..unless some justice takes place, which I doubt will ever happen with either of them. The fun thing would be if we could watch the two if them go after each other, pointing fingers at each other. “He did it!! No, she did it. Back and forth. High theatre!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s