Saturday, October 27, 2012

IMPLOSION: Obama fumbles local reporter's Benghazi question; CIA director throws President under bus

When confronted with a local reporter's pointed questions regarding Benghazi, President Obama fumbled his response and inadvertently provided a few clues into the timing and the cover-up.

KYLE CLARK: Were they denied requests for help during the attack?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, we are finding out exactly what happened. I can tell you, as I've said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we're going to investigate exactly what happened so that it doesn't happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice. And I guarantee you that everyone in the state department, our military, the CIA, you name it, had number one priority making sure that people were safe. These were our folks and we're going to find out exactly what happened, but what we're also going to do it make sure that we are identifying those who carried out these terrible attacks.

Last night, attorney Mark Levin deconstructed Obama's response as follows:

• ...the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives...

Note that this is stated in the present tense. The president found out about the attack while it was happening.

• ...make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to...

Well, sir, what orders did you give? Were they disobeyed? Did you receive requests for help? Notice that the president carefully avoided the reporter's actual question (lesson for vintage media: this is what your predecessors actually used to do) about whether calls for help were refused.

• ...Number two, we're going to investigate exactly what happened so that it doesn't happen again...

So during the attack, you clearly ordered an "investigation"? Does that make sense to anyone?

• ...Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice...

So while the attack was occurring, you want to find out who was attacking and arrest them? Again, does this make any sense at all?

Late last night, CIA Director Petraeus absolved the agency of blame:

Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: “No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

Put simply, Petraeus has handed the hot potato to President Obama.

Now let's examine the president's schedule on 9/11/12:

According to the official White House record, Obama, Biden and SECDEF Panetta were meeting approximately one hour after the Benghazi attack began.

Time for some answers, Mr. President, and we don't have to wait for the results of an "investigation" to hear your responses:

1. When did you first receive word of the Benghazi attacks?

2. Did you receive requests for help from those on-scene and, if so, when?

3. What orders did you issue, if any, after receiving word of the attacks and when did you issue them?

4. Within two hours of the attack, your own schedule indicates you were meeting with the Vice President and the Secretary of Defense. Did you discuss Benghazi and, if so, what information did you receive and what orders did you issue in that meeting?

5. There have been no White House press briefings for more than a week. Why?

Levin believes that the president received word immediately of the attacks and, whether through fear of the political ramifications or simple indecision (akin to voting "present"), watched as Americans were slaughtered as they begged for help.

And then he headed to Vegas for a fundraiser.

There are, of course, other theories worth exploring.


Anonymous said...

Here are a couple more thoughts to your ever more good Benghazi reporting, and slowly putting the puzzle together:

There was no embassy in Benghazi, it was nothing but a CIA weapons and recuiting hub. Stevens was the frontman fast and furious international times 1000; he also was actively recruiting jihadists of all stripes, incl AQ - to fight in Syria to overthrow Assad - Who Russia is supporting. The jihadists were provided the weapons by our government.

A ship arrived in Turkey with not only humanitarian goods, but also massive amounts of weapons, incl should fired missiles. (reported in the press)
Shortly thereafter, the turkish amb met with Stevens in Benghazi; one hour after the turkish amb left, the attack began.

It appears that at that point, hillary, obama and panetta realised that they got caught in their attempt to overthrow Syria by Putins 'step child' Bashar Assad.

Stevens may wanted out, who knows...but there is so much more.

Diana West is a good source to read and, follow her reporting.

Anonymous said...

The other story from Lame Cherry and others is Obama was going to use Stevens as the October Surprise. He would be "kidnapped" then saved by Obama. Well the contract was sold or someone caught wind of the "plan" and decided to throw a monkey wrench in the deal.

The other Islamists decided to kill Stevens. All the while the White House was watching on live video and drones and totally knew what was going on. They did nothing to save them. They wanted no survivors/witnesses.

They knew, the military/CIA has plans plus troops and planes who could be in the air in 5 minutes. They could have been there quickly from Signorella, Italy.

Only the President can give the order to go into another country's airspace. Obama did nothing. Panetta and Hillary are trying to cover for Obama. Patreus less so. They are all cowards and traitors.

Anonymous said...

Obama's indecision/political calculation fits nicely with the months that it took him to pull the trigger on Osama. Was Valerie Jarrett involved in the Benghazi indecision making, too?