Friday, February 15, 2013

Benghazi: Who Knew What, When

More details have come out in the investigation of the Benghazi attack last September 11. It is necessary to document the time line before, during, and after the attack.

"Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Thursday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told him "the president was informed of the April and June attacks." One of those attacks, in June, blew a hole in the perimeter wall of the Benghazi compound. The two strikes were among dozens of security incidents recorded in the region in the months preceding Sept. 11, and in hindsight have been described as warning signs." 

If this is true, then we may assume that President Obama was aware that there had been IED attacks against the Benghazi consulate in April and June of 2012.


"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, at a hearing shortly before she left the administration, said she never saw an Aug. 16 State Department cable sent to her office that warned the consulate could not sustain a coordinated attack. 

"I have made it very clear that the security cables did not come to my attention," she said. The cable was first reported by Fox News". 

Do you see a disconnect here? In April and June, President Obama is notified that IED attacks against the consulate have taken place. In August, Ambassador Chris Stevens is sending messages to the State Department that he needs more security because the consulate could not withstand a coordinated attack, yet, the secretary of state (Hillary Clinton) says she never saw those messages as her subordinates were denying the requested enhancement of security in Benghazi.

Are you buying all this?

If you have half a brain, it is clear that Hillary Clinton and Barack  Obama were either grossly incompetent or grossly negligent in their duties as secretary of state and president respectively.


Siarlys Jenkins said...

The Ryan budget calls for cutting funding to pay for embassy and consulate security...

So much for Republican credibility on this issue.

Siarlys Jenkins said...

Over at "The American Conservative" I read a comment that the congressional hearings on Benghazi amounted to "The Three Stooges Conduct a Stalinist Show Trial." I find that quite accurate.

The comment, incidentally, was from someone who first observed that if congress had conducted a sober, serious, inquiry, they would indeed have turned up significant errors in judgement, although nothing that would have changed the election result. When are these guys going to stop grandstanding and try to act like civil servants responsible for sober governance?

Gary Fouse said...

"When are these guys going to stop grandstanding and try to act like civil servants responsible for sober governance?"

Are you referring to Obama, Hillary et al?

Gary Fouse said...


In Stalinist show trials, the defendants were found guilty and "went away". Here they just skate and go on to re-election and bigger things. Pretty poor analogy.

Siarlys Jenkins said...

No, Gary, I'm referring to the Republican leadership and committee members in congress.

Apparently, you missed the part about "The Three Stooges." I certainly would prefer to face a Three Stooges show trial than one actually run by Yezhov or Beria. But it would still have all the sober factual substance of a Stalinist show trial.