admin

Not Every Dog Has His Day

May 8th, 2013 11:13 pm
"If you listen to the other side, you’d think it’s time to move on from this. They would agree with Secretary Clinton. They would say ‘what difference does it make?’ Well some of the family members I talked to before this hearing, I guarantee this hearing makes a difference today. We want to know who made some of these decisions and why they made some of these decisions.” 
- Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.), House Oversight Committee Hearings on Benghazi, May 8, 2013
 
 
May 8, 2013
 

By: Linda Case Gibbons
 
 
 
 
If your little girl was hit and killed by a drunken driver, would your response be, "Well, it doesn’t matter who the driver is or if we apprehend him or if he is punished, as long as this never happens again?"
 
I don’t think so. But that is the party line from the Democratic members of the May 8, 2013 House Congressional Hearings on Benghazi.
 
In lock step, the Democratic components of the House Oversight Committee aggressively sought to minimize and deflect the testimony of the "whistleblowers,” working hard at selling Democratic talking points.
 
Instead of asking questions, they talked "at” the witnesses, men who were key officials directly involved in Benghazi, men with more than 50 years of diplomatic service experience between them.
 
It was an extraordinary opportunity to ask important questions, but the Democratic members of the Committee weren’t interested. Like Hillary Clinton, they felt "What difference does it make?”
 
And to a man, Democratic members of the Committee pushed the party line: "Been there, done that; nothing to see here; we’re here to make sure ‘this’ doesn‘t happen again.”
 
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wisc.) pushed it best.
 
"Looking at this proactively, I think this is probably the ninth or so hearing that the House has had on this issue, so maybe it is time we start looking at how we make sure we protect our embassies the very best way we can, rather than going through and rehashing some of the same old stories.”
 
So in what way was any of this "rehashing?” Of course, it wasn’t.
 
Nine months after the attack in Benghazi, May 8 was the first time the American people and this Committee had the opportunity to hear testimony from Mark Thompson and Gregory Hicks.
 
The American people and this Committee have never heard from "survivors” from Benghazi.
 
No suspects have been detained, no blame has been placed on anyone in-country in Libya, much less at the higher levels of our government.
 
When planes slammed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, we knew where George Bush was.
 
When terrorists attacked and killed four Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, Barack Obama was M.I.A. for eleven hours.
 
Where was he?
 
So ask yourselves, nine months after Benghazi, what do you know about what happened that night?
 
Do you know where Barack Obama was? The secretary of state? Do you know who gave the orders to stand down? Who "edited” official reports so that for days an anti-Muslim video was blamed for the "demonstration?” Do you know to this day how and where Ambassador Stevens died?
 
For nine months the mainstream press never asked and mocked those who did. They’re still not asking. And this week the Democrats on the House Oversight Committee Hearings didn’t want to ask because they didn’t want to know the answers.
 
It was clear, the Democrats and the mainstream press had no interest. And it was disgusting to watch.
 
Those who wanted to watch the hearings in real time had to work at it.
 
MSNBC didn’t cover it.
 
CNN devoted 17 minutes to it.
 
FOX spent an hour and eight minutes, trying to be fair and balanced.
 
CBS never covered Benghazi for months. Now CBS engaged in "marginalizing” their own Emmy-winning journalist Sharyl Attkisson for her choice to cover the Benghazi attack, CBS maintaining that her reporting bordered dangerously on "advocacy.”
 
What is happening is that this journalist’s reputation will be deliberately destroyed and she will pay the price as will the whistleblowers for their courage and willingness to tell the truth.
 
So, if you could find it, CSPAN 3 was the place to hear the entire six hours. And if you listened, it was worth it.
 
Those who listened learned new information that was damaging to the White House and which brought into question the actions of our State Department. For example:
 
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was never interviewed by the Accountability Review Board.
 
Ditto for Mark Thompson, U.S. State Bureau of Counterterrorism, Deputy Coordinator of Operations.
 
Not only did the FBI not arrive to an unsecured crime scene for 23 days, but once there they never interviewed Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission for the U.S. in Libya, the highest ranking official in Libya and Ambassador Stevens’ right hand man.”
 
Hicks testified that he was originally praised personally for his performance in Libya during the attack by President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Once he started raising questions about Ambassador Rice’s statements directly after the Benghazi attack, a State Department official began criticizing his job performance and he was ultimately demoted "from deputy chief of mission to desk officer.” 
 
As of now he is scratching for his next job assignment.
 
Hicks also testified that the State Department instructed him not to speak to Rep. Jason Chaffetz on a one-on-one, a departure from customary diplomatic policy and when he did, without a State Department attorney at his side, he was severely chastised.
 
Rep. Chaffetz was the bulldog that chased the Benghazi controversy and has kept it alive and the State Department knew this.
 
Hicks said everyone knew from the first that the attack on the consulate was not a "demonstration” so that Ambassador’s Rice’s appearance on five Sunday TV shows saying otherwise was one of the most "embarrassing moments of his life.”
 
When as many as 60 attackers were inside the Benghazi compound, the president of Libya communicated that it was not a spontaneous protest related to the YouTube video. Hillary Clinton was one of those receiving this communication.
 
Hicks said Rice’s comments reduced President Magariaf’s credibility in front of the world, and said "I definitely believe that it negatively affected our ability to get the FBI team quickly to Benghazi.”
 
So how did the hearings play in Obama’s America?
 
Well, the day before the hearings the Democrats did what they always do: award the least worthy among them.
 
Key players in failures and cover-ups, of dereliction of duty, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were both given awards from the Pacific Council in International Policy.
 
Rice received hers the night prior to the Benghazi hearings, the 2013 Louis E. Martin Great American Award for "her work in advancing U.S. interests, strengthening the world’s common security and prosperity and promoting respect for human rights.”
Hill received hers the night of the hearings for her public service.
 
But much as the mainstream media push back, much as the White House pushes back, Benghazi doesn’t look like it’s going away.
 
For one thing the mainstream media at this point just looks silly and for another, despite Rep. Mark Pocan’s comment, "I don’t think there’s a smoking gun today. I don’t think there’s even a lukewarm slingshot.”
 
Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) and Americans disagree,
 
"It may not be a smoking gun or a warm slingshot, but we have four dead Americans and my constituents are looking for the truth.”
 
Hold the line, America.
Older Post Blog Home Newer Post
admin