The Libya Question: What Did Obama Know and When Did He Know It?
Posted on | October 10, 2012 | 25 Comments
We seem to be looking at a classic Washington cover-up scandal:
The State Department is now telling a new story about the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya on September 11. It’s completely different than what we heard from President Obama and other officials in the days after the terrorist attack.
It’s amazing the things you can learn when you start issuing subpoenas and requiring people to testify under oath under penalty of perjury.
UPDATE: Hard-hitting new ad on the Libyan scandal:
UPDATE II: If you’ve seen a few cover-up scandals like this over the years, you know that the next thing that happens — once it becomes obvious that the liars won’t get away with it — is that the administration finds a Designated Scapegoat to take the fall.
Whose résumé will get updated with the unfortunate “resigned in disgrace” entry? I nominate the odious disgrace that is Susan Rice.
Trust me: Hillary is waaayy too powerful to take the fall for this.
UPDATE III: The pattern of such scandals makes the course of events fairly predictable. First of all, the people who did the right thing — the honest, competent professionals — have an inherent interest in establishing the fact that they weren’t the ones who screwed up. Take, for example, former State Department security officer Eric Nordstrom:
[N]ot only did Nordstrom repeatedly request more security for the diplomatic mission, the State Department didn’t even bother to respond to his last two requests
UPDATE IV: Joel Engel at Legal Insurrection:
In yet another story that you won’t find in the New York Times, Charlie Spiering in the Washington Examiner reported that Hillary Clinton was scheduled to meet President Obama at the White House today “as more damaging details about the terrorist attack against a United States consulate in Libya emerge.” . . .
Their story is unraveling, and only the acquiescence of the mainstream press has kept it from becoming a full-blown scandal. So what did the president and his secretary of state discuss today? Foreign affairs? Or better lies? My guess is better lies.
Clinton’s State Department, and therefore in all probability the White House, had forewarning of at least a growing danger when“foreign fighters” began flooding over the Egyptian border prior to the attacks. And, worse than doing nothing, they actually prevented security from being beefed up, though they had been warned that the level was “inappropriately low.”
Don’t expect this story to go away. There is a limit to the media’s ability to ignore such a scandal, when people like CNN’s Anderson Cooper and ABC’s Jake Tapper are so clearly fed-up with the administration’s routine incompetence and brazen dishonesty.
UPDATE V: Despite months of constant practice, Jay Carney still isn’t very effective in his capacity as Official White House Liar:
PREVIOUSLY:
- Oct. 8: ‘THE MANTLE OF LEADERSHIP’ – Text of Mitt Romney’s Speech at VMI
- Oct. 2 EXPOSED: Obama Administration Had Advance Warning of Libyan Terror Threat
- Sept. 23: You Don’t Say, Kirsten Powers!
- Sept. 23: Classic: State Department Attacks CNN for Reporting Inconvenient Facts on Libya
- Sept. 20: Obama Talking Point: ‘Opportunistic’
- Sept. 17 The Disgrace That Is Susan Rice
- Sept. 13 SAVAGES: Did Libyan Mob Sodomize U.S. Ambassador Before Killing Him?
- Sept. 12: SHOCKING: Libyan Mob Attack Kills Four, Including U.S. Ambassador UPDATE: ‘Full-Blown … Crisis’ UPDATE: Hey, MSM, No Fair Shouting Questions at President Gutsy Call

Pingback: State Department Tells A New Story On Benghazi Consulate Attack | The Lonely Conservative
Pingback: Carter’s Second Term … Or Nixon’s … Or Hoover’s? | hogewash
Pingback: Obama’s Benghazi-gate: All Cover-up and Lies