5 Key Things to Take Away From Wednesday’s Benghazi Hearing

[red states rule]

The liberal media is doing its best to ignore this story but the facts are starting to come out




5. State Department Official Fingered Terror Group Day After Attack
One of the biggest points of contention in the Benghazi investigation has been: Why did the Obama administration initially blame the terrorist attack on a YouTube video (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/here-are-the-5-key-things-to-take-away-from-wednesdays-benghazi-hearing/#) when there was no apparent evidence to support that theory?
During the House Oversight Committee hearing on the Benghazi attack, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) read from an email sent by Beth Jones (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/rep-trey-gowdy-reads-previously-unreleased-benghazi-email-during-hearing-whistleblower-says-he-was-embarrassed-attack-was-blamed-on-video/), the acting assistant secretary for Middle Eastern affairs at the State Department, to Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks and other top administration officials. In it, she fingered Ansar al-Sharia, a radical Islamic terror group, as the perpetrator behind the attack after the Libyan government speculated that they might be ex-Gadhafi forces.


4. Who Is Lt. Col. Gibson?
Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks repeatedly brought up a man by the name of Lt. Col. Gibson (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/who-is-lt-col-gibson-and-does-he-hold-the-key-to-who-gave-stand-down-order-in-benghazi/). Other than the fact that he was a Special Operations Command (SOC) Africa commander, we don’t know much else about him.


But more importantly, we don’t know what else he knows about the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2012. On the night of the Benghazi attack, Gibson was “furious” when a stand down order was given, preventing Special Forces from intervening in Libya, Hicks testified.


Hicks said Gibson wanted to bring the Americans trapped in Benghazi home, but was unable to act. Does Gibson know who personally issued the stand down order? Does he know how far up the chain of command the order originated?


These are questions to keep in mind as the investigation proceeds.
3. Benghazi Witness Told Not to Speak With Congressional Investigator Alone
Hicks on Wednesday also revealed that he was told by Obama administration officials not to talk with Rep. Jason Chaffetz (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/benghazi-whistleblower-i-was-told-not-to-talk-to-members-of-congress-investigating-terror-attack/)(R-Utah) unsupervised.
A State Department lawyer (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/here-are-the-5-key-things-to-take-away-from-wednesdays-benghazi-hearing/#) accompanied the delegation and tried to be in every single meeting he was involved in, Hicks claimed.
Chaffetz, who traveled to Benghazi after the attack to investigate, also claimed back in October that the administration assigned a State Department attorney to follow him in his every “footstep” during his investigative trip.
2. Whistleblower ‘Effectively Demoted’ After Questioning Benghazi Talking Points
Gregory Hicks told members of Congress that he has been “effectively demoted” (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/benghazi-whistleblower-i-was-demoted-after-questioning-susan-rices-talking-points/) from his position as deputy chief of mission shortly after he questioned United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice’s explanation that the Benghazi attack was the result of a spontaneous protest sparked by a YouTube video.


Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission under murdered U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, now holds the title of foreign affairs officer in the Office of Global Intergovernmental Affairs.


“In hindsight I think it began after I asked a question about Ambassador Rice’s statement on the TV shows,” Hicks said, after being asked what the “seminal” moment had been in all of his new professional criticism.
1. There Was a Stand Down Order
Though some the details are still fuzzy, someone issued a stand down order (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/who-is-lt-col-gibson-and-does-he-hold-the-key-to-who-gave-stand-down-order-in-benghazi/) that prevented Special Forces from traveling to Benghazi to intervene after the attack.
Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission for the U.S. in Libya and the highest ranking official in the country at the time of the Benghazi attacks, testified that either AFRICOMM or SOCAFRICA issued the stand down order, though he didn’t have a name or where the command originated.


Hicks said Lt. Col. Gibson, a Special Operations Command (SOC) Africa commander, was “furious” after receiving the stand down order. “Lt. Col. Gibson was furious. I had told him to go bring our people home. That’s what he wanted to do,” he said.




for the entire article and videos



http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/08/here-are-the-5-key-things-to-take-away-from-wednesdays-benghazi-hearing/

[red states rule]

and the administration apologists shift into overdrive





Benghazi: Incompetence, But No Cover-upThe hearings deepen the tragedy, but not the scandal.
There was tragic incompetence, plainly, in the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi attacks, and even possibly some political calculation. It is a record that may well come to haunt Hillary Clinton, the first Secretary of State to lose an ambassador in the field in more than three decades, if she runs for president in 2016.


But the obvious Republican effort to turn this inquiry into the Democratic (Obama) version of the Iraq intelligence scandal that has tarred the GOP since the George W. Bush years -- led by that least-credible of champions, the almost-always-wrong Darrell Issa -- is just not going to amount to much.


The testimony Wednesday by three highly credible witnesses before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee added to the serious questions that have been raised for months about Benghazi. Last December, Clinton’s own “Accountability Review Board” --- chaired by two major national-security figures, retired Amb. Thomas R. Pickering and Adm. Michael Mullen—detailed a broad failure of U.S. intelligence and policy-making over the deaths of Amb. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
Statements and testimony in recent days from the three State Department officials, led by Stevens’ former deputy in Libya, Gregory Hicks, only appeared to underline the administration’s failure to take action, futile though it might have been, to save the lives of its emissaries. Hicks, in prepared testimony, said the U.S. military turned down his request for help during the attack, both special operations troops and F-16 fighters. Another witness, Mark Thompson, the deputy coordinator for operations at the State Department, was expected to say that Hillary Clinton sought to cut her department’s counterterrorism bureau out of the chain of decision-making, suggesting that she was downplaying the rise of terrorism in keeping with the administration’s political line during the 2012 presidential campaign (which Clinton has already denied). The last witness, Eric Nordstrom, the diplomatic outpost’s former chief security officer, has said that the Benghazi compound failed to meet security standards (http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/benghazi-incompetence-but-no-cover-up-20130508?page=1#) despite serious security threats.


The most moving -- if still-not-quite scandalous -- testimony came from Hicks, who described how he virtually begged for help as Stevens and his colleagues were being killed that night of Sept. 11, 2012. The help never came. The administration’s response has been that Hicks, a diplomat, is no expert in military capabilities, and his allegations have already been directly rebutted by both Gen. Martin Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs chairman, and former Defense Sec. Leon Panetta. Dempsey testified in February that it would have taken “up to 20 hours or so” to get F-16s to the site, and he called them “the wrong tool for the job (http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/benghazi-incompetence-but-no-cover-up-20130508?page=1#).” Panetta testified that “the bottom line” is that “we were not dealing with a prolonged or continuous assault, which could have been brought to an end by a U.S. military response, very simply, although we had forces deployed to the region. Time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”



http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/benghazi-incompetence-but-no-cover-up-20130508?page=1#comments

[aboutime]

1. The WHITE HOUSE lied.

2. Obama Lied.

3. Clinton Lied.

4. Democrats Lie for Obama.

5. Democrats Lie for Clinton.

SUMMATION. THEY ALL LIE.

[red states rule]

Here is one way for the liberal media to cover the Benghazi hearings






NB's Bozell: Maybe Media Should Pretend Obama's a Republican, Then They'll Care to Cover Benghazi

The revelations made during the May 8 Benghazi hearings "open up a new can of worms with even more serious questions," NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell argued today (https://www.mrc.org/press-releases/investigate-benghazi).


"Five major bombshell revelations emerged that have, so far, only been given lip service by the three broadcast networks," the Media Research Center (MRC) founder noted. They are


1. According to the deputy chief of mission in Libya, a four-man commando team in Tripoli was denied permission to go to Benghazi and help those under siege. The administration’s response that there wasn’t enough time is ludicrous given no one knew how long the attacks would last.


2. Mark Thompson testified that the FEST anti-terrorist team wasn’t sent in because conditions on the ground were too dangerous. Yet this is exactly what FEST is designed for, and the FEST team wanted to go in.


3. It is now established beyond any doubt that instantly the State Department knew this was a terrorist attack. Why did the administration lie, calling this a video issue, and who gave that order?


4. Gregory Hicks, the number two diplomat in Libya, says he was demoted after complaining about the false story being put out by Washington. This is denied by the State Department, which says no one was punished.


5. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated months ago that she was taking full responsibility. She announced an Accountability Review Board (ARB) to investigate this. We now know she was never interviewed. Why?
Our analysts have found that while ABC, CBS, and NBC each reported on the Benghazi hearings during their evening and morning programs last night and this morning, they have not delivered complete (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2013/05/09/nbs-bozell-maybe-media-should-pretend-obamas-republican-then-theyll-ca#), in-depth coverage of these bombshells.


“If ABC, CBS, and NBC don’t thoroughly investigate and report on each and every one of these bombshell developments, and provide the American public with a true and honest account of the administration’s deadly mistakes and outright lies, they will also be guilty of deliberately censoring the news," Bozell charged.


"If the media are having trouble finding the motivation to do their jobs (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2013/05/09/nbs-bozell-maybe-media-should-pretend-obamas-republican-then-theyll-ca#), they should pretend Obama is a Republican," the veteran media watcher quipped.


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2013/05/09/nbs-bozell-maybe-media-should-pretend-obamas-republican-then-theyll-ca#ixzz2SqAyPbgz

[Marcus Aurelius]

1. The WHITE HOUSE lied.

2. Obama Lied.

3. Clinton Lied.

4. Democrats Lie for Obama.

5. Democrats Lie for Clinton.

SUMMATION. THEY ALL LIE.


But... but...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_NFevjU91c1w/TUbWoqSZeZI/AAAAAAAAAD8/H4NJrsL9iZA/s1600/shrubbery.jpg

[red states rule]

Things are heating up




Boehner to Obama: 'Now's Your Chance to Cooperate on Benghazi'

Moments ago, House Speaker John Boehner called upon President Obama to release documents related to the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Below is a transcript of Boehner’s remarks.

“I hope you all tuned into yesterday’s hearing on the tragedy in Benghazi. We learned that on September 12 – the day after the attacks and four days before Susan Rice’s TV appearances – a senior State Department official emailed her superiors to relay that she had told the Libyan ambassador that the attack was conducted by Islamic terrorists. The State Department would not allow our committees to keep copies of this email when it was reviewed. I would call on the president to order the State Department to release this email so the American people can see it.


“We also know that the White House continues to claim it only made ‘stylistic’ changes to the talking points used by Susan Rice, ignoring the fact that senior White House officials directed the changes be made to those talking points. Our committees’ interim report quotes specific emails where the White House and State Department insisted on removing all references to a terrorist attack to protect the State Department from criticism for providing inadequate security (http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/09/boehner-calls-obama-release-more-benghazi-documents#). While a few of our members were able to review these emails, they were not allowed to keep them or to share them with others. I would call on the president to release these unclassified inter-agency emails so that the American people can see them.


“Last November, the president said that, and I’ll quote, he ‘would be happy to cooperate with the Congress in any way the Congress wants.’ Well, this is his chance to show his cooperation so that we can get to the truth of what happened in Benghazi. Four Americans lost their lives in this terrorist attack. And, Congress is going to continue (http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/09/boehner-calls-obama-release-more-benghazi-documents#) to investigate this issue, using all of the resources at our disposal.”


Read more: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/09/boehner-calls-obama-release-more-benghazi-documents#ixzz2SqHRbzi0

[aboutime]

Things are heating up


red states rule. Heating up for Obama's Teleprompter, or Chris "THE TINGLE" Matthews?

The "O" man will ignore it. Pretend he never saw it, didn't know anything about it.

You know? Just like the entire Benghazi story...just before Obama climbed on Air Force One...for the trip to Las Vegas???

[red states rule]

That is the name of the game with the liberal media. If the story makes Obama looks bad we will ignore it





30 Times More Coverage! CNN Trumps Up Tabloid Stories But Buries Benghazi

On Wednesday evening, CNN barely covered the congressional hearing on the Benghazi attack from earlier that afternoon. Instead, the network provided wall-to-wall coverage of the Jodi Arias trial verdict and the Cleveland kidnappings.

From the hours of 5 p.m. until 11 p.m. ET, CNN gave a whopping 4 hours, 9 minutes of coverage to the two crime stories, but a measly eight minutes to Benghazi -- over 30 times more coverage. And three of CNN's prime-time shows didn't even mention Benghazi.


http://newsbusters.org/sites/default/files/2012/2013-05-08-CNN-OutFront-Arias.JPGThe 8 p.m. and 10 p.m. ET hours of Anderson Cooper 360 featured over one hour and twenty minutes of material on Arias and the Cleveland abduction, but not a second on the hearing. The 9 p.m. ET hour of Piers Morgan Live aired over 40 minutes on the two stories, but completely ignored the Benghazi hearing.

Ironically, CNN's Wolf Blitzer admitted that the hearing was dwarfed by the tabloid crime stories: "It's been nearly lost amid in a lot of the glare today, the breaking news coming out of Cleveland and Phoenix, but September's deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was the subject of a very important all-day hearing on Capitol Hill."

Unfortunately, Blitzer's colleagues didn't get the memo about this "very important" hearing. Most of the prime time Benghazi coverage clustered at the end of Blitzer's 6 p.m. ET hour of The Situation Room, in a 7 minute, 13 second-long story. Host Erin Burnett only spent 39 seconds on the hearing in a news brief during the 7 p.m. ET hour. That was all the coverage from 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. ET.


Earlier in the day, CNN provided over 17 minutes of live audio of the Benghazi hearing before cutting away from it for the rest of the afternoon. The network reported on the hearing but never again (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2013/05/09/30-times-more-coverage-cnn-trumps-tabloid-stories-buries-benghazi#) went live. In contrast, Fox News provided viewers with 108 minutes of live coverage of the hearing.

CNN's Burnett even admitted that the Arias trial had become a "soap opera" full of "salacious entertainment" that CNN was feeding a hungry audience. "The fact of the matter is, this actually stopped being a trial a long time ago. As BuzzFeed's McKay Coppins told us today, I'll quote him, 'The Arias trial had every hallmark of a classic tabloid story or a soap opera. A four-month long soap opera,'" Burnett acknowledged.

"So, if you're one of the people who enjoyed the salacious entertainment of the past four months, make sure you thank the good people of Arizona for paying for it," she quipped.


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2013/05/09/30-times-more-coverage-cnn-trumps-tabloid-stories-buries-benghazi#ixzz2Ssrxk9H4