Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Anatomy of a Cover-up

Anatomy of a Cover-up

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

For two weeks, President Barack Hussein “kill list” Obama and his administration tried to cover-up Obama’s (non)actions in the Benghazi attack incident. Does the MSM report the cover-up attempt? To quote John Belushi from SNL, “Noooooooooooooooooooooo!” Even Pat Caddell, Democrat pollster, referred to the MSM by saying “These people have no honor!”

We must ask, “Was Obama in charge?” Did he or did he not refuse to deploy military assistance during the Benghazi consulate attack? We know that he was in the White House Situation Room during the six hour attack, watching in real time as the attack happened. While watching, Obama had plenty of time to have sent a strike team to Benghazi to help defend the ambassador and three other Americans.

During the second presidential debate, Obama said, “… as soon as we found out that the Benghazi consulate was being overrun, I was on the phone with my national security team.” I guess we have to carefully consider what he said. There is, after all, a difference between “being attacked” and “being overrun.” That is similar to what the definition of what “is” is.

The day after the attack (September 12, 2012), Obama made this statement:

I strongly condemn the outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America’s commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives.

But nowhere in Obama’s statement was there a single word about retribution. Four Americans dead, no retribution? Only under Obama. Whatever happened to President Theodore Roosevelt’s advice to “speak softly, but carry a big stick”? Obama did, indeed, speak softly. Have I missed him using a big stick?

About the lack of response, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said, “… a basic principle here, and the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real time information about what’s taking place.” He actually said that despite real time video, emails to the White House, desperate cries for help from Benghazi, and a former SEAL painting a target with a laser. And Panetta’s excuse for refusing to send military assets? He said, “There’s a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here.” What Panetta said may be true, but tell that to Ambassador Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty, and Sean Smith. After all, Panetta signed on of his own free will to make decisions; now! That goes for Obama as well. But I guess he was too busy thinking about the fundraiser in Las Vegas the next day to be bothered with a life or death decision.

Obama was either not in charge and/or incompetent during the entire Benghazi fiasco, so he and his administration tried to cover his non-actions, and tried to to make General Carter F. Ham the scapegoat. General Ham, then AFRICOM commander, had military assets in Sigonella, Italy, about an hour away from Benghazi. General Ham told the Pentagon (that’s Leon Panetta) that he had a unit ready, but was told to stand down. Ham’s response was that he was going to help anyhow. But Ham was relieved of command within a minute when he tried to deploy the assets. If there was ever an illustration of why politicians, once they send Americans into harm’s way, need to back off and let military professionals handle the situation, this was it. And if there was ever an illustration of Obama being in over his head, this was it. Obama relieved a general who tried to take honorable action. But I guess honorable action is a subject about which Obama has no knowledge.

By the way, be sure to look at this map to see what American and ally military assets were available.

The cover-up began soon after Obama’s non-action. The cover-up effort has increased as more and more information is discovered (no thanks to the MSM). Obama and his administration knew about the terrorist attack by an al Qaeda affiliate, but lied about the event for weeks in hopes of minimizing political fallout. Further, when the bodies of the four dead Americans were returned to the United States, Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took over the affair at Dover AFB to deliver politically motivated lies. Acknowledging what really happened in Benghazi will destroy one of Obama’s main campaign themes: he had al Qaeda on its heels via is own personal heroism. Please note when Obama said that. Rather than lose face (as if he has any more to lose), Obama chose to pretend that the Benghazi attack was a mob uprising prompted by a YouTube video. He even said that six times in his UN speech. Where is the MSM as more information is uncovered?

Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume, on Fox’s Fox News Sunday, said, in reference to the Benghazi cover-up, “… one of the problems we’re having here is, that it has fallen to this news organization, Fox News and a couple others, to do all the heavy lifting on this story.” Hume continued, “The mainstream organs of the media that would be after this like a pack of hounds, if this were a Republican president, have been remarkably reticent.”

Rush Limbaugh said, “They [Obama and his administration] lied, folks. I don’t know how else to say it.” Even though you Democrats/liberals/progressive (DLP) try to dismiss Limbaugh as a blowhard, he is correct. Try as you may, the truth is the truth: Obama and his administration lied. Limbaugh continued, “This dwarfs Watergate, weapons of mass destruction, whatever,” citing favorite DLP talking points. “This dwarfs Iran-Contra, about which the media spent three solid years trying to take out Ronald Reagan.” I must ask, in the face of incontrovertible evidence that Obama either took no action or was incompetent, where is the outrage from the MSM and DLPs regarding this cover-up? But that is a rhetorical question since we already know the answer.

The difference between the Watergate cover-up and the Benghazi cover-up: four Americans did not die during the Watergate cover-up. The MSM knows all of this. It will be interesting to see if they do their job, or if they continue to cover-up for Obama. This is just one more illustration of how the MSM is in the tank for Obama.

But that’s just my opinion.

Powered by

About

  • http://danmillerinpanama.wordpress.com Dan(Miller)

    Thanks, Warren, for coming into hostile territory here to discuss these matters. The Obama Administration has shamed the United States and strengthened her enemies; its compliant media have helped him.

    Where do we go from here? Further down the hill and over the cliff, or back up a bit. I very much hope for the latter.

  • dhitter

    A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends ,and break all bonds of fellowship….we have seen that day, September 11, 2012, Benghazi, Lebanon, the commander in chief failed aid those under his charge so he could be well rested for his Vegas road trip. Shame on you Obama! May your name evermore be synonymous with the words, coward, traitor and the like . I hope from this point ever after, America forgets the name Benedict Arnold, and in its place and stead the name Barak Obama remains forever.

  • http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/IanMayfield Dr Hussein “Back to the Trite Nicknames Again” Dreadful

    Dare we hope that a day may also come when the above commenter realizes that Benghazi isn’t in Lebanon?

    Given Americans’ generally sketchy knowledge of world geography, perhaps this might be the real explanation for why the response team didn’t show up…

  • http://cinemasentries.com/ El Bicho

    Maybe he was distracted by the links in the comment previous to his

  • Clavos

    Given Americans’ generally sketchy knowledge of world geography, perhaps this might be the real explanation for why the response team didn’t show up…

    Good point!

    Although, aware of that sketchiness, the government did supply them with GPSs. However, these having been manufactured in China under contract from the administration, had been programmed backwards.

  • Deano

    I think castigating the administration for not suddenly and magically understanding the chaotic situation in the Benghazi attack is bluntly, idiotic and short-sighted.

    First off, no one, not even the people on the ground, generally have a clear understanding or perception of the events as they unfold, it is only through the 20-20 lens of the aftermath that you can generally understand where things have broken down or gone astray. Ripping into the Obama administration for not suddenly dropping the 82nd Airborne on downtown Benghazi at a moments notice or launching predator drone strikes on a populated city that is nominally an ally, is armchair quarterbacking at its worst.

    It is usually a given in a combat situation, that micro-managing a battle from a distant war room is a bad idea, so placing blame on Obama for not authorizing an air strike on a supposed laser-painted target is asinine.

    If you want to lace into Obama, you can quite rightly castigate him for his indifference and apathetic follow-up to the Libyan revolution, his passively reactive stance to the Arab Spring, the lack of any direction on Syria, his inability to recognize that Islamic fundamentalist radicalism remains a potent security threat around the world and the subsequent inability to recognize the security and mortal threat that existed for the staff working in Benghazi.

    The fact that the contingiencies for support and security were weak and neglected is what you should be ripping him on, not on his response to the events – but on the fact that he was reactive and not preventative, the fact that his neglect and indifference left the Libyan mission hanging out over a precipice and contributed to the deaths of four people.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Warren, even Geraldo Rivera has called out Fox News for its misinformation campaign about Libya. The crap has gotten so deep that Mr. Tabloid himself can no longer support the nonsense.

  • http://rwno.limewebs.com Not the liberal actor

    Re: comment # 6, Deano, I had no idea you were such a military expert. You say,”I think castigating the administration for not suddenly and magically understanding the chaotic situation in the Benghazi attack is bluntly, idiotic and short-sighted.” With that statement I agree. But there was real-time video of the attack, and Obama had six hours to make a decision. But the only decision he could make was to relieve General Ham who wanted to respond with military assets that were only an hour away. Apparently Obama was too busy planning his Las Vegas trip the next day.

    And I cannot help but notice that your comment is absent of anything about the subsequent cover-up.

    Re: comment # 7, Glenn, you made my day/week/month! I know I was successful if all you could criticize was my use of Fox as a source.

  • http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/IanMayfield Dr Hussein “To Watergate as Cuckoo Spit Is to Hurricane Sandy” Dreadful

    It strikes me that an event about which amateur conservative bloggers are able to discover information with total ease isn’t much of a cover-up.

  • http://rwno.limewebs.com Not the liberal actor

    Re: comment # 9, Doc, you are correct. The attempted cover-up failed miserably.

  • Clavos

    Yet another instance of incompetence?

  • http://rwno.limewebs.com Not the liberal actor

    Re: comment # 7, Glenn, speaking of Geraldo Rivera, you may find this link interesting.

  • Clavos

    “Douche of the Day” definitely fits…

  • http://rwno.limewebs.com Not the liberal actor

    Re: comment # 11, Clavos, well said! The cover-up attempt by Obama, his administration, Democrats, and the MSM was truly incompetent. Just like Obama has proven time and again to be incompetent.

    Re: comment # 13, again Clavos, well said. Now I await Glenn’s response. After all, he cited Geraldo as why my article should be dismissed.

  • Zingzing

    I’m still amazed at this incompetent/dictator-destroyer of America narrative that the right has going on. In a sane world, it would be contradictory. Either he’s very bad at wielding his power or very good at it, so pick one…

    Also strange how a wsj blogger published a similar story the same day the wsj newsroom debunked the whole idea. But that’s the way it is in the trippy world of the right.

  • http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/IanMayfield Dr Hussein “Bitchin’ Backup Plan” Dreadful

    The election may be a “toss-up” (it isn’t), but one thing is absolutely certain: if Obama does win on Tuesday the right-wing blogosphere is going to find itself incapable of talking about anything else but this supposed cover-up for the next four years.

    By 2016, it will have arrived at the belief that a sentence that contains the word “Obama” without also containing the words “Benghazi”, “impeach” and “now” is grammatically incorrect.

    (Excuse my cynicism: I’m just exploring ways in which the tone of American political debate could possibly get any lower. I don’t think I’ve even scratched the surface yet though.)

  • http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/IanMayfield Dr Hussein “And I’ll Tell You Something Else” Dreadful

    Warren and Clav are right about one thing though. Geraldo Rivera is a douche. Although we Brits have a much better word: berk.

  • http://danmillerinpanama.wordpress.com Dan(Miller)

    Re # 6 — I think castigating the administration for not suddenly and magically understanding the chaotic situation in the Benghazi attack is bluntly, idiotic and short-sighted.

    I agree. However, there was no need to do that. There had been at least one warning from security personnel on site on August 15th and another on August 16th of inability to defend against an anticipated “coordinated attack.” On August 8th, Ambassador Stevens had

    signed a two-page cable that he titled “The Guns of August: Security in Eastern Libya.” In it, he noted a dangerous “security vacuum” had developed in and around Benghazi, symptoms of which were an attempted assassination of the British ambassador, two previous attacks on the consulate itself as well as attacks on the Red Cross.

    Perhaps if anyone who read the cable had previously read Barbara Tuchman’s deservedly popular Guns of August, referenced in the cable and dealing with the prelude to and beginnings of World War I, he might have reflected that although the widely read Schlieffen Plan had late in the nineteenth century laid out the German plan for its attack on France by sweeping massively through Belgium — disregarded by French Commander in Chief General Joseph Joffre as irrelevant before and when the war began but followed by Germany when the war began — he might also have understood that reliance on politically favored misconceptions as to German intentions (and reliance on politically favored misconceptions as to Islamic intentions as well) can have adverse consequences. Did Ambassador Stevens merely cite Guns of August because he had little else to do beyond doodling, or did he intend the mention to have some meaning. I don’t know.

    There were, of course, requests for assistance during the assault. Might it have been beyond the call of duty for the Obama Administration to have prepared to respond effectively on a timely basis perhaps to save a few American lives? Might the warnings provided during the previous month have pierced some of the “fog of war?”

    It seems that there was no need for “magical” understanding. Mere competence and interest in protecting American interests should have sufficed.

  • http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/IanMayfield Dr Hussein “Woulda Coulda Shoulda” Dreadful

    Might it have been beyond the call of duty for the Obama Administration to have prepared to respond effectively on a timely basis perhaps to save a few American lives? Might the warnings provided during the previous month have pierced some of the “fog of war?”

    Perhaps. But there is certainly precedent for the White House having credible advance warnings of terrorist attacks and electing to do nothing. It’s something of a judgement call: do you divert resources to meet a potential threat and risk weakening your defences at the point where you diverted them from?

    It’s pretty plain that in August 2001, President Bush made the wrong call. Did President Obama? I think that remains to be seen, but his lack of action did result in rather fewer American deaths.

  • Zingzing

    So what lead to the lack of security? You’ve got the right wing media saying Obama denied extra security. Meanwhile you have the commanders of the military saying they denied it, and the national security council spokesman saying Obama didn’t deny it.

    Beyond all that, if Obama was aware of an imminent threat and had been told by his military people that extra security was needed, WHY would he deny it? I mean, we ask for motive in murder cases, so there must be some reason why he would deny the extra security, if he did deny extra security. But why would he? I know conspiracy theories don’t need a “why,” but truth usually does.

  • http://danmillerinpanama.wordpress.com Dan(Miller)

    Doc,re #19 — Yes, President Bush made some wrong calls in 2001. Does that excuse President Obama? I had heard that with President Obama’s new, smarter and better foreign policies, that sort of thing was not going to happen.

    You ask, do you divert resources to meet a potential threat and risk weakening your defences at the point where you diverted them from? What threats faced the Africa Command and other available sources that were evidently not asked to assist?

  • Zingzing

    “I had heard that with President Obama’s new, smarter and better foreign policies, that sort of thing was not going to happen.”

    No you didn’t.

  • zingzing

    dan, who seems to know very little: “What threats faced the Africa Command and other available sources that were evidently not asked to assist?”

    let’s ask the secretary of defense, leon panneta, what he and his generals thought:

    “The “basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” he said during a joint question-and-answer session with Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Martin Dempsey.

    “As a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation,” Panetta said. General Carter Ham commands the U.S. Africa Command.

    *snip*

    amazing what a little googling will do. but do go on with your conspiracy theories. they weren’t asked to assist because the fucking generals in charge thought it was a bad idea. the end? ha. i wish.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Warren –

    Glenn, you made my day/week/month! I know I was successful if all you could criticize was my use of Fox as a source.

    What I did, Warren, was point out how even one of your Fox News douchebags – which Geraldo Rivera has been for some time now – is calling out Fox News for misleading the public – which it has been doing for a couple decades now.

    But oh, silly me, I actually thought you’d actually read and comprehend Geraldo’s point, which was:

    “You are misleading the American people because you want to make a political point,” Rivera told fellow Fox News host Eric Bolling. “We have never in the history of the United States of America mounted a raid on the circumstance described here. We have never done it. The Israelis rescued their people in Tevi – seven days to mount that operation. This was seven hours.
    …“When I heard Charles Woods call the president of the United States a murderer and a liar, it broke my heart,” he said, specifically citing a video that aired on “Hannity” several days ago featuring the father of a Navy SEAL who was killed in the attack. How many parents of GI’s lost in conflicts that were screwed up have said of the president of the United States that he murdered my child?” Rivera asked. “I love Charles Woods. I kissed him on television. But he is being led down a primrose path by misinformation that is making it look as if the president of the United States went gambling in Las Vegas when he could have been saving our people in Benghazi, and that is a lie!”

    But you, Warren, are staying true to the First Commandment of right-wing douchebaggery: Thou Shalt Always Accuse Democrats of Doing Wrong, and Never Give Them Credit For Doing Anything Right.

    Which, btw, is why Chris Christie is being pilloried by right-wing pundits – he violated that commandment. It doesn’t matter how right and accurate he was, he violated that commandment. What’s really tragic is that you don’t see what’s wrong with that First Commandment of right-wing douchebaggery.

  • http://rwno.limewebs.com Not the liberal actor

    Re: comment # 24, Glenn, you say, ” What I did, Warren, was point out how even one of your Fox News douchebags – which Geraldo Rivera has been for some time now – is calling out Fox News for misleading the public – which it has been doing for a couple decades now.” [emphasis mine] Well, Glenn, if Geraldo is such a douchebag, how can ANYTHING he says be taken seriously? How, according to Rivera, can we know Fox is misleading us? After all, YOU called Rivera a douchebag.

    But you, Glenn, are staying true to the First Commandment of left-wing douchebaggery: Thou Shalt Always Accuse Republicans of Doing Wrong, and Never Give Them Credit For Doing Anything Right.

    Re: comment # 22, Zz, you are correct: Obama never specifically said his foreign diplomacy would prevent a Benghazi attack. But he did say that the rest of the world would love us. If Lybians love us, why the attack? Let’s blame a video. Oh, wait, that’s part of an incompetent cover-up.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Warren –

    Well, Glenn, if Geraldo is such a douchebag, how can ANYTHING he says be taken seriously? How, according to Rivera, can we know Fox is misleading us? After all, YOU called Rivera a douchebag.

    See, that’s the problem with conservatives in general. If someone they don’t like says something, they automatically dismiss what that person says. Attack the messenger, ignore the message! Hate to tell you this, Warren, but even a douchbag tells the truth sometimes. Even the worst do something right sometime. That’s why I try to pay attention to all sides of an argument, and that’s why I’ve defended Reagan and Bush 41 on this blog on several occasions, and sided with Clavos on many occasions.

    But you? You dismiss out-of-hand what someone says, not because what they say is right or wrong, but because of who says it. That’s sad…and it does you a greater disservice than you know.

    Obama never specifically said his foreign diplomacy would prevent a Benghazi attack. But he did say that the rest of the world would love us. If Lybians love us, why the attack?

    WHEN did Obama say that the Libyans would “love us”? You made the claim, now back it up. And while you’re doing that, how about finding out what MOST Libyan people think about America? Because what you don’t get is that the extremists are a small and quite disliked MINORITY of the people there. But wait – you mean that Fox News never told you about the PRO-America protests in Libya both before and after the attacks? You mean that Fox News didn’t tell you about the thousands of Libyan protesters who marched and seized the headquarters of the extremists, and handed them over to the Libyan military? Here’s one blurb from the story:

    “We want justice for Chris,” read one sign among the estimated 30,000 Libyans, including families, who marched into Benghazi’s main square on Friday to protest in front of the chief encampment of Ansar al-Sharia.

    Thirty thousand PRO-American protesters, and Fox News never told you that? Imagine that! And here’s more, and , and here and here.

    Your boys over at Fox News tell you to listen ONLY to their side, to ignore anything said by the Left…and by doing so, you missed out on finding out the OTHER side of the story, the one that proves that the conservative slogan that “all Muslims hate America” is patently false.

    I don’t know about you, Warren, but if I found out the news source I trusted most was lying to me not just once or twice but continuously, I’d start questioning everything that news source says…and I’d start questioning the news from every source that agrees with the source that lied to me. Fox has been lying to you, and not just once or twice, but continuously, Warren. So what are you going to do – get angry at Fox for using you? Or are the lies simply too comfortable for you to escape?

  • Zingzing

    “But he did say that the rest of the world would love us.”

    No he didn’t.

    “that’s part of an incompetent cover-up.”

    No, this article is incompetent journalism, just like all the other hack bloggers running wild with this bullshit.

  • Zingzing

    Warren’s not only a hack, he’s gullible enough to be taken by other hacks. He knows the game but doesn’t realize he’s playing. Amazing.

  • Winston Apple

    The focus on incidents like “the Benghazi cover-up” and other “gotcha” moments and gaffes, along with the endless barrage of attack ads, and the exchange of sound bites and talking points that pass for debates, all compounded by the obsession of the media with polls and fund-raising reports, have turned our elections into (to paraphrase Shakespeare) a tale told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    I urge voters to look at the big picture of the Republican agenda (radically right wing, but easily understood if you can see beyond the smoke and mirrors) versus the Democratic agenda (more difficult to discern, given the contradictions between their stated platform and the strings attached to much of the big money they receive from the same moneyed interests who place their primary bets on the Republicans).

    In the face of the unified obstruction of the Republicans for the last four years, it is clear that individual candidates don’t count for much beyond their role in determining which party controls the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives.

    On a party-wide basis, the Democrats may be a muddled mess scattered on both sides of the middle of the road, but I much prefer them to the deceitful and corrupt crony capitalists of the GOP.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Can you imagine what Warren and company would have been saying if Obama had been president when 9/11 happened? We’d have had an open rebellion – but since it was a Republican in charge, well, THAT meant that it was a Real American in charge – never mind that he had ignored numerous warnings that bin Laden was about to attack us, and never mind that he used 9/11 as a pretext to illegally invade a nation that posed no threat to us.

  • Deano

    Warren,

    Sorry for not replying earlier in the thread but I was ignoring the online world over the weekend.

    The reason I haven’t bothered to slice up your barely credible claims of a conspiracy is because they really don’t amount to anything but a steaming pile of polished dung, as per your usual spittle-flecked invective. In case you haven’t been following the real-world news, the CIA released a time-line of their own reaction and response team (something they bluntly should not have done as it damages oeprational security). I don’t expect you will believe it, so I’m not going to waste space enumerating the details except to say that your inability to actually understand and renumerate facts does not lend your “articles” much credibility or your argument much veracity.

    Dan – If you read a bit past the opening sentence of my comment you might note that I do think that you can rightly roast the Obama administration for neglect and ineptitude on security for the mission, and they deserve to face that roasting as that neglect and blinkered apathy certainly contributed to the circumstances behind the Benghazi incident.

    As for the administration’s response, I think they did what any US administration would do under similar circumstances – try to figure out what was going on, get intel and info from the assets in place and on the ground, and determine what reactive force would be required. Should they have had better options available to them on the ground with a larger, better equipped security force or reaction force? – yes, probably. They didn’t, due to the aformentioned neglect. Feel free to crucify them for that omission and stupidity but this ongoing paranoia about a cover-up conspiracy is just dumb, self-serving politicalized partisan tripe.