Ex-Diplomats Report New Benghazi Whistleblowers With Info Devastating To Clinton And Obama

Hillary Clinton 9 SC Ex Diplomats Report New Benghazi Whistleblowers with Info Devastating to Clinton and Obama

More whistleblowers will emerge shortly in the escalating Benghazi scandal, according to two former U.S. diplomats who spoke with PJ Media Monday afternoon.

These whistleblowers, colleagues of the former diplomats, are currently securing legal counsel because they work in areas not fully protected by the Whistleblower law.

According to the diplomats, what these whistleblowers will say will be at least as explosive as what we have already learned about the scandal, including details about what really transpired in Benghazi that are potentially devastating to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”

Read More at PJ Media . By Roger L. Simon.

Dumb And Dumber

egypt map SC Dumb and Dumber

Errors by the party in power can get America into trouble; real catastrophes require consensus.

Rarely have both parties been as unanimous about a development overseas as they have in their shared enthusiasm for the so-called Arab Spring during the first months of 2011. Republicans vied with the Obama Administration in their zeal for the ouster of Egypt’s dictator Hosni Mubarak and in championing the subsequent NATO intervention against Muammar Qaddafi in Libya. Both parties saw themselves as having been vindicated by events. The Obama Administration saw its actions as proof that soft power in pursuit of humanitarian goals offered a new paradigm for foreign-policy success. And the Republican establishment saw a vindication of the Bush freedom agenda.

“Revolutions are sweeping the Middle East and everyone is a convert to George W. Bush’s freedom agenda,” Charles Krauthammer observed in February 2011. “Now that revolution has spread from Tunisia to Oman,” Krauthammer added, “the [Obama] administration is rushing to keep up with the new dispensation, repeating the fundamental tenet of the Bush Doctrine that Arabs are no exception to the universal thirst for dignity and freedom.” And William Kristol exulted, “Helping the Arab Spring through to fruition might contribute to an American Spring, one of renewed pride in our country and confidence in the cause of liberty.”

They were all wrong. Just two years later, the foreign-policy establishment has fractured in the face of a Syrian civil war that threatens to metastasize into neighboring Iraq and Lebanon and an economic collapse in Egypt that has brought the largest Arab country to the brink of state failure. Some Republican leaders, including Sen. John McCain and Weekly Standard editor Kristol, demand American military intervention to support Syria’s Sunni rebels. But Daniel Pipes, the dean of conservative Middle East analysts, wrote on April 11 that “Western governments should support the malign dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad,” because “Western powers should guide enemies to stalemate by helping whichever side is losing, so as to prolong their conflict.” If Assad appears to be winning, he added later, we should support the rebels. The respected strategist Edward Luttwak contends that America should “leave bad enough alone” in Syria and turn its attention away from the Middle East—to Asia. The Obama Administration meanwhile is waffling about what might constitute a “red line” for intervention and what form such intervention might take.

The once-happy bipartisan consensus has now shrunk to the common observation that all the available choices are bad. It could get much worse. Western efforts have failed to foster a unified leadership among the Syrian rebels, and jihadi extremists appear to be in control of the Free Syrian Army inside Syria. Syria’s war is “creating the conditions for a renewed conflict, dangerous and complex, to explode in Iraq. If Iraq is not shielded rapidly and properly, it will definitely slip into the Syrian quagmire,” warns Arab League Ambassador Nassif Hitti. Iraq leaders are talking of civil war and eventual partition. Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, meanwhile, warned on May 1, “Syria has real friends in the region, and the world will not let Syria fall into the hands of America, Israel or takfiri [radical islamist] groups,” threatening in effect to turn the civil war into a regional conflict that has the potential to destabilize Turkey. And the gravest risk to the region remains the likelihood that “inherent weaknesses of state and society in Egypt reach a point where the country’s political, social and economic systems no longer function,” as Gamal Abuel Hassan wrote on May 28. Libya is fracturing, and the terrorists responsible for the September 2012 Benghazi attack are operating freely.

Read More at meforum.org . By David P. Goldman .

GOP Defies Boehner On Special Benghazi Panel

John Boehner SC GOP defies Boehner on special Benghazi panel

House Republican members are defying Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and five committee chairmen by endorsing a measure that would set up a special panel to investigate the deadly attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

A growing number of members on the committees with jurisdiction over the Benghazi matter — Intelligence, Judiciary, Oversight and Government Reform, Armed Services and Foreign Affairs — have signed onto Rep. Frank Wolf’s (R-Va.) resolution.

Boehner and the chairmen of those committees do not support the legislation. Instead, they have worked together to investigate the Obama administration’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012 assault.

Despite that resistance, Wolf has garnered a sizable majority of the GOP Conference as co-sponsors since introducing the measure in January. It has 146 GOP co-sponsors, with more than 80 Republicans backing it over the last month.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has also embraced a special committee and attempted to pry the GOP-led House to schedule a vote. That would put pressure, McCain has pointed out, on the Senate to act.

Read More at The Hill . By Molly K. Hooper.

New Benghazi Probe Evidence Puts Spotlight Back On Clinton

Hillary Clinton speech 11 SC New Benghazi probe evidence puts spotlight back on Clinton

New revelations about the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, are pulling Hillary Clinton back into a political firestorm that the presumptive 2016 candidate had so far managed to escape unscathed.

House Republicans have unearthed new evidence suggesting the Obama administration could have done more to help the U.S. diplomats under attack last Sept. 11.

State Department whistle-blowers testifying Wednesday before the House Oversight panel are also expected to say the then-secretary of State was personally involved in the decision to depict the attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans as something other than terrorism.

“I think the dam is about to break on Benghazi. We’re going to find a system failure before, during, and after the attacks,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wrote on his Facebook page Tuesday. “We’re going to find political manipulation seven weeks before an election. We’re going to find people asleep at the switch when it comes to the State Department, including Hillary Clinton.”

The latest allegations come from three career diplomats whose testimony Wednesday is expected to be at odds with the State Department’s official narrative. An internal State Department review last year found “systemic failures” among State Department leadership but did not interview Clinton and did not recommend anyone be fired.

Read More at The Hill . By Julian Pecquet.

Photo Credit: Aaron Webb Creative Commons

Barack Just Never Around When Bad Things Happen

2016 Obama SC Barack just never around when bad things happen

AWOL Commander in Chief

During the Benghazi murders, instead of taking charge, Mr. Obama went into hiding, the various military elements having to stand down because the occupant of the White House was afraid to make decisions. During a Senate hearing, then Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta testified that neither Obama nor anyone else from the White House had contacted the Defense Department or the Pentagon during the attack to find out what was going on. This is not the behavior of a leader, but of a coward. As always, Obama pleads ignorance to distance himself from anything that may make him look bad. He has already claimed to know nothing of the IRS targeting of conservative groups or the tapping of AP phone lines. Having the FBI investigate these events will enable the president to duck any questions because there is an “ongoing investigation.”

Cover-up

The Benghazi “talking points” were changed for a number of reasons, among them to hide Obama’s ineptness and Hillary’s Clinton’s incompetence. The people involved in the creation of the false narrative were more concerned about protecting their careers than the fate of fellow Americans being murdered in Libya. On a positive note, at least a few people told the truth. Yet, to the low information voter, this is “much ado about nothing”. When Americans accept mediocre, indeed criminal performance from their leaders, they will have to accept the inevitable downfall of a once great nation, starting with the denigration of the forces that protect America and its allies. Honorable Executive branch careerists are too few, which is why Americans are being killed as the Nation’s protectors are told to stand down.  Americans are not safe with this administration.

Constitution

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution says: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States. As President, Mr. Obama neglected his duty to protect the American Ambassador and others who were under attack for seven hours. When congressional investigators get too close to the truth, the entire issue will be declared off limits due to “Executive privilege.”

In his entire career, Barack Obama has never accepted the responsibility of making decisions; rather, he avoids it. In an actual crisis, the community organizer runs and hides. The American people should know where the White House occupant was while his employees were being killed. How can he be trusted if America or our allies are ever attacked?

Do We Have Another Woodward?

Bob Woodward SC Do We Have Another Woodward?

The House of Cards is beginning to crumble. All of a sudden, Uncle Joe is back in the closet. Valerie Jarrett is nowhere to be seen. To the task at hand:

CBS’ Sharyl Attkisson bucked the trend and was the only mainstream media reporter who dared to investigate Benghazi-gate, and now it is being reported that she may lose her job over it. And the fact that the president of CBS News is the brother of a top Obama Administration official is allegedly not helping matters.

The Daily Caller is reporting: “The brother of a top Obama administration official is also the president of CBS News, and the network may be days away from dropping one of its top investigative reporters for covering the administration’s scandals too aggressively.” I wonder how a reporter covers a story “too aggressively.” I think if they had asked Bob Woodward if he was being too aggressive with Watergate, I think they would have gotten a different answer.

Attkisson, who is in talks to leave the network before her contract expires, has been attempting to figure out who changed the Benghazi talking points for more than five months. “We still don’t know who changed talking points but have had at least 4 diff explanations so far,” Attkisson tweeted on November 27, 2012.

But last Friday, ABC News reported that the Benghazi talking points went through 12 revisions before they were used on the public. The White House was intimately involved in that process, ABC reported; and the talking points were scrubbed free of their original references to a terror attack. That reporting revealed that President Obama’s deputy national security advisor, Ben Rhodes — brother of CBS News president David Rhodes — was instrumental in changing the talking points in September 2012. There is speculation that the Obama administration is keeping the survivors away so that they can’t do damage. The White House advisors never expected Benghazi to develop legs. Recent developments, especially the emails that were released the other day, show that there are concrete links from the State Department to the White House concerning the wording in the revisions.

ABC’s reporting revealed that Ben Rhodes, who has a masters degree in fiction from NYU, called a meeting to discuss the talking points at the White House on September 15, 2012. That is three days after the airing of the event. “We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation,” Rhodes wrote to his colleagues in the Obama administration. “We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”

Mr. Rhodes, also a 35-year old New York City native and former Giuliani staffer who has worked for Obama since the president’s tenure in the U.S. Senate, has established himself as a hawkish force on the Obama foreign policy team, advocating for military intervention in Libya during the president’s first term and reportedly advocating for intervention in Syria as well. But despite his hawkish views, Rhodes identifies himself first and foremost as a strategist and mouthpiece for the president’s agenda. According to Rhodes: “My main job, which has always been my job, is to be the person who represents the president’s view on these issues,”

David Rhodes has been the president of CBS News since February 2011.

So the plot thickens. Day by day, the Obama administration is sinking into the mud and mire that it created after the attack on Benghazi. One question we need answered is: Who decided on sending Susan Rice out to mislead the public the way she did? That was such a glaring breach of protocol that even an eighth grader would have questioned the choice. As far as the display that Hillary put on, I for one care very much why our Ambassador was tortured and murdered (and why three brave men who came to his defense were deserted by our government and sentenced to an ignominious death.)

It doesn’t matter whether you are Democratic, Republican, or Independent. If you care about America and the future of freedom, you have to demand that there is a complete revelation of the truth. There is something on display in the Truman Library that every American should take note of. Harry Truman was a man of his word who did not look for someone or something to blame for his shortcomings. The sign on his desk was simple and straightforward. It read: “The Buck Stops Here.” That simple statement should be applied to President Obama and the Nanny Media that did everything it could to get him elected and prevent anything or anyone from exposing his incompetence or dishonesty. Now I am sure they will circle the wagons around Hillary and her preparation for a presidential run in 2016.

Who Will Guard Us From Our Guardians?

Obama Big Brother SC Who Will Guard Us from Our Guardians?

The government scandals of the day are packed with irony:   from the seizure of reporters’ phone record to the bungling in Benghazi; from the president’s slight of Thomas Jefferson to the IRS targeting opponents of big government.  If Woody Allen, Carol Brunette, Mark Twain, and anyone else who made the observation that comedy is tragedy plus time  are correct, perhaps this will be the fodder of funny men in the future, much as Monty Python tried to milk a few laughs from the Black Plague from the safe distance of 600 years.

But the Plague wasn’t funny then to the hundreds of millions who lived through it and died from it.  And there is not much laughing room now in watching our government grow more lawless by the day.

Nothing can really top the irony of President Obama’s belittling just days ago of people who say we need to be aware that governments can become tyrannical.  Presumably, Obama’s disdain extends to people like Thomas Jefferson who have warned about the need for vigilance against government abuse.

Such people “gum up the works,” said Obama.

What works, specifically, are those?  The answer came within only days with the discovery that the IRS was politicizing enforcement of tax provisions.   To make the irony complete, that story was immediately followed by news that the Justice department was snooping on reporters’ phone records without benefit of court orders or warrants.

The news that the Justice Department has been snooping through reporters’ phone records at least got the attention of the news media.  It would be nice if the media were as concerned with the rest of the government’s neglect of the Constitution.  It would be nice to see the lapdog press turn into the watchdog press.

Speaking of ironies, there are probably many in the media who don’t at all mind the IRS targeting opponents of big government – Tea Partiers and those interested in the Constitution – just as there are probably many conservatives who really don’t mind big government harassing big media.

Just when you think all of that is enough, we get the news that the Justice Department, itself suspected of gross indifference to the formalities of warrants, is now charged with investigating the IRS, which is indifferent to just about everything.

Meanwhile, those shocked – shocked, I tell you – to discover that the IRS has politicized tax enforcement are either wet behind the ears, or just dangerously naïve.  We know that presidents from FDR to Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon all used the IRS to target their opponents.

But use of the IRS as a weapon has not been limited to the executive branch.  In a Wall Street Journal column (“A Brief History of IRS Political Targeting,” 5/14/2013), James Bovard recounts episodes of congressional abuse, for example of  “an IRS official who had explained at an IRS meeting in San Francisco that audit requests from members of Congress or their staff had been shredded and also suggested how future requests from Capitol Hill could be camouflaged.”

Of the same practice used again, Bovard reports, “Audit requests from congressmen were marked ‘expedite’ or ‘hot politically’ and IRS officials were obliged to respond within 15 days. Permitting congressmen to secretly and effortlessly sic G-men on whomever they pleased epitomized official Washington’s contempt for average Americans and fair play. But because the abuse was bipartisan, there was little enthusiasm on Capitol Hill for an investigation.”

Sadly, it is true that the only time there is enthusiasm on Capitol Hill is when an investigation can produce partisan victories and electoral advantage.  That would explain Capitol Hill’s interest in the Benghazi fiasco:  If Hillary can be neutralized, and if Democrats can be faulted for mishandling Benghazi, Republicans are on the case.  But their interest stops dead in its track at the question of what we were up to in Libya to begin with.  After all, both Republican and Democrat fingerprints are all over the intervention in Libya.  And if the government was using Benghazi as a staging area to run guns to rebels in Syria – fighters uncomfortably similar to Al Qaeda -  then nobody wants to know.

The death of Ambassador Stevens and other Americans in Benghazi is a tragedy; but if the so-called diplomatic mission there was a CIA base, we deserve to know.  We do know that whatever it was in Benghazi, it wasn’t an embassy.  Or a consulate.

If the ambassador was really a CIA agent, that is a violation of our laws.  We deserve to know.  There is no law that commits the United States to protect illegal gunrunning.  And there is no diplomatic immunity for weapons dealers.

Where would the Benghazi trail lead if Congress cared about more than their own political fortunes?  Here’s a hint:  what we do know is that of the people evacuated by air from Benghazi the night of the attack, seven were diplomatic and State Department workers.  Twenty-three were CIA officers.

So from illegal operations overseas (does anybody remember a Constitutional declaration of war that authorized the U.S. to topple the government in Libya?) to snoops in the Justice department; from the targeting of political opponents by the IRS to a Congress concerned solely with the next election; from one badly stained department of government charged with investigating another to the president’s derision of Jeffersonian vigilance; from all this we are left to ask: who will guard us from our guardians?

Maybe it will all prove to be hysterically funny with the passage of enough time.

But for now, Ron Paul deserves apologies from those who, like Obama, believed that his calls for us to be vigilant about intrusive government were over the top.

 

Charles Goyette  is the author of the New York Times bestseller The Dollar Meltdown. His new book is Red and Blue and Broke All Over: Restoring America’s Free Economy.

This article is taken from Charles Goyette’s  Freedom & Prosperity Letter, a monthly political and financial newsletter, helping Americans protect themselves and their families.  GO HERE.

 

Photo credit: waif69 (Creative Commons)

It’s Harvest Time In Washington

Barack Obama speech 8 SC Its Harvest Time in Washington

Not even Barack Obama can defy the laws of physics.

Certain things are absolute. As Newton said, what goes up must come down. The wrinkles you see staring back at you in the mirror validate the second law of thermodynamics: eventually, things fall apart. And, as any farmer will tell you, if you plant cucumbers in the spring, no matter how hard you try, you will never reap watermelons in the summer.

It’s the same with deeds; good and bad, we reap what we sow. From the onset, the Obama administration has woven a web of fabrications so thick it is hard to see where reality ends and make-believe begins. Over time, Obama has woven that web tighter by installing a gang of Chicago allies, confidants, tongue-biters, and tale-tellers as a “shadow government” answerable only to him. There was safety in this tight-knit crew of like-minded associates, or so they thought, until recently when parts of Obama’s web began to unravel.

As the old time pastor R.G. Lee once said, “Nature keeps books pitilessly. Man’s credit with her is good. But Nature collects.” And now it seems Nature has come knocking on the front door of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

It all began with Benghazi. We now know that celebrating in the end zone about bin Laden’s death made for good re-election bumper stickers and water cooler conversation but had little impact on America’s security or the security of the grossly under-protected consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Far-fetched stories about a video spun by a circle of close confidants desperately desiring four more years of power fell apart during recent testimonies. We reap what we sow.

Now we hear the IRS was party to Soviet-style scare tactics in the inappropriate targeting of conservative groups prior to the 2012 election. The Washington Post reports that the tentacles of this scandal reach beyond the supposed few rogue agents in Cincinnati to Washington. Doing what they do best, Progressives deflected the blame to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision — purporting had it not been for it, there would be no need for the IRS’s intrusion into the private lives of conservatives. Had the IRS targeted liberal groups, Democrats would have blamed it on a Republican plot to steal the election. And of course, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney remains steadfast: the administration is beyond reproach. Sure.

So, how about a sprinkle of invasion of privacy to go with that healthy dose of scare tactics? The Associated Press (AP) discovered that Attorney General Holder’s Department of Justice secretly seized two months of reporters’ phone records (including both work and personal numbers), something the AP called a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into news-gathering. While the jury’s still out regarding motives, it should be noted this was not the first time for this administration. As originally reported by Breitbart.com, former Holder spokesperson Tracy Schmaler colluded with the far-left group Media Matters for America to “smear media figures, whistleblowers, and members of Congress.” Transparency? Not.

Scandal by scandal, the president remains resolute and does his sanctimonious best to remain blameless. The dominoes are dropping; it is harvest time for this corrupt administration, which believes that justice is due for everyone but itself and will do everything in its power to avoid reaping the consequences for which it has sown.

Obama’s Assets Worth Between $1.8M And $6.8M

Barack Obama speech 11 SC Obama’s assets worth between $1.8M and $6.8M

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama held assets last year that were worth between $1.8 million and nearly $7 million, according to federal financial disclosure forms the White House released Wednesday.

Required by law, the forms allow public officials to list their assets in broad ranges, such as between $1 million and $5 million, which makes it difficult to determine a precise net worth.

Obama signed the eight-page report Tuesday and the White House released it Wednesday as the president remained on the defensive over how the administration explained last September’s attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.

Obama also has been buffeted in recent days by the disclosure that the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative groups and the Justice Department’s decision to secretly obtain two months of records for multiple telephone lines used by Associated Press reporters and editors.

The disclosure forms show the largest jointly owned asset was Treasury notes worth $1 million-$5 million. The Obamas also had $250,001-$500,000 in a JPMorgan Chase checking account, and $100,001-$250,000 in Treasury bills.

Read More at OfficialWire . By Darlene Superville.

Congressman Doesn’t Rule Out Obama’s Impeachment

Barack Obama Phone SC Congressman doesnt rule out Obamas Impeachment

Rep. Jason Chaffetz reiterated Tuesday that the impeachment of President Barack Obama is possible as the White House faces scrutiny over its role in responding to the terror attack on a U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya.

“Look, it’s not something I’m seeking,” the Republican congressman from Utah said on CNN’s “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.” “It’s not the endgame; it’s not what we’re playing for. I was simply asked, is that within the realm of possibilities, and I would say ‘yes.’ I’m not willing to take that off the table. But that’s certainly not what we’re striving for.”

Chaffetz first said impeachment could be an option in an interview published Monday by the Salt Lake Tribune.

“We want truth,” Chaffetz said on CNN. “We want to have the president do what he has said he would always do, and that is, be open and transparent. Thus far, the White House has not done that.”

Republicans’ accusations of an administration-led coverup in the immediate aftermath of the Benghazi attack were fueled last week by the release of internal e-mails showing that top administration officials scrubbed any mention of al Qaeda from talking points given to members of Congress and Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Read More at abc15.com . By CNN Wire.