There have been dramatic changes in what many will now openly describe as a full-blown cover-up related to the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012. What we have here is a case of complete incompetence, which led to the death of four brave Americans and a subsequent cover-up for the purposes of maintaining political power. The pursuit of power trumped reality and the truth. Simple as that.
At this point you are probably well-aware of the report from last week which detailed the 12 versions of the Benghazi talking points. These changes were, in fact, made with input from senior State Department officials. According to the Weekly Standard, “the draft of the CIA talking points that was sent to top Obama administration officials that Friday evening included more than a half-dozen references to the enemy – al Qaeda, Ansar al Sharia, jihadists, Islamic extremists, and so on. The version [General David Petraeus] received in his inbox Saturday, however, had none.” Thanks to emails from Victoria Nuland of the State Department, we now know the talking points were changed for political purposes, so as to shield the State Department from potential blame from Congress.
Yet White House propagandist Jay Carney still maintains to this day that the White House only made one “stylistic” edit to the talking points. And during his very intense (and very delayed) White House briefing on Friday, Carney believes that by the time the Sunday talk shows came around, there was still no hard evidence that al Qaeda was involved in the attack. This is absolutely false. We've come a long way from just a few weeks ago when Carney was able to brush aside Benghazi as happening “a long time ago.” There are many people who feel bad for Carney at this point. George Will said over the weekend that Carney's “usefulness to this administration is diminishing rapidly.” I think it may be time for Jay to consider resigning.
But Jay Carney is not alone in defending the administration and in some cases, flat-out lying. Here are just a few of the latest ignorant attempts to blame, justify or belittle ...
There have also been unfortunate attempts by liberals to undermine the credibility of last week's whistle-blowers. That is not all that surprising, though it is unfortunate. The truth is that one of the main whistle-blowers, Greg Hicks, is a Democrat who voted for Hillary and Obama. It's unfortunate that this piece of news is necessary in order to try and dispel the narrative that this is a GOP witch-hunt. The fact is that brave, career civil servants like Greg Hicks aren't political in their jobs or their motivations in telling the truth.
But for all of those examples I mentioned above, there are many more who have now seen the light. There has been a remarkable turn-around in the coverage of Benghazi in just the last week. Between the credible testimonies of the whistle-blowers and the reporting on the talking points, Benghazi finally became a story the lapdog media could no longer ignore. For months, Fox News, talk-radio and others have been criticized for continuing to push for answers. Finally, the lamestream media has joined the chorus and started doing what they should have done a long time ago on this story: Report. Here's a round-up of some of the media and politicians who have come around on Benghazi.
You know it's bad when MSNBC admits that something is bad for the Obama administration. So the question is, what happens next? I believe that it is time for the House to create a select committee to investigate. House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa told NBC's “Meet the Press” that he plans to seek depositions from former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and retired Admiral Mike Mullen, who were in charge of the State Department's internal investigation into the Benghazi attack. Over the weekend, Pickering defended the Accountability Review Board's investigation, telling CBS' “Face the Nation” that he didn't feel it was necessary to interview Hillary Clinton for his report. His excuse was that "we had questioned people who had attended meetings with her." Well I'm sorry but with all due respect, that's not good enough. Now we have Democrat Rep. Elijah Cummings, who is the top Democrat on the House Oversight panel, saying that private depositions aren't good enough. He wants Pickering and Mullen to answer questions about their investigation at a congressional hearing. Also we have Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, who is chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, telling “Fox News Sunday” that more whistle-blowers might come forward.
That leads us to today's press conference with Barack Obama and UK Prime Minister David Cameron. The first question asked of Obama was about the IRS and Benghazi. In response to Benghazi, Obama was visibly upset and frustrated and cannot understand why this is still an issue. He called the controversy over the talking points a “side show” and used the term “political circus.” Obama stated today, “We have been very clear that immediately after this happened, we were not clear who exactly who carried it out, how it had occurred or what the motivations were.” But we know this to be absolutely false. Top officials knew the next day that Ansar al-Sharia claimed responsibility for the attack. Greg Hicks, who talked to Hillary Clinton herself at 2am, knew what was happening. The president of Libya came on American TV that Sunday and called it a terrorist attack. If it was “not clear,” then why for weeks and weeks afterwards did the administration continue to peddle this YouTube video lie? These are all important questions, yet Obama told us today that this is now being “spun up” as if there's something new to the story. In other words, nothing to see here. This is all a partisan witch-hunt being fueled by the media. Unbelievable.
The shift in coverage of the Benghazi terrorist attack has been dramatic. However, expect the Obama administration to try and shift the narrative away from Benghazi and the IRS as much as possible. Pick a distracting topic, any topic, and hope that it can shift the focus. The only problem for Obama is … he's running out of distractions. More importantly, he's running out of credibility.