How would the media have reported on Benghazi if we had a Republican president such as Chris Christie? I think we know the answer.
In this week’s scathing bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi, extensive evidence confirms what most of us already knew: the attack was preventable. The report concludes there was a “significant strategic warning” about the possibility of an attack in the months leading up to September 11, 2012.
We also know Ambassador Christopher Stevens had requested additional security several times and for whatever reason was denied. In fact, on the day of the terrorist attack, his final journal entry reads, “Never ending security threats…”
According to the Washington Examiner:
“The CIA hired local Libyan militia members as security for the U.S. facilities in Benghazi but most of them failed to show up the evening of the attacks and declined CIA security officer’s attempts to have them mount a rescue mission once the attacks began.”
We may never know why the Obama cover-up committee thought they could fool the American people by sending then-Ambassador to the United Nations and current National Security Advisor Susan Rice on a PR mission to repeatedly lie about the motives (really, that darn video caused them to kill Americans on another 9-11 anniversary!) behind the attack in the following days while Obama traveled the country campaigning.
I submit to you they were stalling for precious time as the 2012 Presidential Election drew closer and had the truth come out sooner it could have affected the outcome. This is assuming the media would have done their jobs.
Fact: the State Department has now confirmed they knew it was a terrorist attack the day after it took place. The latest report finds that there were no military assets positioned in a place where they could have saved Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans.
As the Government Accountability Institute timeline reveals, President Obama failed to attend his daily intelligence briefing for the five consecutive days leading up to the attack of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. The timeline catalogues Obama’s continuous campaigning even as terrorist forces vowed Libyan attacks and State Department officials were warned of security threats.
The Benghazi attack became a critical event during the final months of the 2012 presidential election, an event Republican Mitt Romney decided not to press Obama about during their debates. (Reminds me of John Mc Cain deciding to play nice and not talk about radical Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Obama’s 20-year association with Wright’s church.)
The Benghazi attack was not caused by a video as Susan Rice tried selling with a straight face but with the media’s help, the Obama administration downplayed evidence that it was in fact a premeditated terrorist attack we know could have and should have been prevented.
The Senate Intelligence Committee’s long-awaited final report on Benghazi faults the State Department for failing to provide adequate security despite numerous warnings.
I’m trying not to lose complete faith in a government that spent millions of dollars doing a bipartisan investigation of Benghazi; they held closed-door sessions, examined thousands of pages of documents, and have yet to hold anyone accountable despite damning evidence.
Finally, it is both sad and embarrassing that the day after we lost four great Americans in Benghazi and suffered the first assassination of a U.S. Ambassador since the Carter administration, the president flew straight to Las Vegas for another campaign event.
I know what you may be thinking: ‘What difference – at this point – does it make?’ It matters to the families of the victims; and it matters to American citizens who simply want and deserve truth from the government that serves us and from the media that reports on our behalf.
David Fiorazo is President of Wisconsin Media Check and author of ERADICATE: BLOTTING OUT GOD IN AMERICA
