The Benghazi Murders
Jason HATE’s TAKE
“What difference, at this point, does it make?,” the angry response given by former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, to a question about the State Department’s account of the September 11th, 2012 Benghazi attack killing Christopher Stevens during a Congressional hearing. It only makes a difference if it your family that is murdered and killed. But when the blood of an American is on the hands of our government who is suppose to protect us and could have, this incident makes my blood boil.
Between June 2011 and July 2012 there was 200 reports of security threats in Libya, 50 of those came from Benghazi. Hillary signed a cable in April 2012 scaling back security in Libya including Benghazi. Christopher Stevens took over for Gene Bretz in May of 2012, requesting more security. Stevens was denied more security just like Bretz plea in March, a couple months earlier. Was Hillary or the State Department working with a reduced budget for security? Couldn’t have President Obama sacrificed some of his lavish trips and golf games for more security in Benghazi?
Evidence shows the interim reports were altered. The warning threats to the State Department about security threats and attacks in Benghazi had been struck from the interim report given to the House Intelligence committee. The security threats were deliberately omitted at the request of Obama and Hillary. A deliberate act to cover up the truth. They let the murder of Christopher Stevens happen when they had the power to prevent it. Obama should be impeached and Hillary prosecuted. They are liars.
A drone was on the scene streaming live video, meaning they had time to send aerial and ground support. But they didn’t! The official story behind the attacks was outrage and rioting from an anti-Muslim video. Although, there was no actual reports of video from anyone in the area. Hillary told the family of one of the victims, we are prosecuting the maker of the video. More lies. Hillary and Obama have a NOSE that would make Pinocchio envious. I am sick and tired of our government using radical Muslims and the War on Terror to cover up their bloody tracks.
In the latest news Obama is aiding those in his administration who are trying discourage anyone testifying with threats to end their careers in Washington. When Obama was asked about the intimidation of Benghazi whistle-blowers, he pleaded ignorant and claimed he would look in to it. Whatever Pinock Obama, dish up some more lies until your nose can reach the sky. Three and half more years of this type on nonsense, then we gotta go thru Hillary 2016. Dear Lord help us.
by Jason Hate.There is now proof that Obama was warned in advance of the coming attack in which Stevens begged for more protection an d his impassioned plea was denied by Clinton. From the preceding video, it is clear that a drone was released to the scene of the murder of Ambassador Stevens and Obama and his staff watched as four Americans were murdered. Obama later claimed that there was not time to launch a rescue mission. This is a blatant lie because if a drone can reach the scene and video the events, fighter planes could have reached the scene and intervened, which could have been followed up with a rapid deployment force trained in rescue. We now know that General Hamm, former commander of AFRICOM, against Obama’s orders, was preparing to launch a rescue mission when he was arrested and relieved of command. As Stevens was begging for help after the attack had begun, General Hamm had activated a special forces team within minutes of learning that the embassy, which was really a CIA safe house, was under attack. General Hamm
Even if Clinton had resigned that should not have been enough to avoid criminal charges of depraved indifference by failing to report a crime that she knew was going to happen and then did take place. Clinton had both a moral and legal imperative to resign and then tell what she knew. General Ham and Admiral Gayouette are clearly men who understand their moral and legal imperatives. They refused to obey an unlawful and unconstitutional order. Clinton, true to her criminal background and history of inappropriate choices, chose to go along, to get along. There can be no doubt that Clinton would have had limited options if she would have displayed the courage of Hamm and Gayoutte and refused to obey an illegal order from Obama through Panetta. I also understand that it would have been gut wrenching to decide where would she could have gone with this information? The logical choice is Eric Holder, the Attorney General. However, with Holder’s complicity in Fast and Furious, Clinton would have known that Holder was not an option and that he is just as corrupt as Obama. She could not have gone to the FBI, because it is controlled by the President. Local law enforcement has no jurisdiction. Now, before you start to feel sorry for Clinton, please realize that Congress threw her a lifeline. Clinton’s supporters have told me that her life would have been in danger, if she tells all to Congress, and my answer response is,
Does she go along to get along and become an accomplice to murder?
Or, does she resign and refuse to go along with the murderous intentions of Panetta and Obama?
The Clot Heard Around the World Leaders are supposed to possess both moral and physical courage. Do not feel sorry for Clinton, she was not totally without options. Congress gave her a chance to save her reputation and possibly her legal rear end. She could have told what she knew about Obama and Panetta being the butchers of Benghazi. Hillary’s testimony could have brought down this criminal administration. Instead, we find a Secretary of State who developed the Benghazi flu and “could not” testify. And when this strategy, designed to avoid congressional testimony, wore thin, Clinton demonstrated that she has a better head fake than hall of fame basketball star, Michael Jordan, when she suddenly developed an alleged blood clot near the brain. Clinton is still putting her political career and her loyalty to the democratic party ahead of her oath of office. Anyone, who has an IQ higher than room temperature, knows that Obama and Panetta let Stevens be murdered and their intent was deliberate. So, rather than doing the right thing, Clinton wants to appear to be protecting the President and ultimately the Democratic party. In my opinion, Clinton is taking the political bullet so she can retain support from her party in order that she can run in 2016 with full party support.
“You mean in the same way that Chris Stevens life was in danger?”
All The President’s Women- Hillary Clinton by Dave Hodges, continue reading…