Investors Business Daily reports on the latest e-mails requested and received by Judicial Watch, a government watch-dog organization. The title for this post is a shortening up of a line from Judicial Watch, by the way.
History recorded that the White House’s United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice appeared a few days after the terrorist incident on a number of Sunday television news shows saying that attack, which killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, was provoked by an Internet video.
It was just a few Islamic hotheads, she suggested, who took a protest over the video too far. We were assured the violence was in no way connected to President Obama’s Libya policy.
Judicial Watch, however, has been combing through the emails and finds they tell a different story.
They indicate a cover-up occurred. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the documents that keep piling up “show the Obama White House was behind the big lie, first promoted by Hillary Clinton, that an Internet video caused the Benghazi terrorist attack.”
“Top White House aide Ben Rhodes, Hillary Clinton, and many key Obama officials pushed others to tie the Internet video to the attacks,” he said.
“It is little wonder that Mrs. Clinton and the entire Obama administration have fought so hard to keep these documents from the American people. All evidence now points to Hillary Clinton, with the approval of the White House, as being the source of the Internet video lie.”
It was a lie that bloomed into a conspiracy. The new documents released to Judicial Watch show “the Obama administration engaged domestic and foreign Islamist groups and foreign nationals to push the Internet video narrative.”
It appears the White House even successfully recruited the Turkish government, or at least Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, to help spread the lie.
Another email, says Judicial Watch, “evidently from the Office of the Secretary of Defense” and sent to National Security Council spokesperson Bernadette Meehan and other top White House officials, “shows that the administration took no action to deploy military assets almost five hours after the attack began.”
This corroborates early and continued speculation that the men were left on their own to die.
Why would the administration want to spin this tragic incident in such a way? Why did it want to, in the words of White House operative Rhodes, “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video”?
Because, as Rhodes said, it did not want to admit the attack was part of “broader failure of policy.”
The administration knew the Benghazi attack was a terrorist act, but it couldn’t dare admit it because that would call into question the Obama policy and expose as a lie the president’s claim that Libya was a success.
The Washington Times writes that the State Department is now admitting that Hillary lied about her e-mail server not containing any classified information.
The State Department on Wednesday conceded that two dozen of Hillary Clinton’s emails did contain classified information, a fact that could trigger a U.S. policy that authorizes the government to take control of her private server and sanitize the contents.
A former senior intelligence official told The Washington Times the policy also requires the government to check other Internet paths her secret information could have taken.
The procedures are spelled out by the National Security Agency’s special panel on controlling leaked secrets, called the Committee on National Security Systems. It published a policy, “Securing Data and Handling Spillage Events,” that fits Mrs. Clinton’s unauthorized private server kept at her home while she was secretary of state, according to the retired officer’s reading of the regulations.
Why would anyone think that she would make a good President? It seems to me that she made a poor decision (Libya invasion), lied to cover up her poor decision (Youtube video), and lied when she said that her e-mails did not contain classified information.