Monday, August 19, 2013

Where Was Obama on Night of Benghazi Attack?

Where Was Obama on Night of Benghazi Attack? WH Isn’t Saying

February 11, 2013 - 12:20 PM – The White House isn’t saying where President Barack Obama was, what he did or whom he spoke to between 5:30 p.m. Sept. 11, 2012—when he finished a meeting with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, which took place while the Benghazi terrorist attacks were unfolding—and 11:26 p.m. that night, which is approximately the time former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed in the attacks.
According to timelines of the Benhazi attacks released by the government, they began at 3:42 p.m. Washington, D.C. time when dozens of armed terrorists swarmed through a gate at the State Department’s compound in Benghazi. A U.S. security officer at that compound almost immediately notified the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, which in turn notified Washington, D.C.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, were informed of the attack at 4:32 p.m. while they were at the White House waiting for a pre-scheduled 5:00 p.m. meeting with the president.  According to government timelines, an unarmed Defense Department drone arrived over the State Department compound in Benghazi at about 5:10 p.m., while Panetta and Dempsey were meeting with Obama.
panetta, dempsey
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey. (AP)
In his testimony in the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Panetta said he informed the president at their 5:00 p.m. meeting of what was going on in Benghazi. Gen. Dempsey testified that the meeting lasted a half hour. Panetta and Dempsey also testified that after the meeting ended they did not talk to President Obama or the White House again that night.
Almost six hours elapsed between the end of the Panetta-Dempsey-Obama meeting and the deaths of Woods and Doherty at the CIA’s Annex in Benghazi.
At about 5:30 p.m., when the Panetta-Dempsey-Obama meeting ended, the five State Department security officers, who had been at the Benghazi mission compound when it came under attack, fled the compound in an armored car to go the CIA Annex. They came under fire, were covered by CIA security officers as they evacuated the compound, and evaded an ambush between the compound and the Annex.
The timelines indicate that terrorists continued to fire on the Annex until about 7:00 p.m. Washington, D.C. time, or about an hour and a half after the Panetta-Dempsey-Obama meeting ended. From 7:00 p.m. until about 11:15 p.m., there was a break in the fighting. But at 11:15 p.m., after a rescue team of security personnel had arrived at the Annex after taking a chartered private flight from Tripoli to Benghazi, the terrorists attacked again.
dempsey, obama
Gen. Martin Dempsey, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. (AP)

This battle lasted about 11 minutes. It was during this time—about six hours since Obama’s sole conversation with Panetta and Dempsey--that Woods and Doherty were killed by a terrorist mortar and a State Department security officer was severely wounded.
On Friday morning, called the White House press office to inquire about where President Obama was, what he was doing, and who he was communicating with, after 5:30 p.m. on the night of Sept. 11, 2012. At 10:29 a.m. on Friday, followed up by emailing questions to the White House press office.
On Friday afternoon, additionally followed up by calling the White House National Security Council press office and also emailing that office the questions. also followed up on Friday afternoon by again calling the White House Press Office and emailing the questions again to that office.
Here are the questions asked the White House:
1.) Where was President Obama between 5:30 p.m. when his meeting with Panetta and Dempsey ended and 11:26 p.m., when the terrorist attacks on the U.S. personnel in Benghazi finally stopped?
2.) What was President Obama doing between 5:30 p.m. when his meeting with Panetta and Dempsey ended and 11:26 p.m. when terrorist attacks on the U.S. personnel in Benghazi finally stopped?
3.) Who did President Obama communicate with between 5:30 p.m. when his meeting with Panetta and Dempsey ended and 11:26 p.m. when the terrorist attacks on the U.S. personnel in Benghazi finally stopped?
4.) Why didn't President Obama speak with Panetta or Dempsey again that night after their 5:30 p.m. meeting ended?
President Obama and then-Secretary of state Hillary Clinton meet with family members of the 4 Americans killed in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya. (AP)

On Monday morning, followed up yet again by phoning the White House press office and the National Security Council press office and emailing them the questions again. The White House press office Monday morning confirmed receiving the questions but did not have a timetable for when it could provide answers.
At a hearing last week in the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R.-N.H.) asked Defense Secretary Panetta: “Did you have any further communications with him [Obama] that night?”
“No,” said Panetta.
“Did you have any other further communications? Did he ever call you that night to say how are things going, what’s going on, where’s the consulate?” asked Ayotte.
“No,” said Panetta. “But we were aware as we were getting information about what was taking place there, particularly when we got information that the ambassador, his life had been lost, we were aware that that information went to the White House.”
“Did you communicate with anyone else at the White House that night?” asked Ayotte.
“No,” said Panetta.
“No one else called you to say: How are things going?” asked Ayotte.
“No,” said Panetta.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) followed up to verify with Panetta and Dempsey that they did not talk to Obama on the night of the attack except in their one half hour meeting. The two reconfirmed.
On CBS’s Face the Nation, Graham said that the nominations of Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense and John Brennan to be CIA director should not go forward until senators know more about what Obama did on the night of Sept. 11.
“We know nothing about what the president did on the night of Sept. 11 during a time of national crisis, and the American people need to know what their commander in chief did, if anything, during this eight-hour attack,” Graham told CBS on Sunday.
“I don't think we should allow Brennan to go forward for the CIA directorship, Hagel to be confirmed to secretary of defense until the White House gives us an accounting,” said Sen. Graham. “What did he do that night? That's not unfair. The families need to know, the American people need to know.”

Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace tried to pin down why we have pictures of Obama sitting in the Situation Room the night Osama bin Laden was killed, but on the night Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed we don't have so much as an artist's sketch.
"The president was kept up to date on this as it was happening throughout the entire night, from the moment it started till the end," Pfeiffer said.
So he didn't go to bed that night to rest up for his Las Vegas fundraiser the next day? Pfeiffer wouldn't elaborate.
Pressing Pfeiffer to fill in the blanks, Wallace noted that Obama was with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey in a previously scheduled meeting on the afternoon of Sept. 11, around the time the Benghazi attack started.
And Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state at the time, said she spoke to the president at 10 p.m. on the night of the attack.
"The question here is not what happened that night," Pfeiffer responded to Wallace. "The question is what are we going to do to move forward ensuring that this doesn't happen again."
Undaunted, Wallace told Pfeiffer, "You didn't answer my question. What did the president do that night?"
To which Pfeiffer answered: "He was kept — he was in constant touch that night with his national security team and kept up to date with the events as they were happening."
Really? When? Where? By whom?
Wallace tried again: "When you say his national security team, he didn't talk to the secretary of state, except for the one time when the first attack was over. He didn't talk to the secretary of defense. He didn't talk to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Who was he talking to?"
Maybe he was talking to himself in his sleep, for all we have are the assurances of paid staffers.
At one point an exasperated Wallace said:
"Here's the point, though. The ambassador goes missing, ends up the first ambassador in more than 30 years killed. Four Americans, including the ambassador, are killed. Dozens of Americans are in jeopardy.
"The president at 4 o'clock in the afternoon says to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to deploy forces. No forces are deployed. Where is he while all this is going on?"
Under questioning from South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, Panetta could not explain why the president spoke with him only once on Sept. 11 during the attack, and never called back for any updates for more than seven hours.
We don't know — and despite Secretary Clinton's subsequent rant, it still matters now. And despite Pfeiffer's obfuscation, it is highly relevant.
When Clint Eastwood talked to an empty chair at the GOP National Convention last summer, everyone laughed. Well, there was an empty chair in the Situation Room the night of Sept. 11, 2012, when four Americans were being murdered by terrorists, and no one is laughing.
It's called dereliction of duty, Mr. Pfeiffer.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily:

Benghazi – More Whistleblowers Coming? Stinger Missiles, Hillary Clinton, General Carter Ham

blood on their hands
Roger L Simon @PJMedia has a column out which essentially predicts a new set of whistleblowers who will soon present to congress.
[...] 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.”  (link)
What is interesting is the affirmation of what we have shared from the VERY BEGINNING.
The State Dept. (Stevens) was buying back Surface to Air Missiles, from the Libyan ”Rebels”, who were actually al-Qaeda.   The CIA was a logistics facilitating co-agency supporting the efforts of the State Dept. but the CIA did not fully support the larger goal.  Nor should they.
What the article does not outline is what also we have previously shared which connects the dots.  
The Libyan missiles were in the process of being re-directed from Benghazi al-Qaeda into the hands of Syrian Rebels using Turkey as the middle-men to keep the Obama’s fingerprints off the transportation and delivery.
That’s why the Turkish delegation was at the U.S. Benghazi compound that night meeting with Ambassador Stevens.   The Turks were able to leave the neighborhood, around 9:00-9:15pm shortly before the attack commenced at 9:40pm.
AFRICOM Commander, General Carter Hamm, was stuck betwixt a rocket and a hard place.   Already the Afghanistan and Iraq U.S. forces had lost their close-air-support due to the risk from the Libyan SAAM’s which had already made their way into those specific areas of combat operations.
The CIA/DoD were not big fans of giving the Libyan “Rebels” the shoulder fired missile capacity from the outset.    The CIA out of fear of passenger aircraft being targeted, and the DoD because they rightly knew the missiles would eventually be used against our troops in other areas.     Looking at what happened in Afghanistan, Iraq, they were right.
After the Benghazi assassination of Stevens the realized fears of both CIA and DoD became a risk to both Hillary Clinton and President Obama.   [Both Obama and Clinton were sympatico on arming the rebels - they made it happen].

Map of Libya
The risk to both Obama and Clinton was from the CIA and DoD being questioned, and/or revealing on their own what was going on, and why they did not like the plan from the outset.   (*note*  That risk actually still exists today)
How would it look if General Carter Hamm and General Petraeus were saying openly, publically, they did not like the original idea?…..   Against the backdrop of a dead U.S. Ambassador, who was trying to buy back weapons we gave the bad guys, against the advice and warnings of both CIA and Military DoD ?
Political “Yikes”!
Even without the election, which just amplified the inner circle election fear exponentially, the entire construct of the Obama/Clinton Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine was openly, and potentially, about to be hung around their neck.
Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, President Barack Obama
Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, President Barack Obama

[Remember it was Samantha Power (wife of Cass Sunstein), Susan Rice, and eventually Hillary Clinton who convinced Obama to ignore the advice of his Office of Legal Council, send troops to Libya without congressional approval, and then ultimately ARM the rebels with the same weapons we were now trying to: a) take back, and b) divert to the next insufferable folly called Syria.]

Why was Susan Rice specifically selected to take those heavily manipulated talking points?   I just told you in the prior paragraph.   This Libyan Quagmire was her baby too – she was instrumental in it.
If the potential existed for Hillary/Obama to take a fatal career hit, it makes sense they would pull in the ideological co-dependent enablers with them.  Everyone needed to have skin in the game, and self-preservation by all would mean a greater likelihood of covering success for both Hillary and POTUS.
Samantha Power Leaving White House West Wing
Samantha Power bailed out.  Lucky for her and Cass the pregnancy and child-birth gave her an out.     He ran along beside her vacating his regulatory position in the world of Obama Czars.
DoD risk?   General Ham was just dispatched by the civilian command and fired/replaced.
General-BetrayUsCIA risk?  General Petraeus was dispatched in a more Machiavellian maneuver.   After all the Eric Holder DOJ through the FBI had been building the ‘just-in-case’ file for quite a while (all summer).
So pulling the trigger on that embarrassment was a no-brainer.
General David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell


No comments: