Years from now historians will look back with disgust at a national mainstream media who never bothered to investigate the biggest scandal in U.S. political history. The story of their failure to investigate is perhaps more shocking and scandalous than the scandal itself.
How bizarre is the Benghazi scandal? The picture emerging now from the Congressional Hearings was clear to me, a small businessman, eight months ago. It was crystal clear. The truth would have brought down any Republican President. But with Obama as President, the media chose to look the other way.
The same media that viciously attacked Mitt Romney because he mentioned the London Summer Olympics might have security problems…the same media that acted as if Republican Senator Marco Rubio reaching for a water bottle during a televised speech was a national scandal -- that very same media thought the murder of four Americans, including an ambassador, and the massive cover-up of their murder was no big deal. Talk about bias; real life is stranger than fiction.
These Congressional hearings about Benghazi are only "explosive" to those who chose to ignore it when it first happened eight months ago. Actually, there is very little new. The most damning revelation is that we finally found out what happens when Hillary Clinton is woken at 2 AM by a national security emergency…
She immediately begins a murder cover-up.
But eight months ago, the national media channeled Sergeant Shultz of Hogan's Heroes ("I hear nothing. I see nothing"). CNN’s Candy Crowley went a step further- during a Presidential debate she lied on behalf of the President. That’s almost as bad as Hillary’s infamous statement, “What Does It Matter?” If a Fox News anchor lied for a Republican President their career would be over. But no one in the national media even questioned Clinton or Crowley.
The real shocker of Benghazi is proof positive that the media is so biased it’s even willing to be an accessory to a murder cover-up. Why? Because they had only one job to do: re-elect Obama. The national media decided they could not let a murder get in the way.
How do I know this was so obvious eight months ago? Because I’ve been writing publicly about Benghazi since September. This is no backseat driving. My published words are on the record.
Like when I wrote about Benghazi early last Fall for Breitbart.com…Here are the exact words I wrote.
Like when I wrote about Benghazi after the second Presidential debate in October for FoxNews.com…Here are the exact words I wrote.
In a published commentary at FoxNews.com in November, I wrote about the reason Mitt Romney lost the election:
“Then there’s Obama’s (Benghazi) scandal. Romney played it safe in the final debate and never took the offensive on the issue of Benghazi. Americans never quite understood. But they would have understood one image: ‘Mr. President you denied them the security they asked for, watched them die in real time, refused to send a rescue team, and then covered it all up by blaming a YouTube video. You left four Americans to die on the battlefield.’ Game, set, match.”
In my new bestselling book, “The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide,” written in January, here is what I say about Benghazi:
“Then there’s the U.S. consulate disaster in Benghazi, Libya. President Obama knew that our Libyan consulate could face an attack on 9/11. He did nothing. The consulate asked for beefed up security. Again, he did nothing.
Forty-eight hours before the attack, the State Department had credible information that U.S. missions might be targeted. Yet again, Obama did nothing.
Four brave Americans died, including our ambassador. With drones filming from above, Obama and his administration lackeys watched from the comfort of the White House Situation Room.
They watched Americans being murdered. They did nothing. I might expect that from the politicians, especially Obama and Hillary. But, how could someone like General Petraeus have watched and done nothing?
Oh yeah, Petraeus was blackmailable—he had been cheating on his wife. Despicable. Yet the media said nothing.
The Navy SEALs on the ground begged for permission to rescue our diplomats. They were ordered to “stand down.” Obama not only left them behind, he refused to help them. Why? Does any of this make sense?
If we had a real media, wouldn’t they at least ask a few questions? Apparently Obama was providing arms to the Libyan rebels, and some of the weapons ended up in the hands of Islamists. Were those rebels in partnership with Al Qaeda? Did the terrorists then use weapons we supplied to attack the U.S. Embassy and murder four Americans?
Did Obama order our Navy SEALs to “stand down” rather than save our own citizens, because he couldn’t risk the rescuers finding American weapons, supplied by Obama, in the hands of terrorists, thereby damaging his reelection campaign? Yet no one in the mainstream media seemed interested--then or now--in these questions.
Obama proceeded to cover it all up--just long enough to win the election. CIA Chief General Petraeus testified under oath (only after the election) that he had made it clear all along that Benghazi was a terrorist attack.
But Obama, Hillary Clinton, and U.N. Ambassador Sun Rice spent two weeks falsely blaming a YouTube video in a cover-up obviously intended to save Obama’s re-election. In football we call this a “Prevent Defense”: just stall long enough to run the clock out. This is Obama’s Watergate with one difference--four dead Americans. Still, the media says nothing.”
All the excerpts above were written many months ago. Yet until now, the national media never cared to delve any deeper. Why? To get Obama reelected. They played the exact same role the media plays in Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, or communist China.
Nixon faced impeachment for a third rate burglary…. But Obama is getting away with a real scandal and cover-up involving four dead heroes.
A terrible crime and massive, devious cover-up has occurred. May God have mercy on the people who let this happened.
But Congress should not.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member