GOP Rep Teased More Debauchery Involving Eric Swalwell Was Coming Before He Resigned
It’s Hard Not to Laugh at the Downfall of Eric Swalwell
Big Beautiful Tax Returns Are Keeping Consumers Afloat
Kash Patel and Sen. David McCormick Team Up to Fight Fentanyl in Pennsylvania
Major US Companies Still Offer to Cover Trans Drugs, Surgeries to Minors Despite...
Democrats Again Attack Religion
Revolution for Thee but Not for Me
The App Store Accountability Act Gets the Problem—and the Policy—Wrong
The Dialysis Industry Is Putting Profits Over Patients
Us and Them
Ted Cruz Is Right to Put the FTC Back Under the Microscope
Putin's War: A Catastrophic Miscalculation That Weakened Russia and Strengthened the West
Zoomers Put Their Own Stamp on Tech-Enabled Rudeness
Exclusive: Texas GOP Official Says Anti-Trump Candidate Tried to Conceal Background of Dem...
California Democrats Just Revealed Their New Scheme to Protect Fraudsters
Tipsheet

Whistleblower: No, Amb. Stevens Is Not Responsible For Benghazi

Whistleblower: No, Amb. Stevens Is Not Responsible For Benghazi

Gregory Hicks is a whistleblower who was bullied by the Obama administration and effectively punished when he tried to tell the truth about what happened on-the-ground in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12. He was there that day working as a diplomat for the State Department, and later testified he knew from the beginning terrorists were responsible for the attack, and thus “immediately” informed his superiors. The Senate Select Committee findings last week, however, concluded that the attacks on the U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi were preventable. But where does ultimate responsibility lie? The answer is obvious: with the current administration, which denied Amb. Stevens’ “repeated requests” for more security and protections on the ground. Nonetheless, there’s been speculation in certain quarters that Amb. Christopher Stevens himself -- who was the first ambassador to lose his life in service to his country since 1979 -- was at least partially responsible for the raid. Could he have "done more" to stop it? Here’s Piers Morgan asking John McCain that very question last week:

Advertisement

Now Hicks is taking a stand, writing at the WSJ that it’s high time to absolve the ambassador of any wrongdoing:

Last week the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence issued its report on the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya. The report concluded that the attack, which resulted in the murder of four Americans, was "preventable." Some have been suggesting that the blame for this tragedy lies at least partly with Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in the attack. This is untrue: The blame lies entirely with Washington.

You can read the entire op-ed here. But here’s what matters:

To sum up: Chris Stevens was not responsible for the reduction in security personnel. His requests for additional security were denied or ignored. Officials at the State and Defense Departments in Washington made the decisions that resulted in reduced security. Sen. Lindsey Graham stated on the Senate floor last week that Chris "was in Benghazi because that is where he was supposed to be doing what America wanted him to do: Try to hold Libya together." He added, "Quit blaming the dead guy."

Advertisement

Related:

BENGHAZI

Yes, the State Department has obviously “screwed up.” But who’s taking responsibility? Crickets.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement