Seattle's Socialist Mayor Has One Word for High-Earners Fleeing the City
The Democrats' Abortion Lies Have Caused Widespread Damage
Humans. Americans. Let Everyone Be Treated Equally.
Detransitioner Asks IBM Shareholders to Stop Funding Trans Surgeries for Minors
Future GOP Presidential Nominees Must Endure Severe Storms
Elizabeth Warren Killed Spirit Airlines and Now She’s Complaining About It
California Man Sentenced to 12 Years for $59M COVID Unemployment Fraud Scheme
This Oklahoma Man Who Threatened to Kill ICE Agents Is Going to Face...
Spirit Airlines Just Shut Down. Here's Trump's Relief Plan for Air Travel.
You Are on Your Own in America's Progressive Cities
Biden’s Ill-Advised Rule Against Critical Minerals Mining Is Finally Gone
Socialist Cognitive Dissonance: Our Revolution Endorses Billionaire Tom Steyer for Califor...
The Social Media Age Is Over, but America Can Still Lead on Tech
Has Iran’s Ceasefire Become a Green Light for Repression?
Desperate Families Here and Abroad Show They Need Government Support, Not Resistance
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