Many times the media acts as if an official or politician has absolute infallible knowledge. And they act as if everything is a deliberate attempt to deceive the American people. On the other hand, many give these liars a pass. But as has been the case with Hillary Clinton’s emails; there is little hope of saving face. Today even more and worse news has surfaced.
A longtime Clinton confidant reportedly advised then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two days after the 2012 Benghazi terror attack that an Al Qaeda-tied group had planned the deadly assault and used a protest as cover — but despite this warning, Clinton’s U.N. ambassador went on to publicly claim the attack was “spontaneous.”
As I reported, it has surfaced that Clinton was receiving advice from Blumenthal. She continued to pay the man under the table because of his conflict of interest in the region. And she used her family foundation to hide the fact.
The New York Times is now reporting
The day after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on American outposts in Benghazi that killed Mr. Stevens and three other Americans, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a memo with his intelligence about what had occurred. The memo said the attacks were by “demonstrators” who “were inspired by what many devout Libyan viewed as a sacrilegious internet video on the prophet Mohammed originating in America.” Mrs. Clinton forwarded the memo to Mr. Sullivan, saying “More info.” (Pages 193-195)
Now this follows the official story given both by the White House and the State Department. And if the story stopped here, it might disturb us but nothing we would call shady. But, unfortunately, this is not the end. The question that must be asked as we look at this going forward, what did Obama know and when?
The NYT continues
The next day, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a more thorough account of what had occurred. Citing “sensitive sources” in Libya, the memo provided extensive detail about the episode, saying that the siege had been set off by members of Ansar al-Shariah, the Libyan terrorist group. Those militants had ties to Al Qaeda, had planned the attacks for a month and had used a nearby protest as cover for the siege, the memo said. “We should get this around asap” Mrs. Clinton said in an email to Mr. Sullivan. “Will do,” he responded.
Now as Fox points out, the story coming from the State Department does not change after Sept. 13th.
Yet, despite this guidance, then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice would go on several television programs Sept. 16 to claim the attacks were “spontaneous,” and not premeditated, and link them to protests over the anti-Islam video.
Why would the State Department want to blame this on an American? The simplest excuse is that this does not fit the story line. Not just the story line that was told, but the one the progressive Democrats wanted told. They wanted it to be the arrogant American Christian who picked on the poor Muslims and incited them to violence. They want peace, but they just could not take the ridicule anymore and had to act.
How much more of this will we have to swallow before we begin to demand that the Attorney General does something?