Why are the Dems fighting SO hard to discredit the House committee investigating Benghazi?
For 20 months now there's been a steady drumbeat by Leftists, Democrats, socialists, "progressives" and other moonbats to call anyone interested in learning the truth about Benghazi crazy, "delusional" and so on. And now that the House has decided to try again, that screaming has grown even louder.
What secret have the Dems been trying so hard to conceal? If it were simply Hillary's refusal to agree to increase security after our ambassador requested it, there were far easier ways to invent cover: "She never saw the request" comes to mind. But the efforts of Team Obama were a full-court press, an elaborate cover story that wouldn't have been needed to get the media to ignore garden-variety incompetence.
Some analysts have speculated that the whole attack was an elaborate misdirection, in which our Muslim-friendly ambassador would ostensibly be "kidnapped" and then exchanged for a high-level U.S. prisoner, but I disagree. Rather, I think Team Obama was either selling or giving sophisticated weapons (probably including the justly-feared shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles) to some al-Qaeda offshoot, with a deal having been made that the Libyan branch would transport them to Syria for the Syrian rebels to use against Assad.
But even that doesn't explain all the lies and secrecy. After all, by now virtually all American voters are accustomed to the idea that Emperor Barack can unilaterally decide to break any law he wants to, and no one will try to call him to account, so one wonders why they didn't simply have the emperor simply say "I issued a secret executive order--so secret my counsel advised me not to commit it to writing--directing the transfer of these weapons. After all, innocent children in Syria are suffering because of the war there.
"Last year I tried everything possible to get congress to approve direct military action to help these poor Syrian children. Unfortunately obstructionist Republican members blocked it [a lie but no one will correct him] so I decided to take those actions the Constitution allows a president to take unilaterally. So the unfortunate demonstration in Benghazi and the tragic, accidental death of Ambassador Stevens is really entirely the Republicans' fault!" And with the help of the Lying Media all the Low-Info voters would buy it.
So why didn't Team Obama take this easy out?
One thing's sure: There's something at the heart of this that, if it gets out, will *gravely* damage the Democrats. It's why they're fighting so hard to keep the lid on.
What secret have the Dems been trying so hard to conceal? If it were simply Hillary's refusal to agree to increase security after our ambassador requested it, there were far easier ways to invent cover: "She never saw the request" comes to mind. But the efforts of Team Obama were a full-court press, an elaborate cover story that wouldn't have been needed to get the media to ignore garden-variety incompetence.
Some analysts have speculated that the whole attack was an elaborate misdirection, in which our Muslim-friendly ambassador would ostensibly be "kidnapped" and then exchanged for a high-level U.S. prisoner, but I disagree. Rather, I think Team Obama was either selling or giving sophisticated weapons (probably including the justly-feared shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles) to some al-Qaeda offshoot, with a deal having been made that the Libyan branch would transport them to Syria for the Syrian rebels to use against Assad.
But even that doesn't explain all the lies and secrecy. After all, by now virtually all American voters are accustomed to the idea that Emperor Barack can unilaterally decide to break any law he wants to, and no one will try to call him to account, so one wonders why they didn't simply have the emperor simply say "I issued a secret executive order--so secret my counsel advised me not to commit it to writing--directing the transfer of these weapons. After all, innocent children in Syria are suffering because of the war there.
"Last year I tried everything possible to get congress to approve direct military action to help these poor Syrian children. Unfortunately obstructionist Republican members blocked it [a lie but no one will correct him] so I decided to take those actions the Constitution allows a president to take unilaterally. So the unfortunate demonstration in Benghazi and the tragic, accidental death of Ambassador Stevens is really entirely the Republicans' fault!" And with the help of the Lying Media all the Low-Info voters would buy it.
So why didn't Team Obama take this easy out?
One thing's sure: There's something at the heart of this that, if it gets out, will *gravely* damage the Democrats. It's why they're fighting so hard to keep the lid on.
posted by SF at
6:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home