Sunday, May 18, 2014

Gowdy: Why Does the Media Not Care About Benghazi?

REP. TREY GOWDY (R-SC): "We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act in Benghazi, and make no mistake, justice will be done." That was the president of the United States over a year ago. >

"We're investigating exactly what happened, but my biggest priority now is bringing those folks to justice." That was the president of the United States over a year ago. No one has been arrested. No one has been prosecuted. No one has been brought to justice. We don't even have access to the witnesses.

You in the media were good enough for my 16 years as a prosecutor not to tell me how to do my job, and so far in Congress, y'all have been good enough not to tell me how to do my job. I'm not telling you how to do your job. But I'm going to ask you some questions, and if you can't answer these questions, then I'll leave you to draw whatever conclusion you want to draw about whether or not the media has provided sufficient oversight.>

Can you tell me why Chris Stevens was in Benghazi the night that he was killed? Do you know? Does it bother you whether or not you know why Chris Stevens was in Benghazi? Do you know why we were the last flag flying in Benghazi after the British had left and the Red Cross had been bombed? Do you know why requests for additional security were denied? Do you know why an ambassador asking for more security days and weeks before he was murdered and those requests went unheeded? Do you know the answer to why those requests went unheeded?

Do you know why no assets were deployed during the siege? And I've heard the explanation -- which defies logic, frankly -- that we couldn't have gotten there in time, but you know, they didn't know when it was going to end. So how can you possibly cite that as an excuse? Do you know whether the president called any of our allies and said, "Can you help? We have men under attack." Can you answer that?

Do any of you know why Susan Rice was picked? The secretary of state did not go. She says she doesn't like Sunday talk shows. That's the only media venue she does not like, if that's true. Why was Susan Rice on the five Sunday talk shows? Do you know the origin of this mythology that it was spawned as a spontaneous reaction to a video? Do you know where that started? Do you know how we got from no evidence of that to that being the official position of the administration?>

In conclusion, Congress is supposed to provide oversight, the voters are supposed to provide oversight, and you are supposed to provide oversight. That's why you have special liberties, and that's why you have special protections. I am not surprised that the president of the United States called this a phony scandal. I'm not surprised Secretary Clinton asked, "What difference does it make?" I'm not even surprised that Jay Carney said Benghazi happened a long time ago. I'm just surprised at how many people bought it.>

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

1 comment:

  1. In response to he above crap by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC):
    No one ordered Ambassador Chris Stevens to go to Benghazi. All Ambassador have free will to go anywhere within the country they are assigned too. Amb. Stevens did have his body guard with him. He was aware of the potential danger in the country he was assigned to. It was his decision to go there. Unfortunately he is dead so we can't ask him WHY he went.

    The Republican Party cut security moneys to Embassies. It is the responsibility of the host country to supply security outside the Embassy. Question: Why aren't we looking at this failure of the host country protecting our Embassies/Missions?

    In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials stated.

    The White House and Secretary of State were not aware of the attacks two hours after it started. Amb. Stevens was dead in the first 90 min. of the attack.

    The military did send a military response. No one told the military to not go. The nearest base was in Italy. It took 4 hours just to gather up the necessary personnel. 4 hours to the nearest Libya airport. There was a 3 hour delay, caused by the Libyan military. It was an additional 1 hour to the the Benghazi compound. It took 12 hours for the military to get their, buy this time it was all over.

    Right-Wing-Nuts love to take things out of context, especially when it's Hillary Clinton. She stated: “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

    As for the "TALKING POINTS." Who cares? It all came out within 1 week of the attack. As for Presidents trying to keep a campaign going, ask Ronald Regan about his October surprise. It goes on in all presidential campaigns.

    In Conclusion, there have been 4 Congressional hearings over this matter. An additional 10 different sub committees from different organizations. Darrel Issa took 16 months looking into this and has found no connection between the White House and Secretary of State, causing or impeding the attack or stopping any response.