Tag Archives: cover-up

What does the Media have to say about that #Benghazi “Molehill” now…?

Cartoonist Eric Allie nailed this back in October of 2012:

Benghazi Molehill - Eric Allie

Just imagine how different things would be today if the Media took even a cursory interest in this story.

You know: like they did with Valerie Plame or Abu Ghraib. Or with Iran-Contra. Or even Justin Bieber.

Is that asking too much?

Sadly, apparently it is:

Continue reading

The Benghazi Talking Points, part 2: (VIDEO)

We normally don’t insist on stuff like this, but today’s the exception: if you didn’t read the previous post on these Benghazi talking points, you really, really need to.


Why? Basically, this finally answers the question that the Left USED TO ask: “WHAT did the White House know, and WHEN did they know it”?

It turns out that they knew quite a bit, they knew it immediately, …and they’ve been lying to our faces about it from Day One.

President Obama Speaks On The Death Of US Ambassador In Libya Christopher Stevens

This is an important revelation, and all credit goes to The Weekly Standard here. Their report includes far more detail than any video clip can summarize in four minutes, but Fox’s coverage below makes for a great follow-up to The Standard’s findings. 

Continue reading

White House talking points on Benghazi show what we suspected all along: They Lied…..

As I said just days ago:

“…And when (Obama) stands in front of the American people and offers the most amateurish of fibs, you know that it’s now not a matter of IF this is all going to come out, but merely WHEN.”

And here we go:

(From The Weekly Standard) – … The CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis prepared the first draft of a response to the congressman, which was distributed internally for comment at 11:15 a.m. on Friday, September 14 (Version 1 at right). This initial CIA draft included the assertion that the U.S. government “know[s] that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.”



The agency draft also raised the prospect that the facilities had been the subject of jihadist surveillance and offered a reminder that in the previous six months there had been “at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy.”

Continue reading

Obama’s worst lie about Benghazi yet: has NO idea that “anybody’s been blocked from testifying”

My suggestion to the President: if you’re gonna tell an obvious lie, practice in front of a mirror first, …’cause this one doesn’t begin to pass the ‘guffaw’ test:

OBAMA: “…I’m not familiar with this notion that anybody’s been blocked from testifying. So what I’ll do is find out what exactly you’re referring to…”

Okay, a quick poll: everyone who believes that the President of the United States has no idea what this reporter is talking about, say ‘Yay‘…

Continue reading

We’re STILL being lied to about Benghazi….


Over six months later, and there continues to be a virtual media black-out on the details concerning the events there on 9/11 of last year. Okay, not “black-out”…maybe a darkish brown-out, or a deep midnight blue-out. Whatever: the White House ain’t talkin’ about it, which is helped along by their best buds in the press rarely asking them questions.

I think I may know why….


About the only ones who are still asking questions are talk radio, a few folks from the GOP, Fox News and bloggers like yours truly. And so far, that’s netted us…not all that much.

Continue reading

David Gregory on Benghazi: “WHAT cover-up?”

bloodhoundOnce upon a time, journalists were professionally curious individuals who could sniff out a story like a bloodhound, would look for clues diligently, and wouldn’t take ‘no‘ for an answer.

Plus, the Fourth Estate instinctively knew when they were being fed a line of bull by the current Administration, regardless of which party was in the White House.

Wow, that seems like a very long time ago, indeed.

Continue reading

(VIDEO) – Networks somehow can’t find the time, so Fox News does their job for them

I’m glad that we only have to (God willing) put up with this guy in the White House for a little while longer, ’cause I don’t think I could handle another four years.

More and more, our Media sounds like a thousand cats-in-heat on your back porch: high-pitched, annoying and more than a little unsettling. They are systematically steamrolling any negative news for President Precious, while they continue to push that day’s narrative regardless of how provably false it may be.

Over the weekend, the best example of this came from George Stephanopoulos on his ABC Sunday show, as he asked this question during a discussion on Benghazi:

“Hasn’t the White House been relatively transparent?”

I saw that quote and thought, “Naaahh… can’t be”. So, I looked it up: the transcript is HERE.

He was serious. Stephanopoulos was defending Obama’s complete two-week sock-puppet show on Benghazi and the video by saying…that the Administration had been “relatively transparent”. George wasn’t just asking it rhetorically; he wasn’t trying to play Devil’s Advocate to make a point.

I repeat: He. Was. Serious.

Given all of the facts which have already come to light on Benghazi, I find that question stunning. Are we to believe that he has simply taken the White House’s newest claims, which fly directly in the face of ALL the facts, and decided,  “yeah, that sounds about right”?

I’ve seen more intellectual curiosity from my neighbor’s Yorkshire Terrier.

This is why I find it so laughable that Fox News is reviled by the Left for the high crime & misdemeanor of not being another outpost of DNC “Newspeak”. It’s like controlling almost the entire Monopoly board, and being miffed that you can’t get your mitts on Baltic Avenue, too.

Speaking of Newspeak, I was flipping through my copy of ‘1984‘ the other day, and I read a term which I’d forgotten. See if this parallels Mr. Stephanopoulos’s example above:

blackwhite– The ability to accept whatever “truth” the party puts out, no matter how absurd it may be. Orwell described it as “…loyal willingness to say black is white when party discipline demands this. It also means the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know black is white, and forget that one has ever believed the contrary.”

I’d say that’s fairly accurate.

So, in the interest of further infuriating the Fox News haters, please allow me to share with you a special that was on over the weekend, hosted by Fox’s Bret Baier. It covers the entire Benghazi travesty and eventual charade, with tons of back-story details, most of which I’d not heard or seen yet.

It is troubling; it’s frightening; …and it’s the truth.

(**Thanks to AceOfSpadesHQ for the heads-up on this**)


The entire show is 41 minutes, but at least watch the first 10. You haven’t seen any of this anywhere else, I assure you.

Final question: if lil’ old Fox News can find this info, and do such a thorough job providing context, history, and multitudinous facts surrounding a terrorist attack which cost us 4 American lives and has emboldened our enemies, …why haven’t the bigger, better funded, network news organizations been able to do so?

Of course, you already know the answer to that one.

(VIDEO) Obama fails to answer Question on if Hillary is to Blame for Benghazi

Let’s hear it for President Barack “The-buck-stops-somewhere-else” Obama, everybody!!


Obviously, Obama didn’t hear the question. If he had, I’m sure President Transparency would have spun around and given a complete & thoughtful answer.

‘Cause he’s courageous like that.

I’m just guessin’ here, but I’d think that this just MAY pop up in tonight’s debate. Call me crazy…

(**Thanks to AceOfSpadesHQ and Daily Caller for the video).