Btw: Glenn Beck's network was all over the Benghazi fiasco with the truth. Of course he was ignored for the most part because he's supposedly a kook. This travesty was compounded by the conspiracy of the MSM in ignoring searching for the truth long enough for no consequence to come to those primarily responsible.
In classical politico form, "a problem postponed is a problem solved". If they can get our minds off of Benghazi long enough, we'll return our focus to Dancing With The Stars.... which is quite the shame. I'd like to see those negligently responsible to pay in spades! Americans died, for Christsake! Isn't a primary function of our government to protect the life of American citizens AS BEST THEY CAN??
I don't know about the gun running conspiracy theory, but I suspect what actually happened is worse. The embassy gets hit. Obama and Clinton are notified. Their first thought. Their very first thought. How does this impact me personally? Both being very astute professional politicians, they immediately go into damage control. They put layers of people between them and the incident. Obama says, let me know what's up in the morning. Really? Clinton does the same. Other people make the decisions. Both Clinton and Obama now have plausible deniability. If something went wrong, they were not in the room when it happened. They got bad intel. They were told it was only a demonstration. That's their defense. WTF? Is this leadership? Are these the type people you want running the country? People who will stand by and watch people die just to protect their own careers? So I ask. Is gun running so bad compared to this type of leadership? Is anything as bad as your government standing by while Americans die and do nothing because it's the politically smart thing to do? And where is the watch dog media? The defenders of the truth. The ones who are supposed to try and keep these bastards honest. They, THEY have decided to choose a side and defend it. Facts and truth be damned. Friends, we are not in danger of the country being lost. It is lost!
I had the same question at the time. Romney went from super aggressive to changing the subject. Someone in the CIA got to him and said this will be bad for the country if it comes out. That's the only explanation that makes any sense. What's coming out now makes the military look really bad. They claimed there was nothing they could do. Seriously? They had a small contingent of SpecOps troops in Tripoli and ordered them not to go to Benghazi. They claimed they couldn't get jets from Aviano over the Med to Benghazi. Who is buying that? What is Aviano? An Air Force museum? Or a fighter base? So in the past couple of weeks we've learned the FBI is totally incompetent. We've know for years to CIA was incompetent. Now we find that we can't even rely on the military.
So other than threatening his life, why would Romney cave to this information? CIA tells him this will make the country look bad. Why should Romney give a shit? If it's bad, it's on Obama, not Romney. All the better for his campaign to show how screwed up we've become under Obama leadership. I can't believe Romney backs off, unless he's told...accidents happen.
I disagree that this was some conspiracy and was instead this notion that if the campaign took the 'high road' that people would notice and respect that. I disagree and like most of us, I did at the time. He thought he had the lead and was trying to coast to a victory. I also think the reps do care at least insofar that the whole ordeal can be used against obama. While it's great that we will finally be hearing from the people who were there, the only way anyone is gonna give a shit is if evidence surfaces that obama or clinton or both knew it was terrorism for a fact before they threw rice to the wolves. Obama definitely KNEW by the time he went to the UN.. where he still alluded to the film, and said nothing of muslim jihadis. Obvious lie and the masses still didn't care. And for all the obama bashing that fox news does, they really didn't harp on this point.
That's totally the way I saw it at the time. It seemed to me after Crowley aided Obama and Romney didn't bring up Benghazi Romney's lead evaporated but he didn't see it. Or he wasn't wanting to be aggressive again. And them Sandy came along and his fate was sealed. I still think Benghazi can be crippling for Hillary and ruin a 2016 run and there is a very slim chance something will come out that could get Obama impeached. Most likely, other than the damage to Hillary, Obama will come out of this just weakened further.
That might explain why romney pussed out but every damn republican in both houses should have been on this like stink on a fishery. there's no excuse for it except incompetence or willful ignorance. neither is acceptable
Military at the ready told to stand down. Who gave that order and why wasn't Obama or Clinton involved if it is true that they actually weren't? The entire region is a hot bed of terrorist violence, a country has just fallen apart and is in chaos, an embassy in that country is under siege, and the two people most needed to make decisions are no where to be found????? WASHINGTON (AP) â Four members of Army special forces ready to head to Benghazi, Libya, after the deadly assault on the American diplomatic mission had ended were told not to go, according to a former top diplomat. Gregory Hicks also argued in an interview with Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that if the U.S. military had flown aircraft over the Benghazi facility after it came under siege it might have prevented the second attack on the CIA annex that killed two CIA security officers. Excerpts of the interview with the former deputy chief in Libya were released Monday in advance of Hicks' testimony on Wednesday before the panel.