The Fake Benghazi Scandal

The witnesses are being forced into a witness-protection program.

I don’t think they’re the ones being protected, though.

[Update a while later]

Will David Ubben blow the roof off the “phony” scandal?

Ubben was stuck on that rooftop for 20 hours before help finally arrived. He can tell us and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “what difference does it make”that help was not sent — at least two American lives. Ubben sustained injuries at Benghazi so severe he’s still being treated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Rep. Darrel Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has tried to interview Ubben as part of its Benghazi scandal investigation, but the State Department has not allowed the meeting, according to Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

“While initially they said they would be helpful, pretty quickly they turned that off,” Chaffetz reported. “And I had a meeting scheduled to go visit this … young man and then I was denied.” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki denies Chaffetz’s claim, saying State has been fully cooperative.

Yeah, right.

[Update a while later]

“The CIA has been subjecting operatives to monthly polygraph tests in an attempt to suppress details of a US arms smuggling operation in Benghazi that was ongoing when its ambassador was killed by a mob in the city last year.”

Of course they have. Can’t let the truth get out. Might turn a “phony” scandal into a real one.

[Update a couple minutes later]

Gee, maybe this is worth investigating after all.

To be clear, it isn’t at all certain that the CIA was secretly funneling Libyan weapons to Syria, long before Congress “lifted its hurdles” on arming Syrian rebels. But if CNN’s report is correct, the CIA is at minimum trying to hide something huge from Congress, something that CIA agents might otherwise want to reveal — itself a reason for Congress to press hard for information. And if speculation about moving weapons is grounded in anything substantive, that would be an additional reason to investigate what the CIA is doing in Libya. Dozens of CIA agents were apparently on the ground in Benghazi, Libya last September.

And yes, it would be nice to know why, and what they were doing.

14 thoughts on “The Fake Benghazi Scandal”

  1. The CIA concealing the identity of CIA operatives is now considered a scandal?

    It’s been known for a while that most of the US personnel in Benghazi were working for the CIA, and that the consular annex was a CIA facility. But the GOP has only been interested in the story as a White House/State Department screw up, so they’ve steered clear of the heart of the story.

    1. Steered clear of the heart of the story?

      That arms were sold to Iran to free hostages and raise money to fund a Central American insurgency in violation of the will of Congress . . . er, I mean, that arms were collected in Libya to supply an insurgency against an Iranian ally in violation of the will of Congress . . .

    2. Congress has taken testimony from people with protected identity for decades. There are legitimate reasons to do so. This time, it appears the CIA (and ostensibly Obama) is refusing to allow them to testify under any circumstances. Anyone whose nose isn’t firmly implanted up Obama’s backside has to wonder what they have to hide.

    3. The CIA concealing from Congress the identity of CIA operatives is now considered a scandal?

      Well, I consider it a scandal even if you don’t.

      1. I think there should be more Congressional oversight of the CIA (and NSA, and Pentagon), but I don’t see the need to let any member of Congress know the identity of any CIA operative. We have Congressional oversight committees for this sort of thing; if they feel that the CIA is obstructing their work they’re being pretty quiet about it.

    4. Jim,
      Please tell us what you believe the “heart of the story” is, and why the GOP may be steering clear of it. Thank you in advance.

      BlueMoon

      1. The heart of the story is that the CIA operation in Benghazi went bad. They didn’t anticipate the attack. The local militia that they vetted for consular security melted away when the attack came. The attack itself may well have been directed at the CIA presence, with the State Dept. employees caught in the crossfire.

        The GOP steers away from talking about the CIA role because the CIA was run by a GOP hero, and failed CIA covert operations are a distraction from their preferred narrative, which instead focuses on Hillary Clinton and the State Department.

        1. The heart of the story is that the CIA operation in Benghazi went bad.

          A bit earlier you were talking about this as a “faux” scandal. Looks like a scandal isn’t real to you until there’s someone else to blame.

          And why is it so hard for the administration to find and present witnesses to the Benghazi attacks? I think there’s a simple explanation, namely, that the administration is protecting itself in an illegal manner from embarrassing revelations.

        2. So other than Bush deference to the advice of Petraeus, when he was the head of Centcom and thus operations in Afghanistan; what makes Petraeus a GOP Hero?

          His service as head of CIA under Obama?

          His resignation once news came out of his extra-marital affair?

          Democrats would love for it to be Petraeus, because he already resigned and the scandal could follow its scapegoat.

  2. Jim: “Of course Obama kept CIA agents from speaking to investigators. Obama wants a full investigation of what happened to prevent these systematic errors from happening again.”

    or

    Jim: “The Republicans have been ignoring the CIA, even though they wrote the talking points. The CIA has nothing to do with the Obama administration. They are an independant organization and don’t take orders from the President.”

  3. IIRC, the father of one of the guys killed said his son told him that he was there tracking down missiles and buying them from the militias.

    I am skeptical about gun running to Syria though. It sure would be nice if investigators could actually speak to the survivors.

    1. IIRC, the father of one of the guys killed said his son told him that he was there tracking down missiles and buying them from the militias.

      That doesn’t seem like something for which there would be a need to keep quiet.

  4. “So, we’re giving guided missiles to anti-American, anti-Western terrorists?”

    “No! We’re providing arms, training, and guidance to indigenous (and undocumented immigrant!) multi-cultural forces who represented a diverse, pluralistic range of Islamic politico/religious activist cultural backgrounds, helping these authentic voices to self-actualize and dis-establish and reject the false narratives being presented by the British neo-colonial presence in Benghazi, itself a relic of the white oppressor patriarchy and physically manifested by the psychological equivalent of a Victorian era colonial English embassy.”

Comments are closed.