Obama's Scandals Stem from His Lawless Presidency

[Gordon Ray Kissinger]

Last Friday, after the Associated Press learned about the Justice Department's sweeping seizure of its phone records, AP CEO Gary Pruitt said "there can be no possible justification" for the action.

No doubt that's true. But there also seems to be no possible justification for the many other scandals now swamping the Obama administration — from Benghazi, to the IRS scandal to the White House's attempt to shake down health companies for ObamaCare money.

Except that they all stem from a common root — President Obama's callous disregard for the rule of law.

When not grousing about "this big, messy, tough democracy," or joking about having the IRS audit groups that don't do his bidding, or talking about how "we're gonna punish our enemies" (meaning his political opponents), Obama has repeatedly and casually flouted legal roadblocks whenever they got in the way of his agenda.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/051413-656026-obama-scanda... 
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

_______________________________________________________

BENGHAZI SCANDAL AND COVER-UP

Americans Died.

Lied About Video Protesters.

Hid Loss of War on Terror.

Blocked Available Rescue.

Would Not Supply Security.

Pre-election Cover-up and "Sideshow."

 

BENGHAZI SCANDAL GETS DESERVED ATTENTION

5/15/2013 12:01:00 AM - Lisa Schiffren

 

The scandal surrounding the Obama Administration’s actions in Benghazi, Libya, 
last September 11, in which four Americans died at the hands of an al Qaeda 
mob– as the President and the Secretary of State declined to send any kind of 
military help – is finally getting the coverage it deserved from the start. The 
Obama Administration succeeded in suppressing interest and information during 
the fall election season, and continues to throw cold water on the 
investigation. Today the President, rather tauntingly, called the whole 
incident plus cover-up a “sideshow.”

That’s a scary claim. Because if a failure of action of this magnitude – which 
the Administration obviously thought was important enough to go to the trouble 
of covering up with many rounds of lies and interagency memos specifying what 
the nature of the lies should be – is just a sideshow, then clearly he thinks 
we are missing far greater failure elsewhere.

To be sure, the debacle in the center ring – the U.S. economy, with the damage 
about to hit from hurricane ObamaCare—is a bigger failure.

Still, Benghazi is worth understanding, if only because it occurred on the 
watch of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a woman who has held high office 
but accomplished little, yet who is considered “unbeatable” as a Democratic 
candidate for the Presidency in 2016.

For reasons not yet disclosed, US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens was sent to 
the outpost at Benghazi, for a meeting with the Turkish Ambassador. Stevens had 
been the US liaison to the Libyan “Rebels,” whom Hillary Clinton had been so 
insistent on supporting. “Liaison” in this sense has to do with supplying arms, 
a task one imagines the CIA, and not the State Department, helped with. And, 
indeed, there was an active CIA station near the consulate in Benghazi.

Stevens, obviously a man of real courage, had asked, several times over 
previous months, for more security at the Benghazi outpost. Because an outpost 
in the middle of ungoverned desert, peopled by Arabs with ties to Al Qaeda, 
probably isn’t a good place to hang out without taking all reasonable 
precautions. But Hillary Clinton’s State Department first ignored, then 
rejected the requests. But they let him go back…for a meeting on September 11, 
a date that apparently did not ring any bells. Why would it? Osama was dead; GM 
was alive; and Obama was making the US popular again.

At the time, we knew that the consulate had been attacked; Ambassador Stevens 
killed, and dragged through the streets. Others had escaped. And three other 
Americans, who had spent the seven hour ordeal phoning in for help, shooting at 
the assailants, and keeping them in sights for airpower to take out, had also died.

For reasons known best to themselves, President Obama and Secretary Clinton had 
made a very big deal of this attack being the result of an obscure video made 
by a Copt immigrant in California, despite the fact that Secretary Clinton knew 
for a fact that it was an al Qaeda terror attack. Though this seemed like a 
transparent lie all along, Obama and Clinton took it all around the world, to 
Pakistan, to the U.N., making a big moral case against “those who defame 
 Islam,” though no one had. We learned last week at the long awaited Benghazi 
hearings, that the second in command in Libya – Gregory Hicks, had told Mrs. 
Clinton himself, as it waged, that the attack was conducted by professional 
terrorists. Beth Jones, the career Ambassador who is the Acting Assistant 
Secretary of State for Near East, was told the same thing by the President of 
Libya, a fact she undoubtedly did not keep to herself.

We also learned that Mr. Hicks was among those stunned and horrified to learn 
that none of the available military assets within range of Libya were allowed 
to deploy there to attempt to save the Ambassador and the three other men. Four 
Special Ops officers on a tarmac in Tripoli, eager to help, were not allowed to 
go. Persistent orders to “stand down,” came from the White House, where 
Secretary Clinton and others were watching the events unfold in real time. 
President Obama, it seems, did not watch. He went to bed. Then he woke up and 
got on a plane to go to a fundraiser in Las Vegas. His priorities. Not the 
priorities of a Commander in Chief.

The Clintons are famous liars. In 2008, Major Democrat funders chose to back 
Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, because they recalled the 
 “exceptional” lying during the Clinton Administration. They needed to lie, of 
course, because neither Clinton thought the law applied to him, or her. They 
were above the rules. It doesn’t look good in a Democracy when you enrich 
yourself, or lie under oath or skirt the rules, so lie you must when you get caught.

How do you run for President if the image of a powerful woman, choosing to do 
nothing, to deploy no assets to attempt to save her staff – after failing to 
get them the security they asked for numerous times – is out there? It becomes 
much harder.

We learned, last week, that Hillary Clinton’s staff, starting with State 
Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, severely edited away the truth of what 
happened, in a round of emails with the CIA, which had presented a set of 
truthful, comprehensive talking points for release to the public. Ms. Nuland 
thought it would give fodder to Congress to complain about State, if they knew 
the truth. So she argued to remove all references to Islamic terrorists, al Qaeda, 
lax security, etc.. Jay Carney, White House spokesman, presided over a deep 
background meeting in which it became evident to some mainstream news 
people, that the White House had participated in redacting the truth out of 
these memos. One or two reporters began to understand that they ought to be 
very angry about the depth of deception perpetrated on them, and the fact that 
the Administration played them for the saps they are, knowing that their 
allegiance has been to the Administration, and not the news, or the truth.

We learned, unsurprisingly, that Hillary Clinton employs a person named Cheryl 
Mills, as her enforcer. Mills is the one credited with attempting to silence 
any potential whistleblower. That is, Ms. Mills attempted to shut up the three 
career Foreign Service Officers, of long and honorable service, who wanted to 
tell the truth about what had happened, and who were surprised and horrified at 
the lies that came out of the mouths of Clinton, Obama, the hapless Susan Rice, 
who had been in line to be Sec. State.

Apparently there are more men and women who knew the truth at the time, and 
have indicated interest in sharing it. This is the silver lining to the story: 
good and honorable men and women at the State Department who believe that the 
American people whom they serve, deserve the truth.

Less attractively, but also useful to recall – a leopard does not change her 
spots. Hillary Clinton remains just as willing to lie, defame and suppress the 
testimony of people who know what she did – or did not do – as always, for 
political ends, as ever. Barack Obama is cut of the same cloth.

Consequences in these matters are always distributed unevenly. Those on the 
frontlines, who seemed to have had great zeal in lying for their bosses – Ms. 
Nuland and Mr. Carney – will be the first casualties. You can’t have a 
spokesman who is known to have lied. They need to go soon. And then the buck 
shouldn’t stop there.
------------------------------

For free Politically Incorrect news ignored by the American news media,
send your friends' email addresses for REAL NEWS from [e-mail].

_______________________________________________________

BENGHAZI: WHERE ARE GEN. HAM AND ADM. GAOUETTE?

By J.B. Williams
May 16, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

Who knows the whole truth about why Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty along with State Department officials Chris Stevens and Sean Smith died in Benghazi 11 September 2012?

It’s now public knowledge that the ever evolving official administration stories on Benghazi are all bold faced lies. It’s clear that the four Americans who were brutally murdered in Benghazi did not have to die. What’s not clear yet, is who is responsible for these murders? Nothing the Obama administration has told the people about Benghazi is true… but who is responsible?

General Carter Ham and Admiral Charles M. Gaouette know the answer to this question. Where are Ham and Gaouette today? Why hasn’t Issa’s investigative committee called these decorated Military officers to testify before the committee investigating Benghazi?

We have known since 30 October 2012 that these two officers…

1. Were ordered to STAND DOWN in Benghazi
2. Ignored those orders
3. Were relieved of duty for refusing orders to STAND DOWN

We know from the unclassified cables between Benghazi and DC and the subsequent Executive Brief, that cables were firing in all directions in the hours before and during the Benghazi attack that ended in the brutal death of four Americans.

General Ham was head of AFRICOM and Commander of the 2011 US-NATO operation to depose Gadhafi in Libya. Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette was in command of the Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3), then deployed in Middle Eastern waters during the attack on Benghazi.

Both Ham and Gaouette reported receiving the same desperate cables for additional security and backup that Obama administration officials received and ignored from Benghazi. They did not ignore those desperate calls for help ringing out from the Benghazi installation on 11 September 2012.

No, both Ham and Gaouette attempted to launch ready response teams in the region capable of provided the much needed assistance during the seven hour long assault on Benghazi. Both were then relieved of command for their actions, described by the US Military as “allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.”

General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready to deploy to Benghazi. Then, General Ham received the order to stand down. His response was “screw it,” - he was going to help anyway.

Within minutes after issuing an order to deploy his ready response team, Ham’s second in command apprehended the General and told him that he was now relieved of his command. Ham knows who issued the order to STAND DOWN as well as the order to relieve him of his command at AFRICOM.

Adm. Gaouette had also received the startling requests for support as the attack unfolded in Benghazi. Like Ham, he readied a response from Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3). Gaouette was also ordered to STAND DOWN and like Ham, he decided to refuse those orders. Gaouette readied vital intelligence and communications operations for an extraction effort to be launched by Ham.

Stars and Stripes reported October 18, 2012 that General Ham is being replaced by Gen. David Rodriguez. They also reported on October 27, 2012 that Adm. Gaouette is being replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker. The Navy stated that it was “replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.”

What were the “inappropriate judgments” of these two decorated Military leaders? Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Navy's chief spokesman, declined to discuss the investigation.

What we know is that these two highly unusual acts to remove two highly decorated commanders is related to the 11 September 2012 strike on Benghazi. We also know that the congressional investigation has not yet called these valiant men in to give testimony.

We know that months’ worth of warnings and requests for additional security at Benghazi we ignored and denied by the Clinton run State Department and that someone gave the DoD order to STAND DOWN when American troops were in the region and ready to assist.

We know that the Obama administration manufactured a lie about some obscure anti-Islam youtube clip that had nothing whatsoever to do with the events of 11 September 2012 Benghazi. We know that the Obama administration is holding that filmmaker in prison today. We know that Benghazi survivors have been threatened and silenced.

But most of all, we know that Gen. Ham and Adm. Gaouette can provide very real answers to a laundry list of very important questions regarding the Benghazi attacks and Issa’s alleged investigation.

On 23 April 2013, Five House Committees investigating Benghazi issued a joint Interim Progress Report. In it, all five committees fail to ask the right questions and all five demonstrate a clear intent to keep the truth about Benghazi under wraps, though the report does confirm almost everything stated herein.

The attack in Benghazi of 11 September, 2012 is now almost eight months old and yet, the truth about that attack is still a distant fog sheltered by government officials engaged in blatant obstruction of justice, made possible by the help of a totally incompetent or complicit press.

If you want to know what really happened in Benghazi, demand that Issa’s congressional committee subpoena both Gen. Ham and Adm. Gaouette to testify before the HouseCommittee on Oversight & Government Reform.

And then, recall Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta once Ham and Gaouette have testified.

Someone is responsible for the murder of Americans in Benghazi and the lies that followed. That someone, in fact all who are involved in the Benghazi murder and the cover up, must be held fully accountable.

Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page.

 

---

JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American's greatest legal battles. Williams receives mail at: [e-mail]

Web site 1: www.PatriotsUnion.org

Web site 2: www.VeteranDefenders.org

E-Mail: [e-mail]