by: the Common Constitutionalist
Many of us truth seekers are hoping that there will be more to come regarding Benghazigate.
Well today (May 9) I heard that the Benghazi hearings would in fact go on. We have heard that attorney Joe diGenova has more witnesses to bring forward.
diGenova confirmed to Jay Severin that they have more witnesses that have come to him to testify. There could be bombshells. My guess is that more people are coming forward out of frustration and a want and need to get the truth out.
It is being said that these witnesses were on the ground in Benghazi, Libya. They were in the fight.
Now, the Obama administration has already publicly announced that witnesses and whistleblowers can feel safe from retribution. In other words, they will not be pursued or punished by the White House if they speak out.
If you were one of the whistleblowers, would you take Obama at his word? Would you believe him to be a man of his word? umm…Nope.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D. –Maryland) publicly proclaimed that he would protect any witnesses from retribution. The question is, would he? If he were to receive heat from his own party, would he pack up and abandon the whistleblowers? Umm…yep.
I have another question. Actually I have a few more questions. If things start to heat up for Obama and they start to point to him as the epicenter of a cover up, he will lob some missiles into Syria to bump the Benghazi hearing off the front page (assuming it ever makes it there)? Is there an aspirin factory in Syrian? (think Bill Clinton)
Another question is whether Darrell Issa will use the power bestowed upon him as chairman of the congressional committee heading up the Benghazi gate hearings?
It has not been confirmed that he will use his subpoena power to drag in those who would not come willingly.
So what if he does subpoena Susan Rice? What about Leon Panetta? And how about the big kahuna, Hillary Clinton? Would he dare to order them to testify? Yeah he would.
Would any or all even show up? And what happens if they didn’t show? What is supposed to happen, is that the Attorney General would threaten prosecution if they don’t show.
Now given who the Attorney General is, do we really think that will occur? Do we honestly think the Fast and Furious criminal Eric Holder would think of pursuing Hillary or Panetta? Notice I left someone out.
Despite Barack’s fondness for Susan Rice, he would hang her out to dry in second. Not that it ever will, but if things actually started to get a little close to Obama, I could see Susan Rice being the fall-gal. The administration would let the cover up be pinned on her if need be, just as the Bush administration allowed Scooter Libby to be hung out to dry.
He would more than likely protect Leon Panetta and certainly protect Hillary at any cost.
Now, what if King Barack wants to spare everyone in his inner circle from testifying at all? Well that’s simple. It’s called executive privilege and Obama won’t give a rip who cries foul.
A lot of questions and very few answers so far.
The director of The Central Intelligence told Joe diGenova that CIA operatives that were actually on seen would not pursued. The operators had previously been told that if they testified, they would NEVER receive another contract job…period!
diGenova said that he was going to test the metal of the CIA Chief. He claims he will present the witnesses to the CIA Chief and remind the Chief of his promise to protect them from retribution.
This is going to get interesting.