by: the Common Constitutionalist
Let’s not lose focus on the Benghazigate scandal.
To recap – Benghazi is not a singular event. It’s not just about the death of the ambassador and three others. It’s not just about why help was not sent or even where Obama was all that time.
Although these are important, the real scandal is what was going on in Benghazi and why was ambassador Stevens there in the first place and with very little security?
I believe, as do others smarter than me, that Stevens was running guns from Libya, through Turkey and to the “Rebels” in Syria. Others and I have contended this from the beginning. To clarify, most of the “Rebels” have turned out to be Al Qaeda or affiliated terrorist groups.
I also reported early on that we “conspiracy theorists” thought that Stevens was trying to possibly retrieve some of the weapons through Benghazi and Al Qaeda or a subgroup set him up and took him out.
Now we learn from an exclusive PJ Media report by Roger Simon that some very damning evidence may be revealed soon.
Keep in mind that the following reports are not official and may not turn out to be completely accurate.
It appears as if more whistleblowers may come forward to enlighten us further regarding the real scandal – why Stevens was in Benghazi. Benghazi as you may or may not know, was not a good place to just hang around, but evidently a good place to procure weapons.
It is being said that these whistleblowers will say that Stevens was in Benghazi to buyback Stinger missiles from Al Qaeda. Stinger missiles that are capable of downing military or civilian aircraft. Not the weapons you want in the hands of terrorists.
If reports are correct, they will also claim that the gunrunning was not being done through the CIA, but Hillary Clinton’s State Department.
It will be said the CIA did not want to provide these weapons to the terrorists but apparently Hillary Clinton personally authorized it.
So if Hillary new all about this operation guess who else had to have known? You got it, the King himself.
The whistleblowers apparently contend that the CIA director David Petraeus’ affair was leaked to silence him.
There are also reports that Gen. Carter Ham, head of AFRICOM (U.S. Africa command) had “special ops” teams that could have been in Benghazi in very short order. The claim is that he was ordered by the White House not to send them. When he decided to disobey the order, it is reported that his second in command was ordered by the White House to threaten him with removal.
You may ask if these whistleblowers will soon come forward, why speak to PJ media ahead of any possible public testimony?
Is it possible that they fear serious retribution ahead of the testimony? Might some tragedy befall them prior to it? Could be.
Frankly, the more we learn of this thuggish administration, anything is possible.
And that brings us back to our dear president who was apparently AWOL throughout this whole ordeal.
Remember, this happened on September 11, before the presidential election. One would think it important to show a sitting president as a strong and involved Commander-in-Chief.
Yet the then Sec-Def, Leon Panetta, publicly stated that he had but one meeting with Obama and didn’t see or hear from him again. Curious? Not really.
Even if just some of these assertions are true, Obama must be seen to be as far away from this thing as possible. He could not be in the situation room. He could in no way be seen to have his fingerprints on this. He had to be insulated. But if Hillary knew, he knew.
It is my belief that these four men were sacrificed to cover-up the gunrunning and buyback operations. My guess is that there was evidence at that location that could be discovered and when the “op” went bad, they pulled the plug and abandoned the SEALs and the ambassador.
For the good of the country, I sure hope we’re wrong.