Corruption Starts At The Top

To say that the Benghazi consulate attack on September 11, 2012, has blossomed into a full-blown scandal for Dear Leader Barack Obama and for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be an understatement.  Much of the media attention has, rightly so, focused upon the e-mails that contradict statements by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about talking points revisions.  The e-mails show that talking points alterations were instigated by top officials in the Obama administration, as well as from the State Department.

Those (altered) talking points were marched out on Sunday, September 16, 2012, by (Obama crony) UN Ambassador Susan Rice to try to cover up what actually transpired, and to try to justify in-actions by Obama and Clinton.  The fact that those talking points were subsequently proven demonstrably false has led to the current scandal situation.

What did transpire on that infamous night?  Well, we know for certain that four American citizens died.  And we know that Obama met with Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey at a 5 P.M. meeting, while the attack was ongoing.  Obama was informed about the attack at that time, and (according to Panetta) had no further discussions with them that night.

But, while the Americans in Benghazi were dying, it seems that Obama talked to Clinton that night.  At approximately 10 P.M., fully six hours after the attack started, Obama called Clinton.  Carney said:

"He [Obama] was in regular communication with his national security team directly, through them, and spoke with the secretary of state at approximately 10 p.m. He called her to get an update on the situation."   [emphasis mine]

And, according to Dan Pfeiffer (another Obama crony):

"He [Obama] was kept - he was in constant touch that night with his national security team and kept up to date with the events as they were happening."
[and, when asked if Obama was in the Situation Room]
"I don't know what room he [Obama] was in that night. That's a largely irrelevant fact."

We know that Obama got his beauty sleep that night (difficult to be kept up to date while sleeping), then left the next morning for a fund-raiser in Las Vegas, NV.  He left the situation to be dealt with by subordinates.

We have a pretty clear picture of what went on with Obama and Clinton that night. So, why all the lies?  Why did Obama and Clinton not tell the truth?  Why did they immediately instigate a cover-up?  Well, consider the sources.

All organizations are run from the top.  That is true for businesses, crime families, and government administrations.  Lying, fraud, and attempts to mislead the public come from the top, not mid-level officials.  Mid-level officials in the Obama administration and the State Department carry out superiors' orders, rather than make them.  Mid-level officials did not create any talking points, nor did they alter them.  The mid-level officials were not running for reelection or trying to position for a 2016 election, as Obama and Clinton were.  And, the Benghazi attack revealed just what a disaster Obama's and Clinton's foreign policies, particularly with respect to the Arab world, have been.

One little "fact" that has not been loudly trumpeted, even by the conservative press, is that while the attack was ongoing, Obama, after consulting with Clinton, was apparently concocting the "video caused the attack" narrative.  He did this while no military efforts were made to rescue the Americans, and while the military people who wanted to rescue them were being told to stand down.

The scandal is NOT about Obama's and Clinton's in-actions - we've come to expect that from them.  It's about the talking points, their creation and revisions, and their intended purpose - Obama's and Clinton's lying, fraud, and trying to mislead the American public.  All this mendacity from an administration that promised an unprecedented level of openness and transparency in government.

The really sad facts are that the MSM went along with them, and that low-information voters "bought it."

But that's just my opinion.

Dr. Warren Beatty (not the liberal actor) earned a Ph.D. in quantitative management and statistics from Florida State University. He was a (very conservative) professor of quantitative management specializing in using statistics to assist/support decision-making. He has been a consultant to many small businesses and is now retired. Dr. Beatty is a veteran who served in the U.S. Army for 22 years. He blogs at rwno.limewebs.com.


To say that the Benghazi consulate attack on September 11, 2012, has blossomed into a full-blown scandal for Dear Leader Barack Obama and for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be an understatement.  Much of the media attention has, rightly so, focused upon the e-mails that contradict statements by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about talking points revisions.  The e-mails show that talking points alterations were instigated by top officials in the Obama administration, as well as from the State Department.

Those (altered) talking points were marched out on Sunday, September 16, 2012, by (Obama crony) UN Ambassador Susan Rice to try to cover up what actually transpired, and to try to justify in-actions by Obama and Clinton.  The fact that those talking points were subsequently proven demonstrably false has led to the current scandal situation.

What did transpire on that infamous night?  Well, we know for certain that four American citizens died.  And we know that Obama met with Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey at a 5 P.M. meeting, while the attack was ongoing.  Obama was informed about the attack at that time, and (according to Panetta) had no further discussions with them that night.

But, while the Americans in Benghazi were dying, it seems that Obama talked to Clinton that night.  At approximately 10 P.M., fully six hours after the attack started, Obama called Clinton.  Carney said:

"He [Obama] was in regular communication with his national security team directly, through them, and spoke with the secretary of state at approximately 10 p.m. He called her to get an update on the situation."   [emphasis mine]

And, according to Dan Pfeiffer (another Obama crony):

"He [Obama] was kept - he was in constant touch that night with his national security team and kept up to date with the events as they were happening."
[and, when asked if Obama was in the Situation Room]
"I don't know what room he [Obama] was in that night. That's a largely irrelevant fact."

We know that Obama got his beauty sleep that night (difficult to be kept up to date while sleeping), then left the next morning for a fund-raiser in Las Vegas, NV.  He left the situation to be dealt with by subordinates.

We have a pretty clear picture of what went on with Obama and Clinton that night. So, why all the lies?  Why did Obama and Clinton not tell the truth?  Why did they immediately instigate a cover-up?  Well, consider the sources.

All organizations are run from the top.  That is true for businesses, crime families, and government administrations.  Lying, fraud, and attempts to mislead the public come from the top, not mid-level officials.  Mid-level officials in the Obama administration and the State Department carry out superiors' orders, rather than make them.  Mid-level officials did not create any talking points, nor did they alter them.  The mid-level officials were not running for reelection or trying to position for a 2016 election, as Obama and Clinton were.  And, the Benghazi attack revealed just what a disaster Obama's and Clinton's foreign policies, particularly with respect to the Arab world, have been.

One little "fact" that has not been loudly trumpeted, even by the conservative press, is that while the attack was ongoing, Obama, after consulting with Clinton, was apparently concocting the "video caused the attack" narrative.  He did this while no military efforts were made to rescue the Americans, and while the military people who wanted to rescue them were being told to stand down.

The scandal is NOT about Obama's and Clinton's in-actions - we've come to expect that from them.  It's about the talking points, their creation and revisions, and their intended purpose - Obama's and Clinton's lying, fraud, and trying to mislead the American public.  All this mendacity from an administration that promised an unprecedented level of openness and transparency in government.

The really sad facts are that the MSM went along with them, and that low-information voters "bought it."

But that's just my opinion.

Dr. Warren Beatty (not the liberal actor) earned a Ph.D. in quantitative management and statistics from Florida State University. He was a (very conservative) professor of quantitative management specializing in using statistics to assist/support decision-making. He has been a consultant to many small businesses and is now retired. Dr. Beatty is a veteran who served in the U.S. Army for 22 years. He blogs at rwno.limewebs.com.


RECENT VIDEOS