Thread: WND RADIO: Benghazi makes Watergate 'look like kindergarten' dereliction of duty

General: Benghazi makes Watergate 'look like kindergarten'
A former top Air Force general is calling the administration's handling of the Benghazi attacks and the subsequent lying and coverup a "dereliction of duty that this nation has never seen before."

That's not all ... he's laying out consequences that "will go right into the Oval Office."

WND RADIO

Benghazi makes Watergate 'look like kindergarten'

General: 'A dereliction of duty this nation has never seen before'

Published: 23 hours ago

Video at the Page Link: http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/benghazi-...FI0pwGT60Ce.99

Revelations in Wednesday’s congressional hearings on the Benghazi terrorist attacks prove it is a massive scandal that will carry significant consequences for those involved in the cover-up, according to retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney.

McInerney served at the highest levels in the Air Force, including time as assistant vice chief of staff and vice commander in chief of the U.S. Air Forces in Europe. He believes the Obama administration deliberately misled the American people on the motivation for the attack and is now covering its tracks on decisions to prevent a military rescue in Benghazi. He told WND that is more clear than ever following Wednesday’s testimony of former Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks and two others before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

“This is going to be the biggest scandal. It is going to make Watergate look like kindergarten because Watergate was primarily limited to the Oval Office. This cuts across the whole national security apparatus, where people were lying and covering up,” McInerney said. “It is a dereliction of duty that this nation has never seen before.”

So what consequences could that mean for the highest levels of the administration?

“Well, just see what the consequences were in Watergate. If it’s far worse than Watergate, the consequences will go right into the Oval Office,” he said.

McInerney said the tell-tale sign of Obama’s dereliction of duty can be determined in the admitted White House narrative of the president’s actions as the terrorist attack played out the night of Sept. 11, 2012.

“When is the exact minute he knew? We don’t have the timeline, and it was well before the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff went over there. He only talked to the secretary of defense one time, so it’s obvious he knew that he had given the stand-down order and did not need to talk to the secretary of defense or anybody else after that,” McInerney said. “Then he goes the next day out on a fundraising campaign to Las Vegas. That is a low for the commander in chief of this great nation.”

He also insists the stand-down order could only come from one source: the president himself.
“The only person who could have given it was the president, and he had to give it through the secretary of defense, secretary of state. The word came out so it came from the combatant commands and other unites below, but nobody could have given that except the president of the United States, and that is very clear,” said McInerney, who noted that the State Department’s own Accountability Review Board likely reached a similar conclusion in its report, which is why so few have seen it and the leaders of that study refuse to appear before Congress. McInerney believes they should be subpoenaed.

While he believes Obama has a lot to answer for, McInerney made it clear that many top-level subordinates deserve a lot of the blame too, and that’s what makes the scandal so troubling.
“It’s going to have significant consequences because it impacts two CIA directors, two secretaries of state, two chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, two secretaries of defense that are all involved now with the cover-up,” he said.

The general also singled out former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her comment at congressional hearings in January in which she bristled severely at accusations the administration concocted a plan to blame the attack on a spontaneous demonstration over an anti-Islam YouTube video that got out of hand. Clinton slammed Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, saying, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

McInerney sees that as a low point in American history.

“That is one of the most despicable statements that any American has said about such a tragic incident when you lose people like that. It makes a huge difference that our troops know that they will always be protected as much as they can and we’ll do anything to protect them,” he said. “She says, what difference does it make? That will live with her til the day she dies. I can tell you, all the people I know, both active and retired, think that is one of the most despicable statements we have ever heard a civilian leader say in our country’s history.”

McInerney said the administration’s story is full of holes on a number of fronts, including the narrative about the supposed video protests. But the general said his own experience serving in that theater convinces him there was plenty of time and opportunity to deploy U.S. forces to protect Americans in Benghazi.

“We have never done that, that I know, in our military history, where we just abandoned and did not try to send in rescue forces. They could have gotten there from Aviano (Air Base in Italy) the F-16s. I used to fly F-16s out of Aviano when I was vice commander in chief of U.S. Air Forces in Europe. I know that scene very well. They could have made it. They said they didn’t have tankers. They could have dropped their tanks. They could have recovered at a nearby Italian air base on an island,” he said.

“So it is unacceptable to me that we didn’t send those forces from Tripoli that we had there. We didn’t send F-16s and the FEST team to go in and to try to rescue those people. That was unacceptable, but from the get-go they had a narrative that they wanted to stick with that was a political narrative that the war was over, they had defeated al-Qaida,” he said.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/benghazi-...FI0pwGT60Ce.99

Is the Benghazi scandal worse than Watergate?

• No, of course not. Watergate reached the highest level of the White House. Benghazi was a mishandling by the state department
• No, Watergate was clearly a premeditated crime, and Benghazi was a combination of ineptitude and cover-up
• No, Republicans will put '-gate' at the end of any Obama issue
• No, I'm confident the Obama administration made the right call in Benghazi
• No, and at this point, what difference does it make?!
• No, this is a political witch hunt to weaken Democrats before the 2014 election
• No, this is a ridiculous attempt by nutty right-wingers to advocate for Obama's impeachment
• Yes, the cover-up in Benghazi is at least as disgraceful and documented as Watergate
• Yes, it's as least as bad, and Watergate produced jail terms
• Yes, of course it is. But the left-leaning media will not hold this president accountable as they did with Nixon
• Yes, the cold-hearted response to the crisis and the outrageous, ongoing cover-up far exceed Watergate
• Yes, the Watergate burglars didn’t result in deaths, let alone the killings of an ambassador and 3 American heroes
• Yes, and the consequences for the president and those who enabled Benghazi-gate should be more severe than those of Watergate
• Yes, Benghazi-gate was infinitely worse than the Watergate break-in. It's truly in a league of its own
• Other

View Results

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/benghazi-...FI0pwGT60Ce.99

Is the Benghazi scandal worse than Watergate?

• Yes, and the consequences for the president and those who enabled Benghazi-gate should be more severe than those of Watergate (45%, 1,371 Votes)
• Yes, Benghazi-gate was infinitely worse than the Watergate break-in. It's truly in a league of its own (28%, 863 Votes)
• Yes, the Watergate burglars didn’t result in deaths, let alone the killings of an ambassador and 3 American heroes (10%, 313 Votes)
• Yes, the cold-hearted response to the crisis and the outrageous, ongoing cover-up far exceed Watergate (8%, 240 Votes)
• Yes, of course it is. But the left-leaning media will not hold this president accountable as they did with Nixon (7%, 211 Votes)
• Yes, the cover-up in Benghazi is at least as disgraceful and documented as Watergate (less than 1%, 14 Votes)
• Yes, it's as least as bad, and Watergate produced jail terms (less than 1%, 8 Votes)
• No, of course not. Watergate reached the highest level of the White House. Benghazi was a mishandling by the state department (less than 1%, 5 Votes)
• No, this is a ridiculous attempt by nutty right-wingers to advocate for Obama's impeachment (less than 1%, 5 Votes)
• No, Watergate was clearly a premeditated crime, and Benghazi was a combination of ineptitude and cover-up (less than 1%, 5 Votes)
• Other (less than 1%, 2 Votes)
• No, this is a political witch hunt to weaken Democrats before the 2014 election (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
• No, Republicans will put '-gate' at the end of any Obama issue (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
• No, and at this point, what difference does it make?! (0%, 0 Votes)
• No, I'm confident the Obama administration made the right call in Benghazi (0%, 0 Votes)

Total Voters: 3,039

Vote

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/benghazi-...FI0pwGT60Ce.99

Benghazi/Watergate – What difference does it make?

by Ed Farnan on May 9, 2013

Over 40 years ago the country came to a standstill as revelations of lying and a cover-up by the President of the United States were exposed. Watergate became a name synonymous with a scandal of proportions that could topple a president.

Days of televised Congressional hearings with the often repeated phrase: “what did the President know and when did he know it?”— held the nation spellbound as politicians from both parties asked tough questions of the presidents staff.

The media coverage was unrivaled as details of a bungled petty burglary turned into a major scandal and efforts to hide the president’s involvement came to light.

But no one died as a result of Watergate.

Today’s congressional hearing on the events leading to, during and following the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, are revealing disturbing differences between what the Obama administration told the American public and what actual witnesses to the events are testifying to.

It is becoming clear; a purposeful decision was made to reduce the security presence in Libya which could have protected our personnel from attack. If normal security procedures would have been followed in Benghazi, our ambassador and three other Americans would not have been killed on September 11-12.

During the attack on our consulate and annex, contrary to what President Obama has claimed, not all measures were taken to send help to our besieged Americans. They were left outgunned and outnumbered to be killed, mutilated and wounded.

For weeks after the attack, a deliberate false narrative was put out by the Whitehouse and the State Department to cover up the real instigators in the attack: violent Islamic extremists who were closely allied with Al Qaeda.

At the critical moment in the presidential campaign, President Obama and Vice President Biden’s main theme had been they killed Osama Bin Laden and had defeated Al Qaeda. To admit that an Al Qaeda element had attacked our consulate and killed our ambassador would have been an admission of failure of one of the few successes the administration could lay claim to.

This knowledge would have made a huge difference in the election and could have been the difference between having a President Obama or a President Romney — it also would have been devastating for President Obama to defend in the debates with Romney.

But yesterday’s Benghazi hearing and the press surrounding it, no matter how riveting, is showing how dramatically our country has changed since the Watergate scandal.

Perhaps Americans have become hardened to scandal and no longer expect honesty from their President.

Perhaps if this was a Republican administration, there would be dozens of reporters assigned to get to the bottom of this story and 24/7 coverage would continue until all of the facts were exposed.

Unlike Watergate, where Democrats and Republicans joined together to find the truth, the Benghazi scandal has magnified the meanness of partisan politics. Any attempt to get to the truth by congress is labeled partisan politics by democrats. There is little if any cooperation by house democrats in this investigation.

Tell Congress: Create a Joint Select Committee to INVESTIGATE the 9/11/12 Benghazi Attacks! Sign the Petition!

Tagged as: bengazi libya terrorism, benghazi, benghazigate, coverup, ed farnan, watergate


About Ed Farnan

Ed is the conservative columnist at IrishCentral, where he has been writing on the need for energy independence, strong self defense, secure borders, the 2nd amendment, smaller government and many other issues. His articles appear in many publications throughout the USA and world. He has been a guest on Fox News and a regular guest on radio stations in the US and Europe.

View all posts by Ed Farnan →


http://www.conservativeactionalerts....-does-it-make/