Benghazi Smoking Gun Exposed

benrhodesThe idea that the Obama administration willfully orchestrated a disinformation campaign with regard to the attacks in Benghazi has now been confirmed. 

An email written by then-White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser Ben Rhodes and obtained by Judicial Watch contained four bullet-point “Goals” outlined as part of the strategy to contain the political damage engendered by the murder of four Americans on September 11, 2012 at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. One bullet-point in particular revealed the Obama administration’s deliberate crafting of a deceitful narrative following the incident.  According to the Judicial Watch emails, the objective of the Obama administration was to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

The email was part of a series of 41 new Benghazi-related documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed June 21, 2013. That effort was aimed at gaining access to the documents used by then-UN Ambassador Susan Rice for her September 16 appearance on five different  Sunday TV news programs. Rhodes’ email was sent on Friday, September 14, 2012 at 8:09 PM. It contained the following subject line: “RE: PREP CALL with Susan, Saturday at 4:00 pm ET.”

“Now we know the Obama White House’s chief concern about the Benghazi attack was making sure that President Obama looked good,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And these documents undermine the Obama administration’s narrative that it thought the Benghazi attack had something to do with protests or an Internet video. Given the explosive material in these documents, it is no surprise that we had to go to federal court to pry them loose from the Obama State Department.”

Rhodes’ email was sent to several members of the administration’s inner circle. They included White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, Deputy Press Secretary Joshua Earnest, then-White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, then-White House Deputy Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, then-National Security Council Director of Communications Erin Pelton, Special Assistant to the Press Secretary Howli Ledbetter, and then-White House Senior Advisor and political strategist David Plouffe.

Another critical email contained in the documents was written by former Deputy Spokesman at U.S. Mission to the United Nations Payton Knopf. It was addressed to Susan Rice and sent on Sept. 12, 2012, at 5:42 PM. It provided a brief summary of the attack, and further revealed that State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland had characterized the compound assault as “clearly a complex attack.” This characterization undermined Rice’s contention that the attacks were “spontaneous.”

Nonetheless when Rice appeared on ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News and CNN she insisted, as she specifically stated on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” that “based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy–sparked by this hateful video.”

Sen. John McCain, who immediately followed Rice’s appearance, revealed the utter nonsense of her assertion. “Most people don’t bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons to a demonstration,” he explained. “That was an act of terror, and for anyone to disagree with that fundamental fact I think is really ignoring the facts.”

Not ignoring the facts. Making them up. As Judicial Watch explains:

The Judicial Watch documents confirm that CIA talking points, that were prepared for Congress and may have been used by Rice on “Face the Nation” and four additional Sunday talk shows on September 16, had been heavily edited by then-CIA deputy director Mike Morell. According to one email:

The first draft apparently seemed unsuitable….because they seemed to encourage the reader to infer incorrectly that the CIA had warned about a specific attack on our embassy.  On the SVTS, Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy hand to editing them. He noted that he would be happy to work with [then deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton]] Jake Sullivan and Rhodes to develop appropriate talking points.

This revelation appears to contradict written testimony given by Morell to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence last April, during which he insisted that “there is no truth to the allegations that the CIA or I ‘cooked the books’ with regard to what happened in Benghazi and then tried to cover this up after the fact.” Morell also claimed it was Rice, not the CIA, who linked the video to the attack. “My reaction was two-fold,” he told Committee members, “One was that what she said about the attacks evolving spontaneously from a protest was exactly what the talking points said, and it was exactly what the intelligence community analysts believed. When she talked about the video, my reaction was, that’s not something that the analysts have attributed this attack to.”

Rhodes’ email blows Morell’s allegation out of the water, but a critical question remains unanswered: who did brief Rice in the aforementioned “prep call”?

A letter sent Monday night to the House and Senate foreign affairs committees from Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and John McCain (R-AZ) addresses that issue. It asks both committees to compel the Obama administration to explain who briefed Rice for her talk show appearances, and whether anyone from the State Department or White House was involved. “How could former Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, during the five Sunday talk shows on September 16, 2012, claim that the attacks on our compounds were caused by a hateful video when Mr. Morell testified that the CIA never mentioned the video as a causal factor,” the letter inquired. 

Graham characterizes the latest emails as “a smoking gun,” indicating White House efforts “to shape the story” of the Benghazi attacks and “to put a political stance on a disaster six weeks before an election.”

The White House says otherwise. In an explanation that strains credulity, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney claimed the White House withheld Ben Rhodes’ email from Congress and the media because it didn’t deal directly with the Benghazi attack. “This document was explicitly not about Benghazi, but about the general dynamic in the Muslim world at the time,” he insisted. “The overall issue of unrest in the Muslim world and the danger posed by these protests … was very much a topic in the news.”

Yesterday, in a testy exchange with ABC News White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl, Carney further declared that the White House urged Rice to focus on the video because her TV appearances were ostensibly supposed to address all of various protests sparked by that video, not just the murders in Benghazi. Karl ridiculed that assertion and reminded Carney that he had lied repeatedly in the past. “You stood there, time after time, and said that she was referring to talking points created by the CIA,” Karl stated. “Now we see a document that comes from the White House, not from the CIA, attributing the protests to the video.” In response, Carney continued to insist the protests outside American embassies were just as big a story, that Rice relied on CIA talking points, and the Rhodes’ email was part of the preparation to respond to the protests in general, not Benghazi.

Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, who believes the newly released emails completely undermine President Obama’s 2012 campaign narrative (i.e. “Al Qaeda is on the run”), also believes a more thorough investigation of Benghazi is warranted. “I think the Republicans have something here that really ought to be looked at,” he said Tuesday. “I just don’t know if there’s gonna be any interest in the mainstream media. They should, because this exposes a cover-up of a cover-up. The fact that it was redacted when the documents were asked for and only revealed by a court order is telling you this is a classic cover-up of a cover-up, and that is a serious offense.”

What Krauthammer is referring to is the reality that Rhodes’ email wasn’t included in the 100 pages of emails released by the administration last May, when Republicans refused to confirm John Brennan as CIA director until the “taking points” memos were released. 

Yet Krauthammer’s other point about a lack of mainstream media interest is just as germane. Some of that lack may be driven by the reality that Ben Rhodes’ brother is CBS News President David Rhodes, who was not enamored with former CBS investigative report Sharyl Attkisson’s reporting on the attack, despite the fact that she had been one of the few reporters to follow the story wherever it led. Yesterday in interview with Glenn Beck, Attkisson said she was glad to see “a little more light” shed on that relationship, even as she bemoaned the incestuous relationship between Big Government and Big Media, and the increasing level of intimidation aimed at journalists who refuse to abide that collaboration.

Unfortunately, many in the media are still willing to carry water for the White House. The George Soros-funded Media Matters insists Fox News is “distorting” the use of Ben Rhodes’ memo “to falsely suggest that the administration was lying about the Benghazi attacks for political gain.” Slate’s Dave Weigel claims the email “was largely redundant” and that the talking points blaming the attacks on a video “came from the CIA,” apparently ignoring Morrel’s testimony. Politico Magazine Deputy Editor Blake Hounshell tweeted, “Can you point me to a credible, authoritative story saying the WH knowingly pushed a false narrative?” demonstrating a willful obliviousness to the efforts undertaken by Attkisson, Karl and Fox’s Catherine Herridge.

That’s water-carrying by commission. There’s also water-carrying by omission. On Tuesday, when this story first broke, CBS This Morning was the only network broadcast to cover it. ABC, CBS and NBC completely omitted the story from their evening broadcasts.

Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) spokesman, Catherine Frazier, expresses what must occur going forward. “This administration must be held accountable to telling the truth so that we can find closure, bring our attackers to justice, and prevent future attacks — and Hillary Clinton’s regrets are not enough,” she said. “All witnesses with knowledge of the attack including administration officials should be called to testify before a joint select committee so we can once and for all know the truth about what happened.”

A select committee on Benghazi has been thwarted by House Majority leader John Boehner (R-OH), who as recently as April 7 still insisted that the four separate committees — Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Oversight — are sufficient to investigate the matter. “There are four committees that are investigating Benghazi,” Boehner told Fox New’s Megyn Kelly “I see no reason to break up all the work that’s been done and to take months and months and months to create some select committee.” “But your own people want it,” Kelly countered. “You got 190 House Republicans whose say they need it.” 

Boehner remained resolute.“I understand that,” he said. “At some point, that may — that may be required.” We are now at the point, Mr. Boehner.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Jakareh

    Obama has long lost any legitimacy because of his blatant lawlessness. By not moving toward impeachment, members of Congress are also in violation of their oath to uphold the Constitution. As of this moment, the United States lacks a legitimate government.

    • Grumpy

      Obama and Holder protect Reid from being subjected to any serious investigation. In return, Reid protects Obama and Holder from any chance of being impeached,

    • Douglas J. Bender


  • Cockatoo

    The nature of these lies and other numerous deception tactics is so blatant, so childish actually, it boggles the mind to think they’re peddled by grown-ups who .. and here’s the scary part .. GOVERN the United States of A! How can this once great global power, the moralizing conscience of the civilized world, allow itself to continue to be run by a hornet’s nest of smarty-pant crooks without so much as a smidgen of integrity. Looks like this country is closing in on the vortex of dark forces that’ll pull it into the abyss. Endtime prophecy being fulfilled right before our eyes.

  • zanzamander

    When the media ends up working for the government, a lefty Islamist oriented one at that, the country is doomed. But the situation in the West is compounded by the fact that not just the media, but our educators are in on it as well.

  • wildjew

    I don’t know why. It seems Speaker John Boehner is protecting Barack Obama and Obama adminstration officials. Otherwise why doesn’t he appoint a select committee on Benghazi?

    • truebearing

      Exactly. And why is he bent on Amnesty before the election? Boehner has gone over to the dark side and should be yanked by the neck from the speakership.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Here is a SMOKING GUN!!

    1). Obama flaunting an April 27th, 2011 computer generated FORGED birth certificate.
    2). Obama fraudulently registered with the Selective Service in 2008.
    3). Obama’s SS# )042-68-4425) was FLAGGED by E-Verify several times for being fraudulent.


  • Lanna

    Don’t ever expect this administration to come clean, as long as they are in office!

    • WW4

      Correct. They never do (unless given immunity).

  • geneww1938

    The tip of the Ice Berg. The real culprits still sits in the oval office and the other is waiting for her offspring to deliver its fetus while she practices preaching her non Biblical religion to the blinded mass.

  • JVictor

    Bill Clinton was referred to as the teflon president because none of the after-effects of the scandals his administration perpetrated ever stuck to him. Even though the articles of impeachment were drawn up against him, he was able to skate on through relatively unscathed. If Slick Willie earned his monicker, what on earth can we call Barack Obama?

    My mind is nearly numbed by the fact that everyone in this current abomination (ahem, administration) is given free rein to run roughshod over the laws of this country and then lie about it to our faces. The mainstream media looked high and low to discredit the Bush administration yet they ignore the obvious transgressions of everyone associated with Obama. Why? No one wants to be accused of racism by their peers–and they care more about the affirmation of their cronies than they care about the truth. If Barry Sotero looked more like his mom, the world never would have heard of him. But, Barack Hussein Obama looks more like his dad and he is getting away with everything.

  • Lanna

    Whats amazing is that the Left doesn’t care about the people who work for them like Chris Stevens, especially if they are useful in promoting an agenda…then they are expendable once the goal is finished.

  • james connolly

    The major media will treat this as a Republican-led witch hunt, as always, because “their guy” can do nothing wrong. I can’t imagine ANYTHING whatsoever Mr. O. could do that would elicit calls for his impeachment from his fawning, smitten fellow travelers. He is STILL their great, all knowing savior even as he dismantles and destroys their county right before their blind eyes,

  • glissando


  • WW4

    This “smoking gun: occurred after a string of earlier emails asserting the “protests over the video” story. If this were the germ of the idea, that would be one thing. Unfortunately, it is merely a summary of the talking points already received. More transparent is an earlier email from a state department official doing CYA. But the fact that it is part of an email from an Obama flack is pretty ho hum, since summarizing talking points to make the administration look good is pretty much the job.

    Did they handle it poorly? Hell yes, top to bottom. Does it rise to the level of a scandal? Only to those already inclined to believe so. Barring any other “revelations” if this story lasts two weeks, I’d be surprised.

  • Johnny Palestine

    I am not an American citizen nor resident but most of my adult life, until about 2008, I wished to be one.

    Sad watching your country devolve into another failed nation along the lines of Italy, Portugal, Greece and Spain. If the American people do not or cannot rise up against the weasels who run your Federal govt and banks, then you are doomed.

    Both parties have been at war against the American people, be it a war mongering LBJ or war mongering GBJr. Such sycophanatacism to Islam is shocking. Who is financing this? How can any real man or woman support these (D) rats, the current group of rats in charge?

    • nimbii

      One thing you can bet on Johnny, they are very dark financial interests. George Soros type of interests.

      I suspect they want to break up the US into smaller states like Europe and leave running the world to China and Russia.

      That way, they can more easily plunder our wealth and land.

    • tagalog

      Don’t write the USA off as a failed nation yet. It’s true we’ve slipped quite a bit, but the situation is not hopeless – yet.

  • nimbii

    If they’re willing to lie in the faces of the parents of these fallen heroes, what else are they willing to do?

    It seems incredible that we even have the docs we have…

    Boehner can no longer hide.

    He must go forward with a select committee.

  • Clare Spark

    The Obama administration turned this preventable atrocity into a “hate speech” episode, throwing one of their own highly educated SF liberals onto the funeral pyre of political correctness. See Stevens as a younger man along with an index to my blogs on hate speech here:

  • Chiron_Venizelos

    It’s great to read articles on Frontpage Magazine and to have a place where one can express their thoughts but the real work is in contacting our elected representatives to let THEM know how we feel and what we expect from their service to us AND donating a few dollars to Mr. Horowitz’s site to help his crew to keep us informed.
    I hope you’ll do both–every call and every dollar helps.

  • Christopher Riddle

    I must be “Psychic”!I Knew This On Sept.13,2012.Let me see:Setember,October,November 6????Could this be”COINCIDENCE”?????????

  • cindy


  • reader

    If Watergate was a scandal worthy of a threat of impeachment, this certainly is. The problem here is feckless GOP leadership – particularly Boeher, who flat out refused to appoint select committee.

    • WW4

      I don’t know that it rises to the level of Watergate in terms of malfeasance; I think it’s more of a pathetic botch than an illegal operation. The video “explanation” was floating around and they grabbed it and clung to it like a lifesaver.

      In terms of what actually went down, the CIA operation and the loss of life (which is indeed more serious than Watergate)–nothing is going to come of that in terms of this administration paying a price. I’d like to think we’ll think twice about meddling in other nation’s affairs to that extent, but that makes me a dreamer. It’s something we do, and it went FUBAR.

      However, the picture of State and an administration playing CYA on this issue will hurt the Hillary campaign.

      • reader

        Watergate was all about influencing election and a cover up. This was a possible illegal gun running operation, derelection of duty and a blatant cover up. We know everything there is to know about Watergate. We still know almost nothing about Benghazi. What gives?

      • tagalog

        It probably WAS a botch. But Obama was at the wheel when the botch happened.

        Although the decision not to send fighting men who could have arrived in time to change the events is disturbing. I suspect that was Hillary’s decision. But Barack is responsible for her decisions too.

        It’s like the captain who takes command of a ship that’s sinking. The guy in charge takes the heat. That’s the way it is.

      • truebearing

        You don’t know much of anything. I’ll bet you said the same things about Fast and Furious and the IRS scandal.

    • tagalog

      Nobody got murdered because of Watergate.

  • tagalog

    The administration is going to get a pass from the mainstream media on this.
    They’re giving the administration a pass because of racist reasons.

    Should they all lose their jobs because of that?

    America’s first affirmative-action scandal. If it were Bush, the MSM would be solemnly pontificating on “constitutional crises” and talking about impaneling an impeachment committee. They’d be asking in one voice: who knew what, and when did he know it?

    And while I’m on the subject of people getting a pass because of their status, what’s the difference between Obama getting a pass because of his race/color and the rich kid in school getting a pass because his family endowed the college library? Talk about inequality…

    • WW4

      This wouldn’t be a scandal if Bush were president. This is barely a scandal now.

      • reader

        Abu Grabe and waterboarding were huge scandals when Bush was president, Abu Grabe being a low level operators’ mischief and waterboarding being an absolutely legitimate tool used on exactly three high level Al Qaida terrorists.

      • tagalog

        It was a scandal -for some people- when Bush said that he was going to invade Iraq at least in part because Saddam Hussein had WMDs, based on the intelligence he got from British Intelligence and the CIA, which was the truth. Remember “Bush lied, people died?”

      • tagalog

        Well, asking questions about it to the Press Secretary got the press pass of the Senior White House reporter for Fox News lifted, so I guess someone in the White House is taking it seriously.

      • truebearing

        You’re insane.

  • Douglas J. Bender

    Here’s my comment for the day: If you LIE to the American people, you are not fit to LEAD the American people

  • Walter Sieruk

    It’s not so much the question “Was Muhammad a prophet?” It’s better stated “Was Muhammad a prophet sent by God or was Muhammad a false prophet sent by Satan to lead many people astray?” After all Jesus did warn “Beware of false prophet which comes to you in sheep’s clothing but are inwardly ravening wolves.” Matthew 7:15. The Bible further warns that “many false prophets are gone forth into the world.” First John 4:1. To give the acid test if a prophet, teacher, or religion is teaching truth of falsehoods is if the prophet, teacher or religion has teaching and doctrines that are in according to God’s Word, the Bible. That if a person or religion has teachings and doctrines that are in contradiction to God’s Word then that prophet, teacher or religion is false. As Isaiah 8:20; explains “To the law of the testimony : If they speak not according to the word , it is because there is no light in them.” [KJV] Islam denies that Jesus is the Son of God. This is in contrast to the Bible which teaches that Jesus is indeed the Son of God, John 3:16, 17, and 36. First John 2:22, 23. Likewise. Islam denies that Jesus is God the Son. In contrast to Islam the Bible teaches that Jesus is God the Son. As seen in Hebrews 1:6-8 with emphasis on verse 8. Furthermore, Islam denies that Jesus is God. This is in strong contradiction to the Bible which teaches that Jesus is God. As shown, for example, in John 1:1-3. Romans 9:5. Colossians 1:15-17. First John 5:20. Second Peter 1; 1. Titus 2:13. Moreover, by comparing the Old Testament with the New Testament will further show that Jesus is God, As in by comparing Isaiah 45:22,23. With Philippians 2:5-11. Will show Jesus is God. Also by comparing Psalm 89:8,9. With Matthew 8:23-27 will further confirm Jesus to be God. Even by comparing the New Testament book together will confirm Jesus to be God. As in John 5:22 with Romans 14:12 will show Jesus to be God. The list can go on but this should be enough. The imams and mullahs will try to “explain” this all away by claiming that Christians had corrupted the Bible through time. This claim greatly underestimates the power of God to preserve His Word in time and keep it intact and away from the corruption of men. In conclusion, Muhammad was a false prophet and Islam is a false religion, Proverbs 14:12. John 14:6.

  • vicki s

    majority of voters don’t care and will keep voting for the pres who gives them the most free stuff. think of ancient Rome, and the free Games and free bread

  • Sally Smith

    Obama supporters will go hysterical over this well sourced list of 659 examples of his lying, lawbreaking, corruption, cronyism, etc.

  • truebearing

    Allowing 4 Americans, one of which was an ambassador, to be murdered, after refusing more security and refusing to send help isn’t a scandal?

    Supplying weapons to Al Queda isn’t a scandal?

    Covering up the supplying of weapons to Al Queda by hanging Stevens out to dry — and thereby eliminating the key witness — isn’t a scandal?

    Fabricating a bunch of bullsh!t about a video to decieve Americans before an election isn’t a scandal?

    You have the moral clarity of spent motor oil.

  • The Conservative Wife

    There is so much more to this and it names not only Obama and Hillary, but other high ranking officials like McCain and Boehner as well…

  • william johnson

    Well said, Jakareh. But our so-called first black president Impeached…not a chance, and we all know why…

  • justquitnow

    According to the Judicial Watch emails, the objective of the Obama administration was to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

    That’s designed to look like a quote from the emails…it’s not. Like FPM, Judicial Watch does a lot of telling you what they REALLY mean. We know pretty much every thing that happened regarding Benghazi, including the intel at the time, where the talking points came from, who said what and why and when and what they had for breakfast before they said it. We even have, in addition to the reality of what happened, several fantasy timelines that were promoted on FPM and quietly let die. Now we’re back to the talking points…and who “lied”. Really?

    U.S. Embassy and Consulate Attacks Under the Bush Administration:

    January 22, 2002: US consulate at Kolkata, 5 Killed
    June 14, 2002: US Consulate at Karachi, 12 Killed
    February 28, 2003: US Embassy at Islamabad, 2 Killed
    June 30, 2004: US Embassy at Tashkent, 2 Killed
    December 6, 2004: US Compound at Saudi Arabia, 9 Killed
    March 2, 2006: US Consulate in Karachi, 2 Killed
    September 12, 2006: US Embassy at Syria, 4 Killed
    March 18, 2008 US Embassy at Yemen, 2 Killed
    July 9, 2008: US Consulate at Istanbul, 6 Killed
    September 17, 2008 US Embassy at Yemen, 16 Killed

    Total deaths: 60

    Most of you probably didn’t even know about these people…no one felt like rubbing your noses in it at the time and doing a witch hunt to try to destroy Bush’s credibility. That would have been ugly and absurd. Because under Bush sh*t happens right? I mean we all try as hard as we can to be ready…and protect our people, but they have dangerous jobs some of them in dangerous areas at dangerous times and this kind of thing can happen. Under Obama, everything about Benghazi is subject to questioning, theorizing and ridicule. If one line of stupid conspiracy theory falls through, there is always another…and then you can go back to the first one after a few months with new/oid “bombshells”…

    It’s all completely disingenuous.

    • reader

      Your vicious fight with a straw man of your creation is admirable, but the link to the original Morell’s email is provided right here, in this very article. Finally, Boehner has moved to appoint Select Committee. So, since you seem to be the only person outside of the administration who knows everything there is to know about it, I expect you to be before the Committee shortly.

      • justquitnow

        You know that Obama didn’t attack the compound right?

        • reader

          I also know that Nixon did not break into the Watergate hotel room. Why on earth did the members of his own party threatened him with impeachment if he wouldn’t resign? I’ll tell you why. They had way more integrity than the commies in power today.

  • USARetired

    This should cost Obozo his job and while we are at it he should be prosecuted for being in this country illegally, which will unify everything he has done, as worthless as it is!

  • simonzee1

    The danger with the Republicans focusing on the lies of the past with Obama’s administration is that it frees your opponent to laugh at you as narrow minded while they go about their present deceit. It is obvious that Obama has been incessantly race baiting, to bring out a tired and uninspired Democrat support base; and that there are other things going on behind the scenes including FCC Fast Lane reforms which is another deceit of Obama in maintaing net neutrality.

    But something serious has happened recently to have 2 senior intelligence officers give their resignation without a reason…

    It is curious timing indeed, and especially after Reid has used such strong language against Bundy and his followers as “terrorists.”

    Congress needs to ask why those two senior officials have resigned because I believe there is an intelligence effort underway right now to go through all American records on a religious and ethnic profiling basis to assess who they determine as a national risk. This is a very slippery slope indeed.

    Essentially this administration has stoked the fire of terrorism abroad by their disrespect of customs..religion and traditions and now they are unwittingly going down a path where they are going to create a national problem out of fear without considered thinking. This is left wing fascism at work as it has been overseas. This is why reporters are being targeted as they have not been anything but tools for Western propaganda with their disrespect and attacks on custom and religious practice.

    This goes to the total incompetence of this administration…the power it has over the media and Silicon Valley. Race baiting is a great external clue of how grubby these zealots in the administration are. That press conference with Merkel where he was clearly race baiting shpwed the same insensitivity to the families of those whose sons were killed in Benghazi. This guy shot and buried a woman alive.

  • USARetired

    Obama is desperately attempting to coverup his indiscretions, and to no avail! The most serious indiscretion has not exploded as yet.but it will, and that is the fact Obama has no US citizenship documents, NONE! He has a stolen US SSN, SN 042-68-4425, issued to Harry Bounel in Connecticut. He has no other US documents not forged! He is not a Citizen of the US, being in office illegally will make it quite easy to arrest him, providing we can find anyone with Kahunas!
    The fact that he has an agenda to destroy this Country, makes urgency important!