The Aftermath of the Dallas Police Shootings - Violence Based on a Lie

As I sat in my hotel room up in Chicago, watching FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before congress Thursday morning, I could not imagine how my Monday morning blog could not be about Hillary Clinton. Sadly, the shooting of the police officers in Dallas, including five who died, during a Black Lives Matter protest later that evening would cause me to re-evaluate that idea.

I will save my response to Director Comey’s finding for a more appropriate time.  For now I want to focus on the social issues that are tearing apart the very fabric of this country. I am asking you to please consider everything that I am about to tell in light of the false narrative that you are being spoon fed by the politicians, pundits and so called community activists.

First and foremost is the chilling fact that: #BlackLivesMatter (aka: BLM), like its predecessor: #HandsUpDontShoot, is a lie.

Why do I say that?

Because, just like the real reasons behind gun violence, the people pushing this agenda are completely disingenuous and have no answers as to how to take action to save any lives, let alone black ones.

You know who does? The police.

Yes, those very same blood-thirsty, racist cops are the only ones who are proactively doing something to save lives, especially black ones.

You must be thinking to yourself that I have completely lost it and I can honestly understand why. It’s hard not to believe this stuff when you are being bombarded with it at every turn. Every day the media is reporting about the latest ‘murder’ of a black man by ‘racist’ cops. Hell, even Congress and the NFL got in on the act. But just because you are repeatedly being told something doesn’t make it factual. Consider this quote before you go any further:

“A lie doesn’t become truth, wrong doesn’t become right and evil doesn’t become good, just because it is accepted by the majority.” – Rick Warren

We have to move beyond the narrative and look at the facts. Now some people in politics and the media don’t want to do this because it is going to cast a spotlight on the fallacy of their claims. By creating this fictitious boogieman it serves four purposes:

• Makes someone else responsible for the problems
• Creates a sensational storyline that sucks in under-informed viewers / readers
• Provides a financial cottage industry to those willing to exploit it
• Unjustly demonizes a group of people they already do not like

Sadly, this is a classic case of a ‘Lather, Rinse & Repeat’ problem.

So what is the truth, you ask?

Well, much different than what they want you to believe.

The recent attack and assassination of the police officers in Dallas underscores the reality. Those officers were there to protect the BLM protestors. None of the officers in Dallas had been involved in any way with the recent shootings, yet they were being vilified as if they had pulled the triggers themselves. The fact is that the only one that went there with a hate-filled agenda was the shooter and when that shooter opened fired what happened? The police officers, the same ones being demonized by the crowd, rushed in to put themselves between the shooter and protesters.

Yep, sounds just like the blood-thirsty, racist cops we are being warned about.

So how did social media, that bell-weather for the state of decay that has become America, respond?  Not surprisingly, in typical BLM fashion:

• “Y’all pigs got what was coming for y’all.”
• “Yeah it's lit in Dallas fuck the pigs !!”
• “Next time a group wants to organize a police shoot, do like Dallas tonight, but have extra men/women to flank the Pigs!”
• “These fucking pigs deserve Dallas, and every incident after Dallas until reform. Fucking disgusting animals.”
• “Dude hell yeah someone is shooting pigs in dallas. Solidarity.”
• “DALLAS keep smoking dem pigs keep up the work.”

Unfortunately, this vile, hate-filled rhetoric is nothing new. It wasn’t too long ago that we heard chants of: “What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want it? Now!” and “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon!”

But surely if the problem is truly as bad as we are being told, then surely there is some emotional justification for all this, right?

The simple answer is no.

To be sure there was a time when racism was a very real problem in this country, but the same can be said with just about every other country in the world. The truth is that there will always be some form of racism and or discrimination. Do you think those comments above are any less racist just because they are directed at the nameless / faceless police?

If those in the BLM community have that much of a problem with the police, then why do they still pick-up the phone and call 911 when they need help? Not sure how to reconcile exactly how you can be so vehemently anti-police one moment, and then hide behind them the next.

Now I know there are those who will contend that the police killings of innocent black are of such epidemic proportions that it justifies some of this anger.

Once again, the truth is no.

To be fair, there are bad cops, just as there are bad politicians, reporters, community activists, doctors, lawyers, firemen, etc. and we should do our best to root them out, because they do a grave disservice to the vast majority who do their jobs with professionalism. But the lie of the epidemic of racist cops killing unarmed / innocent blacks is just that, a lie and just because a lie is told enough times doesn’t make it the truth. I don’t care who is telling you this, whether it is a politician, celebrity, pundit, or the person on the street corner, it will never be the truth and here is why:

The population of the United States is roughly 318 million people. Of that number, approximately 40 million are black. There are less than eight hundred thousand sworn members of law enforcement.

Let that sink in for a minute.

Law enforcement makes up just a quarter of a percent, 0.25%, of the population of the United States!
 

In terms of the black population it is a ratio of 50:1

So how many blacks have been killed by police so far in 2016? 123.

If you like math that is equal to 0.000307499% of the black population.

Just for comparison, there have been almost 250 blacks killed in the city of Chicago during the same time period.

Do you need me to do the numbers?

The reality is that, if you are black, you are twice as likely to be killed on the streets of Chicago then you are in the entire United States. Yet, I can’t recall ever seeing a single BLM march through the Chicago neighborhoods of Austin or Englewood. Guess they don’t like protesting in war-zones.

The truth is that while more whites are killed by the police (238 vs 123 YTD), blacks are killed by cops more often than whites, proportional to population, but the contrast in numbers is still ridiculously low: 0.0003% vs 0.0001%

This is what we are all up in arms about? 0.0002%

All lives matter, but we must consider what is really going on here.

I’m sorry, but I would really like to know how this adds up to systemic racism of epidemic proportions?

Where is the moral outrage at the murders occurring in Chicago? 

Where are the President, Attorney General, and all the other indignant politicians demanding a full Justice Department investigation into the atrocities being committed daily on the streets of that city?

Because the reality is that politicians have no response for the rise of inner-city crime, like Chicago. Murders there are truly at epidemic proportions. They know the problem, but it is the 800 lb political gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about. They would rather talk about incarceration rates, yet make no mention of recidivism rates, or point out how blacks are stopped at disproportionately higher numbers than whites.  Call me crazy, but how many white people do you see walking down the streets of places like: Brownsville (New York City), Englewood (Chicago), Compton (Los Angeles), Sandtown (Baltimore), or Highland Park (Detroit). 

So who exactly should the police be stopping? Think about that for a moment. Should we have quotas based on ethnicity? A cop in Brownsville can only stop a racially diverse number of people per day? If you get robbed should the cops be prevented from stopping someone, who fits the description, because they have already stopped a person of that color earlier in the day?

We truly need to #WakeUpAmerica

The police are not the enemy. They are the ones you call when you need help, the ones who run toward the danger while the rest of society runs toward safety. Ask those innocent people trapped within those dangerous inner-city neighborhoods who they want to make things safer. It certainly isn’t the drug dealers or the gang members.

The thin blue line is just that, thin.

We are nothing more than a veil which separates the sheep from the wolves, but more and more it seems that there are many who want to tear that veil away. Through incendiary rhetoric and baseless accusations they castigate the very small fraternity sworn to protect them. They goad the masses into violent action and then feign surprise when they act on it. Each act, dismissed as ‘lashing out in frustration,’ only serves to further embolden the criminal element.

As a society, we are quickly approaching the edge of our own demise.

The calls for violence, the tacit approval of urban destruction, all in the name of a proven lie, is quickly undermining our very foundation. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy turning our society into an US vs THEM state, all because our elected representatives are more inclined to blame others instead of taking responsibility for the decades long practice of turning a blind eye toward the real problem.

The problem is that one day they will get their wish, and anarchy will become the rule. Then who will they blame for the continual carnage in the black community?

Baseless cries of racism mask the true problem. The true racism is the political one that contends that the system, not a lack of personal responsibility, is the problem; that the police, not the criminals, pose the greatest threat. Ask yourself why those who represent these inner-cities are always looking to blame someone else, instead of re-evaluating their decade’s long failures in government.

Where are the inner-city success stories? Where are the places that four to five decades of democratic control have: reduced poverty, lowered crime, raised education levels, and reduced the need for public assistance?

Anyone?

In 2014, Eric Garner died in New York City. Everyone seemed to jump on the ‘I Can’t Breathe’ bandwagon, yet everyone seems to miss the very point that Garner’s ability to utter the words ‘I Can’t Breathe’ negated that statement. If you can’t breathe, you can’t talk. Some have broken out their medical textbooks and tried to spin this, saying that even if you can’t breathe you can still utter some words, but Garner said ‘I Can’t Breathe’ at least eleven times while still continuing to resist arrest which occurred under the direct supervision of a female, black sergeant.

Eric Garner was not an innocent. He had a record of more than 30 arrests, dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny. At the time of his death, he was out on bail after being charged with illegally selling cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession and false impersonation.   Garner also did not die at the scene of the confrontation. He suffered cardiac arrest in the ambulance taking him to the hospital and was pronounced dead about an hour later. The 6-foot-3, 350 pound, man suffered from a number of health problems, including heart disease, severe asthma, diabetes, obesity, and sleep apnea.

Maybe, just maybe, he contributed to his own demise by engaging in criminal behavior and then resisting arrest? When the officer went to take him into custody Garner physical swatted the officer’s hands away from him, escalating the situation. He made that choice. If he had not resisted I imagine the outcome would have been completely different.

The question is what would you like the police to do? The cops are being blamed for enforcing laws that they didn’t create. How would citizens feel if they called 911 to report a crime only to be told ‘that’s been determined to be a minor crime and we no longer enforce them’?

In 2015, Freddie Gray died in Baltimore.

Baltimore is a city comprised of a 63% black population.  It has a black mayor, black police chief (at the time of Gray’s death), black state’s attorney, and a predominantly black city council presided over by a black council president.  The last four out of five mayors have been black and the last four out of six police chiefs have been black. The police department is a majority-minority department. It is a city that has been controlled by democrats for eighty-four of the last one hundred years and yet Gray’s death was somehow made out to be racist, even though three of the six officers involved were black.

Really?

To be sure, all lives matter. The officers involved didn’t set out that day to kill someone. If you believe that then I truly feel very sorry for you. Of the six officers involved, only one officer had a disciplinary record, stemming from a domestic incident.

Not exactly the picture of the racist cops everyone tried to portray.

Understand that Freddie Gray was also not an innocent person. He had a criminal record that included drug charges, parole violation and other crimes. At the time of his death he had five active criminal court cases pending. He had also served four years in prison. At the time of his arrest he was in possession of an illegal knife. The state’s attorney, Marilyn Mosby, tried to muddy the waters by saying the knife was legal in Maryland, but ignored the fact that it was actually illegal in Baltimore.

What the state’s attorney also didn’t want you to know was that three weeks prior to the incident, she had requested enhanced drug enforcement efforts at the corner of North and Mount, the area where Gray was arrested.

The truth is a much different picture than is routinely portrayed.

In the case of the recent shooting of Alton Sterling, the police were called after someone said Sterling had threatened them with a gun. Upon arrival of the police a struggled ensued and Sterling was subsequently shot. He was in fact armed with a gun.

An examination of his criminal history shows thirteen arrests including: Assault, Juvenile Sexual Offender, Burglary, Weapons Possession, Narcotics, Resisting Arrest, Domestic Abuse….. Not exactly the poster child for: ‘I was minding my own business and the cops attacked me for no reason.’

Once again we have a criminal, engaging in criminal behavior and armed with a weapon, yet it is the fault of the racist police.

As I previously wrote about, the New York Times did a story that documented seventy-three fatal police shootings over the course of a 1 year period, from August 2014 to August 2015, throughout the United States. In all but three cases, the shootings where the end result of what started off as some type of criminal activity. Perhaps it isn’t about racist cops, but about the criminals and their behavior?

So why do these false narratives continue to persist? For the reasons I outlined at the beginning:

• Politicians, who bear a substantial responsibility for the decay of our inner-cities, blame someone else. They elevate themselves as the people’s champion, in order to get re-elected, to continue fighting to correct some fictitious problem.
• Pundits sensationalize erroneous storylines because, truth be told, bad news sells. They look at the same impartial data, but then cherry pick it to support their pre-determined conclusion. Add to the fact that violent protestors and property destruction draw viewers who stay glued to their TV sets and increase ratings.
• The activists realize that there is fame to attain and money to be made.
• And finally, there is a certain segment of society that is anarchistic in nature and is exploiting the situation to justify their desire to simply destroy things. They want to speed up the confrontation.

This country will never be able to move forward until we begin to embrace the truth and not the stories we are being told. The problem is that this will require us to educate ourselves and not believe the lies. It will require us to expect more from the politicians we elect to represent us.

Until then, the police will continue to do their job; putting their lives on the line to keep the citizens of this great nation safe, even when those same citizens are protesting and shouting ‘Fuck the Police.’

“Violence multiplies violence. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.” - Dr. Martin Luther King

If you’d like to stay up to date on the newest releases, then please like my Facebook page and feel free to follow me on Twitter.

Benghazi: Lies, Misdirection, Silence and the 2016 Presidential Race

I write books. They are mostly mystery / thrillers with a healthy dose of political intrigue thrown in for good measure. I get a lot of enjoyment in spinning a tangled web of lies and deceit, but lately it seems that my fiction is taking a back seat to real life.

In the latest installment of: ‘What did I do to piss you off this time?’ I think it is time we re-visit the whole ‘Benghazi Thing.’ I say this, because there are some people who still just don’t get it.

I read a post on Benghazi that went something like this: “I would love a debate about policy. Or we could say just vote democratic because of the thirty embassy attacks when Bush was president and the hundreds that died.”

<Squinting> Huh? Are You F’ing serious?

You see, this is the bullshit they do. They, as in the poorly uninformed, have learned it from the politicians and pundits. Don’t argue the actual point, just change the narrative. As if the attack on Benghazi was just another terror attack, or the lives lost were somehow the same as the ones killed

in other attacks.

Here is a newsflash: The Benghazi attack was a completely different animal because, when the attack occurred, the government failed them and then lied to us.

I read a CNN article the other day which said: “House Republicans capped a partisan, two-year investigation of the Benghazi terror attacks Tuesday with a report that faults the Obama administration for security lapses that led to the deaths of four Americans, but contains no revelations likely to further damage Hillary Clinton.”

Let that sink in for a moment.

No revelations likely to further damage Hillary Clinton?

As opposed to all the other stuff that has damaged her, but yet we somehow still want to believe she is capable of being President.

Fine, whatever, here’s another glass of Kool-Aid, drink up.

And why exactly was this ever partisan to begin with?

Investigations, especially ones dealing with a terror attack in which an Ambassador and CIA contractors are killed, should never be partisan, they should always be a search for the truth. What is sad to me is that a large group of people are making partisan political comments without knowing any of the facts. The majority of Americans have no clue about what happened at Benghazi, either before, during or after the attack. They have relied on carefully crafted talking points instead of actually researching it for themselves. I’d venture to say that almost no one has actually read the 800+ page report.

In a way, it’s kind of like that whole Affordable Care Act debacle.

In case you’d like to take a walk down memory lane, here’s a piece I wrote right after the attack when they were pushing the video and spontaneous demonstration theory. You remember that lie, don’t you? Consider that the first of many to come.

As I mentioned before, most American’s have no clue as to what they are talking about. They couldn’t even begin to tell you how long Libya has been an independent state; let alone what the state of the country was leading up to the attack. Fortunately for you, I have written a Libya / Benghazi primer course for you, to bring you up to speed.

Bear in mind that these posts tend to be a bit long, but that’s the key. They are not your cliché riddled talking points.

You know, I’ve lost count of the number of times I have heard people say: “It wouldn’t have mattered if they sent troops; they wouldn’t have gotten there in time.”

Really? And exactly how did you, or they, know just how long the attack was going to last for?

I guess using that analogy, the next time you’re the victim of a violent crime, don’t bother calling the police because chances are they won’t get there in time either.

13 Hours: Paramount Pictures

Making a cavalier statement like that is fine, in hindsight retrospection, but I can tell you that in the middle of an attack no one knew how long it was going to last…… 13 HOURS is a long time to wait for help. If you feel the need to make a flippant comment on this topic, I highly recommend watching the movie, 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, or read the book, 13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened in Benghazi,  by Mitchell Zuckoff, before you do.

The fact is that when word of the attacks reached the Embassy and the CIA Station in Tripoli, in less than an hour, they managed to assemble a response team and acquire an aircraft for transport. The team, dubbed Team Tripoli, consisted of four Tripoli Station GRS members, one of whom was Glen Doherty, two Defense Department special operators, and a CIA linguist. An hour after they got to the airport in Tripoli they were in Benghazi.

So much for not being able to get there in time.

Now, Hillary Clinton, the woman at the heart of the Benghazi attack, who is looking to be our next president, is telling the world that there is nothing more to see here and that we simply need to move on.

Really? Must be nice to be able to lie to the American people, including the families of those four dead Americas and then tell them to move on.

 Here is what we know:

The Ambassador, as well as the folks doing protection, requested additional manpower and resources which were routinely met with no response or were refused by senior officials in Washington.  I’m not talking 1-2 requests, but nearly 600 security requests / concerns from January through September 2012. While some were acted on, the majority, including the requests for additional manpower, were not. In fact, manpower was reduced leading up to the attack. Clearly there were issues going on!!

Say what you will, but when an Ambassador, the President’s personal representative to a foreign nation, requests additional security, that cannot be overlooked, nor should it be dismissed by underlings sitting in a cushy office in D.C.  When everything is said and done, the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, dropped the ball. It was her agency and even the State Department ARB said security was ‘grossly inadequate.’  If you don’t believe that she was responsible, then you need to stop blaming Bush for everything because apparently the ‘buck’ really doesn’t stop anywhere in Washington.

The fact is that the State Department assessment of Benghazi in 2011 and 2012 noted rising crime and a high-risk of militia violence left by the toppling of Gaddafi. The precarious security situation was exacerbated by inadequate security at the Benghazi facility, which was plagued by equipment failures, a lack of manpower and relied too much on unreliable local militia for protection.  Ironically, one of those Washington State Department bureaucrats, Charlene Lamb, had the audacity to say: “It is very unfortunate and sad at this point that Ambassador Stevens was a victim, but that is where ultimate responsibility lies."

Wow, the State Department denied additional security, but it’s really the fault of that poor schmuck who died.  Oh, it should be noted that, while denying the requests for security, the State Department, through their spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, emailed Stevens to ask how to describe the security incidents in 2012

Really, Vickie?

I would like to imagine that Steven’s reply was something like: “They just attempted to assassinate the British Ambassador with an RPG. I guess you could say all’s well. Wish you were here, darling.”

One of the things that has always troubled me about this attack was our response or lack thereof.  On the night of the attack did the President issue Cross Border Authority? If you don’t know what CBA is, then click the link. The Congressional report now presents a distinct dilemma that no one seems to be considering or even talking about. 

According to the report, the military did not carry out then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's order to deploy U.S. forces to help rescue Americans under fire in Benghazi. If this is correct, and the President gave CBA, then we have an act of gross dereliction of duty on the part of senior members of the military. Or, as is most likely the case, we are not being told the full story, yet again.

I’m sorry, but I simply do not believe anything that comes out of the mouths of those inhabiting that cesspool known as Washington, D.C. As someone who has served under a chain of command, I know that there are consequences to failing to take action as directed by a superior, especially when four Americans die in a terror attack.

Consider the following and ask if you think this is plausible:

The President directs the Secretary of Defense to take action.

The Secretary of Defense notifies the Pentagon which in turns notifies the Commanding General of AFRICOM, General Carter Ham. 

By all accounts, General Ham immediately began directing / assembling units for deployment, a deployment that never occurred.

Shortly after the dust settled, General Ham announced he was retiring, for personal reasons, after only serving ½ of his scheduled rotation as head of AFRICOM and only a few years shy of mandatory retirement.  When announcing Ham's replacement, his X.O. at AFRICOM, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta praised Ham's service. A report from the department said leaders remain "fully confident" in Ham's performance. Even Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said that Ham “has the full confidence of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.” Little attributed the change to Ham's "decision to retire," which he described as "an entirely personal decision."

Now, Congressman Trey Gowdy, who led the Congressional investigation into the attacks, states that Carter Ham acknowledged that he altered President Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's order to deploy to Benghazi to rescue American personnel, and redirected the deployment to Tripoli, Libya instead.

Wait, how does a commanding general, who acted in contradiction to the direction of the President and Secretary of Defense, still enjoy 'the full confidence of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?'

I’m sorry, but I call bullshit. That would fall under Article 92 UCMJ: Failure to Obey Order or Regulation and is a Courts Martial offense.

In October 2012, General Ham told Rep. Jason Chaffetz that after the 9-11 Benghazi terror attack he was never given the order to secure the consulate in Benghazi.

Wait, he was NEVER given the order? Yet we are also being told that he was ordered, but that he  redirected the troops, from where they were being requested, to a city over 400 miles away.

Add that to the fact that Leon Panetta testified that: “The President made clear that we ought to use all of the resources at our disposal to try to make sure we did everything possible to try to save lives there.” He further testified that within an hour of his return to the Pentagon, he issued an order to deploy the identified assets. “My orders were to deploy those forces, period.…It was very clear: They are to deploy.” Yet it took nearly two more hours before the Secretary’s orders were relayed to those forces and then several more hours before any of those forces moved.

But how does this even make sense, considering the statement in October 2012 by Panetta where he said: "The basic principle is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on; without having some real-time information about what's taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation."

So now the Secretary of Defense says they decided not to take action.

Not sure what he meant by not knowing what was going on, as I think it was pretty clear from the drone flying above, the calls from the Benghazi facility, and the reports at the CIA Annex as to what was going on.

If all of this seems confusing and convoluted to you, imagine how the folks on the ground felt.

Kris ‘Tanto’ Paronto, one of the CIA contractors who went to the aid of the Benghazi facility, said “I asked for the Spectre and ISR [an armed Predator drone]. At midnight, they told us they were still working on getting us that Spectre gunship. Not that it was not available, but that they were still working on it.”

According to Paronto there were two AC-130H Spectre gunships on call that night, both within range of Benghazi. One of them was a six-hour flight away, co-located with a U.S. special operations team in Djibouti, and the other was at Naval Air Station Sigonella, in Sicily. In addition, the European Command (EUCOM), Commander’s In-Extremis Force, was on a counter-terrorism training mission in Croatia. A three-hour flight from Benghazi.

Paronto says that he knew people in that unit and when he spoke with them, after he and his security team got back to the CIA Annex from the diplomatic compound, he was told that “they were loading their gear into their aircraft and ready to go.” Later, they informed him that they had been shut down sometime after midnight.

All evidence now points to a specific stand-down order issued by Secretary Clinton, since the Libyan facilities came under her direct authority. Without a specific request for assistance from the State Department, the Pentagon was powerless to act.

Why do I say this?

Because, in 2015, the State Department released an email that was sent at 7:09 p.m. EST (1:09 a.m. Benghazi time) from Jeremy Bash, an aide to the Secretary of Defense, directly to Hillary Clinton’s office, informing them of the various military assets that were “spinning up” to deploy to Benghazi. Among those assets were Special Forces operation specialists (C-1/10), the In-Extremis Force Paronto talked about, stationed in Croatia, along with two U.S. Marine Corps Fleet Anti-terrorism Security Team (FAST) platoons based in Rota, Spain, the Spectre gunships, armed Predator drones, and possibly elements of Marine Expeditionary Units in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea.

We know this is accurate because, in preparation for deploying the C-1/10 directly to Benghazi from Croatia, General Ham, issued orders transferring authority for C-1/10 to him from European Command (EUCOM). General Ham was actively beginning to stage units to rescue those in Benghazi.

The email further states, and this is VERY important: “Assuming Principals agree to deploy these elements, we will ask State to secure the approval from host nation. Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us.”

To date, the State Department has not released any reply from Mrs. Clinton’s office to Bash’s email request. Why?

What we do know is that the top U.S. diplomat in Tripoli at the time, Gregory Hicks, testified that the State Department NEVER requested country clearance from Libya for any U.S. forces that night.

And whatever happened to the C-1/10 in Croatia?

When orders finally went out from Panetta’s office, an hour later, they included a re-transfer of C-1/10 from AFRICOM back to EUCOM, along with orders for the unit to deploy to Sigonella, Italy, the NEXT DAY, and hold in place. 

C-1/10, the Special Forces team that is actually trained to conduct hostage rescue and high-profile missions was activated to respond and then told to stand down.

Have you read that and let that really sink in?  Are you getting these flip-flops?

Are you seeing that there was never going to be a rescue?

So what exactly did the President authorize that night? Again I ask: was Cross Border Authority ever issued? But, like the former Secretary of State famously said: “What difference does it make?”

The presumptive democratic nominee,  along with the majority of democrats in Congress, are telling you to move along; that there is nothing to see. I don’t know about you, but the only thing I’m not seeing here are real answers, except from those who were on the ground in Benghazi, and those answers paint a sordid picture of lies, treachery, treason and deceit. Not exactly the qualifications I find particularly pleasing in a Presidential candidate.

We, as American’s, now have the government that we allowed. Our leaders no longer respect us nor do they believe they have to answer to us. That is sad and it is the primary reason we are in the state of division that we are. We have to wake up and take back our country one election at a time. We can have civil discourse and we might not always agree, but the time has come for us to educate ourselves and not rely on what we are being told.

The truth is that, from the very beginning, they lied to us about what happened in Benghazi. Now the question is how many more lies were told. To determine that it is up to us to research the facts and vote accordingly.

If you’d like to stay up to date on the newest releases, then please like my Facebook page and feel free to follow me on Twitter.