In the Name of National Security, Media Declares Libya a Non-Scandal

 

After yesterday's closed-door testimony of David Petraeus on the Hill, we now know for a fact that for two weeks the Obama Administration repeatedly and relentlessly lied to the American people about what they knew was the truth behind the September 11 anniversary attack on our consulate in Libya. Unfortunately, we also now know that they're going to get away with it. 

 

 

Within 24 hours of a coordinated assault that left four Americans dead, then-CIA Director David Petraeus was convinced the intelligence proved a local Libyan militia affiliated with al-Qaeda was responsible, and said so in his report.

Then the Petraeus report was edited (probably by Eric Holder's Justice Department) to remove the terror angle and pile the blame on a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video. Over the course of two weeks, this blatantly false Narrative would only grow and sharpen, even though all knew it was a lie -- and by "all," I mean the White House, the terrorists, the media, and anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

In other words, what critics of the White House narrative knew to be true months ago, has now been verified. There's no longer any dispute that for two weeks the White House knew Benghazi was an act of terror and that for two weeks everyone from President Obama to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to White House spokesman Jay Carney to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly told us something the Administration knew wasn't true.  

And still, the media and Democrats don’t care, because….

…the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups. …

[N]ames of groups suspected in the attack — including Al Qaeda’s franchise in North Africa and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah — were removed from the public explanation of the attack immediately after the assault to avoiding alerting the militants that American intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them[.]

That's reporting from The New York Times -- the same New York Times that during the Bush Administration published every piece of classified information leaked to them that might undermine the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But now, apparently, blatantly lying in the name of national security -- with a lie that just happens to be convenient to the president's reelection bid -- is okey-doke with The New York Times … and the Democratic Party … and almost all of the media.

Let's just take a moment to appreciate how absolutely brilliant this is. Using  the rationale of "national' security" as an excuse for a two week pre-election cover up is pure genius. It's total bullshit, but that doesn't mean it's not genius bullshit.

No one believes it, most of all the media, but that's not and never will be the point. Prior to the election, the media was just as desperate as the White House to ensure that the successful assassination of an American ambassador wasn't blamed on the very same al-Qaeda the President had just bragged about decimating in his convention speech. So the lie about a riot over a video was manufactured and a compliant media complied by whack-a-moling Mitt Romney or anyone else who pointed to the lying.

You know, to protect the America they love so much.

All that mattered to the White House and to the media was running out the clock to Election Day.

Which they did.

But everyone involved in this conspiracy knew that what we all knew was the truth would eventually come out. Then what? After all, a four-alarm scandal surrounding a White House that engaged at every level in a two week pre-election cover up, could swamp Obama's second-term agenda and damage his legacy. The White House surely doesn’t want that to happen, nor does the media.

What to do?

What to do?

Ahhh… The ole' National Security ploy!

Listen, I get that public deception is sometimes necessary in the name of national security, but this wasn't a deception. Absolutely no one was deceived. It was a blatant political move to save Obama from the embarrassment of a successful terror attack occurring under his watch just days after having bragged about his handling of al-Qaeda.

Even though everyone -- including the terrorists we supposedly didn’t want to tip off -- knew from day one that the White House was telling a big fat whopper to help the president win reelection, we're now going to be told another big fat whopper by the media that says this was all okay because it was done for mom, apple pie, and Old Glory.

And I'll bet dollars against rubber washers they get away with it.