“Benghazi? It’s just a Fox story, don’t pay any attention there…”

“Really? Like ObamaCare?”

Score a big one for Megyn Kelly who is doing the Lord’s work on Benghazi.

Fourteen months ago the House Intelligence Committee asked the State Department that they wanted to interview the survivors from the Benghazi attacks. Fourteen months of stonewalling and five of the survivors finally were given the opportunity to be heard in a closed hearing of the Intelligence Committee. Committee Chair Mike Rogers (R, MI) discussed their testimony with Megyn Kelly.

Kelly’s first question to Rogers, were you stonewalled by the State Department? Rogers answer, yes.

Kelly then asked Rogers whether the fighting was constant or was there breaks. This is important because, as Kelly pointed out, State has a counterterrorism team that is normally dispatched when assets are attacked and it was held back. The administration says the attack stopped and they thought it was over so they didn’t send the team.

Rogers said that it appears that there were intervals in the fighting. Another member of the Committee, Devin Nunes (R, CA), said earlier that in his opinion there was no break in the attack. It will be interesting to see where this shakes out and the Committee has transcripts of the testimony that they will be reviewing over the next few weeks.

Kelly next brought up the rumor that the survivors were forced (asked?) to sign new non-disclosure agreements related to Benghazi. Rogers noted that there can be reasons to sign new or revised non-disclosures (every CIA employee signs on when they are hired) it was unusual that they were given the new agreements on the day they returned to Washington for the memorial service. As Kelly noted, “this doesn’t pass the smell test” and Rogers agreed and the Committee will be looking into this issue.

Here’s the next segment, pay close attention to Rogers.

Why. Why indeed. Let’s see how long the State Department and the White House can stonewall that question.

Kelly goes on to ask Rogers about the fact that Ambassador Stevens had testified before the House Intelligence Committee before he went to Libya.

Why did the Ambassador testify? What did he say? We likely won’t be enjoying transparency on that question, and the even bigger question comes from Charles Krauthammer.

What was the President doing during those eight hours our consulate was under attack, during those eight hours when brave men disregarded direct orders to save the lives of others, during those eight hours when a United States Ambassador was being murdered. Those eight hours when the President called the Secretary of State – that would be Hillary Clinton – and she informs the press that a Islamophobic film maker was the cause of the attack.

After all, at this point what difference does it make?

Give them hell Representative Rogers, to paraphrase Chesty Puller (warning: link is written in the language of USMC infantry), the enemy has you surrounded you can’t miss them.

Subscribe 150h


Curioser and curioser...
The War on Marriage comes to Chattanooga
  • jim_m

    What was the President doing during those eight hours

    What do you want to bet he was squeezing in 36?

  • GarandFan

    “What was the President doing during those eight hours our consulate was under attack?”

    Prepping for his campaign speech in Las Vegas. Priorities, ya know.

  • superdestroyer

    Who cares? Do you think that anyone in Virginia who voted against a social conservative, Fox endorsed candidate like Ken Cuccinelli would have changed their votes in more information about Benghazi comes out.

    When will conservatives finally realize that they need to focus on big issue and the future instead of trying to drum up irrelevant scandals.

    • Jwb10001

      Yes why would anyone want to hold elected officials and washington bureaucrats accountable for their actions, that would be stupid….IDIOT!

      • You waste your time and inconvenience electrons to no end. Down ding and move on.

        • superdestroyer

          As the Republican Party fades away and the U.S. becomes a one party state, I guess it makes sense to the last few Republicans to chase after every irrelevant shiny new toy (scandal or minor issue) while ignoring the big issue and Republican failures in the past.
          Compared to the GW Bush Adminsitraitons massive failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, Benghazi is lose in the noise.

    • Brett Buck

      I care. When people representing the United States of America are targeted and gunned down by organized terrorist, and the US government leaves them to die, I think that’s rather important.

    • stan25

      How would you feel if one of your family members was gunned down by terrorists? Wouldn’t you want to find out who was responsible for it and what could have been done to stop it? The families of the slain at Benghazi have that right too. Even if the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States is in control.

      • Commander_Chico

        You make it sound like this was the Boston bombing or something.

        • stan25

          The attack at Benghazi was a grander scale of the Boston bombing and no one in the corrupt administration wants anything to do with it. They are afraid that they will lose support of the Ragheads

  • Rep. Rogers looks scared to me. Compare him to Nunes interview. Lee Stranahan @stranahan on Twitter is worth following, regarding the cover-up.

  • Yeah, Really! Doing good Kelly, keep it up. Praying for you, and America’s freedom to be kept in spite of the Obama Regime. Obama is just a wantabe dictator with a cargo ship of lies to hide, however it is a sinking ship. America
    has been free too long to go for the Usurper’s BS or Hitlary’s either.