August 2, 2013

Does anyone remember when Rep. Jason Chaffetz outed the fact that the United States had a CIA compound that was using the consulate in Benghazi as cover during a Congressional hearing back in October? Apparently after months on end of scandal mongering that President Obama was willing to let the consulate there go undefended and ZOMG! he allowed four Americans to be killed and he was AWOL and not paying attention to what was going on in Libya on 9-11, the new "scandal" is that there were a bunch of CIA agents on the ground at that compound in Libya and the CIA really doesn't want them to talk to Congress about what the hell they were doing there.

Steve at No More Mister Nice Blog summed this latest revelation, that doesn't really seem to be all that new, by Tapper here: WINGERS HAPPY TO SCRAP THEIR ENTIRE BENGHAZI SCANDAL IN FAVOR OF A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BENGHAZI SCANDAL:

CNN's Jake Tapper has this today about the Benghazi attack:

... Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

... Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency's missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency's workings.

The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career.

... Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.

A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously.

While it is still not known how many of them were CIA, a source tells CNN that 21 Americans were working in the building known as the annex, believed to be run by the agency....

The right, which has been trying to spit the phrase "phony scandals" back in the president's face ever since he used the expression in his Knox College speech, is now cackling in triumph: [...]

But wait -- wasn't the scandal of Benghazi supposed to be that Obama, who hates America and wants our enemies to win, allowed the consulate to go undefended, then covered up what happened because he was running for reelection claiming to have Al Qaeda on the run, hence the notorious talking points making reference to a spontaneous protest of a YouTube video? Doesn't this kinda blow that narrative completely out of the water?

As Steve discussed in his post, this article from Business Insider explained what really might have been going on there: There's A Reason Why All Of The Reports About Benghazi Are So Confusing:

"The U.S. effort in Benghazi was at its heart a CIA operation," officials briefed on intelligence told the Wall Street Journal, and there's evidence that U.S. agents—particularly murdered U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens—were at least aware of heavy weapons moving from Libya to Syrian rebels.

WSJ reports that the State Department presence in Benghazi "provided diplomatic cover" for the previously hidden CIA mission, which involved finding and repurchasing heavy weaponry looted from Libyan government arsenals. These weapons are presumably from Muammar Gaddafi's stock of about 20,000 portable heat-seeking missiles, the bulk of which were SA-7 surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles.

What's odd is that a Libyan ship—which reportedly weighed 400 tons and included SA-7s—docked in southern Turkey on Sept. 6 and its cargo ended up in the hands of Syrian rebels. The man who organized that shipment, Tripoli Military Council head Abdelhakim Belhadj, worked directly with Stevens during the Libyan revolution.

He followed up on what a complicated mess this actually appears to be:

Is what we were doing in Benghazi appropriate or admirable? For months, the right tried to tell us that you'd say it was reprehensible if you were a rock-ribbed, military-loving American, and you'd approve if you were an America-hating hippie. But if we're shipping weapons to Syrian rebels, and that's what's being covered up, John McCain would applaud and many of his fellow Republicans wouldn't.

But hardcore Obama haters will beat him with any sick the can grab. This will do.

This makes me wonder if Jake Tapper is proving himself to be more than willing to help the right with their Groundswell operation as well.

Can you help us out?

For 18 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.