U.S. Diplomat Accuses White House Of Benghazi Cover-Up
GREG HICKS BREAKS HIS SILENCE
AMBASSADOR HICKS: 'MY JAW HIT THE FLOOR' WHEN YOUTUBE WAS BLAMED...
Eight months after the Sept. 11 attack on a United States Consulate in Libya, a career diplomat is accusing the Obama White House of a cover-up. Ambassador Greg Hicks is one of three whistleblowers scheduled to testify Wednesday before Darrell Issa and the House Oversight Committee, despite receiving threats that his career would be destroyed for exposing the White House.
We knew from the get-go the Libya attack was terrorism.
Hicks, who did not appear on the show but whose reactions were featured based on transcripts of interviews with Issa's committee, said he was stunned by what UN Ambassador Susan Rice claimed on five different news shows on Sep. 16. When she appeared on Face the Nation, she followed an interview with the President of Libya who claimed he had "no doubt" it was a terror attack. Moments later, Amb. Rice contradicted him and claimed a spontaneous protest was more likely.
Ambassador Hicks watched the Sunday shows and found this contradiction shocking.
"The net impact of what has transpired is the spokesperson of the most powerful country in the world has basically said that the President of Libya is either a liar or doesn't know what he's talking about," he accused. Hicks added, "My jaw hit the floor as I watched this...I've never been as embarrassed in my life, in my career as on that day."
Hicks believes the stunning failure of diplomacy on the Sunday news shows explains why it took the FBI three weeks to gain access to the Benghazi site. The U.S. had effectively humiliated the Libyan President on national TV. That decision, he believed, probably compromised our ability to investigate and track down those responsible.
According to Hicks, no one from the State Department contacted him about what Amb. Rice would be saying in advance. The next morning he called Beth Jones, Acting Assistant Secretary for Near East Affaris, and asked her why Amb. Rice had made the statements she had. Jones responded, "I don't know."
A report published Friday by the Weekly Standard suggests that State Dept. spokesperson Victoria Nuland took issue with the initial talking points and, with backing from the White House, removed any evidence of al Qaeda involvement and of prior attacks on western targets in the region. According to emails reviewed by the Weekly Standard, Nuland said her superiors (unnamed) were concerned about criticism from Congress.
Must Read
The Benghazi Talking Points - And how they were changed to obscure the truth
Obama lies to a national audience:
'I'm Not Sure If Benghazi Witnesses Are Being Threatened'
Carney Unleashed: 'Benghazi Happened A Long Time Ago'
May 6, 2013 at 2:31 PM
Reader Comments (6)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/05/Acting-Amb-Gregory-Hicks-on-9-16-Benghazi-Talking-Points-My-jaw-hit-the-floor-as-I-watched-this
http://dailybail.com/home/carney-unleashed-benghazi-happened-a-long-time-ago.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57582948/three-more-officials-to-testify-about-benghazi-attacks/
As the deputy chief of mission for the U.S. in Libya, Gregory Hicks was on the ground at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli on September 11, 2012, when terrorists launched two attacks on American compounds in Benghazi.
Hicks and two other government officials have been named as witnesses for a Congressional hearing Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee. The others are: Eric Nordstrom, the former lead security official for the State Department in Libya, and Mark Thompson, the acting deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism at the State Department. Other so-called "whistleblowers" from federal agencies, including the CIA, have provided information to Congressional investigators, but are said to be unwilling - so far - to speak publicly because they aren't authorized by their agencies to do so. Some claim fear of retaliation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57582929/official-we-knew-benghazi-was-a-terrorist-attack-from-the-get-go/
Connect the dots...... Massive and dangerous national security leaks (Joint Israeli- USA Iranian nuke hacking program, Drone kill list, and other programs) 12 to 18 months back, with White House at the time repeatedly declining "story callback" offers from the NY Times and other media entities, with Obama disinterested in finding leakers - all conveniently making Obama look like the strong Commander & Chief, such theme THE central theme at the early Sept 2012 Dem Natl Convention......... to slowing down or calling off an attack and leaving SEALS to die for a ("Al Qaeda is decimated") political narrative........to changed talking points and UN Ambassador Susan Rice letting her prestigious high office be used as part of a cover up to buy time to assist in winning the election mere weeks away.
This was at systemic levels having one purpose - re-election at any cost. High crimes? absolutely, and will make Watergate look like a parking ticket. After a series of National Security leaks last spring, left wing reporter Judith Miller (obviously tipped by vested parties) very oddly kept repeating the following talking point, (paraphrasing): "well if Obama FIRST declassified certain programs, then the White House leaked" "its not a crime."
Nice try for Ms Miller to try to clear the minefield, but one is still looking at impeachable type offenses - massive and dangerous national security leaks to win an election, entire programs in shambles for political gain, field operatives exposed or perhaps killed, other current critical assets and potential future relationships permanently damaged going forward, for example Pakistani Dr Afridi (who helped established DNA evidence in the Bin Laden raid) tortured and given a 33 year prison sentence, all this just part of the damage - such systemic abuse and misuse of power precisely why there is an impeachment clause in the Constitution.
Put White House Natl Security Advisor Tom Donilon under oath and watch him plead the 5th. By the way, nothing Donilon does is ever done w/o the full approval of the President of the United States.......