Still no Beng­hazi jus­tice

The Washington Times Weekly - - Letters To The Editor - BOB JACK North Las Ve­gas, Ne­vada

On Oct. 22 at the Beng­hazi House Se­lect Com­mit­tee hear­ings Hil­lary Rod­ham Clin­ton was caught with­hold­ing in­for­ma­tion crit­i­cal to a com­plete un­der­stand­ing of the na­ture of the at­tacks on U.S. Am­bas­sador J. Christo­pher Stevens’ com­pound. She was also caught ad­mit­ting to what amounted to an abuse of power by her and un­named con­spir­a­tors in the ar­rest of the Cal­i­for­nia-based pro­ducer of a video depict­ing the Prophet Mo­hammed. Fi­nally, she was caught, too, ly­ing about her part in hav­ing spread the false ru­mor of the video’s role in prompt­ing the at­tacks. (Re­mem­ber, she had ini­tially told her daugh­ter, the prime min­is­ter of Egypt and the pres­i­dent of Libya that the at­tacks were the re­sult of ji­hadi ter­ror­ists.)

When asked about the 10 p.m. tele­phone call she had with Pres­i­dent Obama the night of Sep. 11, 2012, she re­fused on two oc­ca­sions to dis­close the con­tent of the con­ver­sa­tion. Why? Most likely in or­der to con­ceal the facts about Mr. Obama’s part in the cover-up and lies. No one asked whether Mrs. Clin­ton had called the pres­i­dent or he had called her, but it was clear the na­ture of the call was highly sen­si­tive — and likely damn­ing.

Mrs. Clin­ton lied and cov­ered up sub­stan­tive facts about the Beng­hazi mur­ders and at­tacks, and her ac­tions lead to the con­clu­sion that Mr. Obama was part of a con­spir­acy to pro­tect his own po­lit­i­cal in­ter­ests.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.