Benghazi Continues To Fester As The Truth Comes Out

[KingOrfeo]

Most people don't pay any attention to Jon Stewart and his fake news.

Many do. And, they are younger, smarter and more affluent than Bill O'Reilly's viewers.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

 

[AllyRose]

It's going to be tough watching someone else take over for Jon.

 

[Comshaw]

This story linked by Judicial Watch:

JUDICIAL WATCH DISMANTLES ANOTHER BENGHAZI COVER-UP



by TOM FITTON 16 Dec 2014, 1:40 PM PDT

After seven months, the House Benghazi Select Committee held its second hearing recently. We monitor its proceedings closely. The Select Committee’s very existence is because of our uncovering of a key White House Benghazi scandal cover-up email.

Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) got to the heart of the matter in his opening statement:

On September 11, 2012, at 9:45 p.m., twenty or more armed men assembled outside the U.S. Mission in Benghazi and breached the Mission gate. Several Ansar Al Sharia members have been identified among this group. The initial attackers were armed with AK-47-type rifles, handguns, and rocket-propelled grenade launchers. During this initial attack, buildings within the Mission were set on fire. The fires set during the attack led to the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and Sean Smith. The remaining State Department personnel escaped to a nearby U.S. facility, known as the Annex. It also came under attack, which continued throughout the early morning hours of September 12th, culminating in a mortar attack that killed Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

What I just read is the now official position of our government, filed in US District Court by the Department of Justice in a motion to detain the one defendant who has been captured and will stand trial.

20 or more men. The weapons of war. Arson. Sustained attacks. Precision mortars. Terrorist groups.

It is interesting to note the word – “terrorist” – so rarely used by those in positions of responsibility in the days and weeks after Benghazi is now the very word used in the very statute charging the very defendant accused of killing our four fellow Americans. “Conspiracy to Provide Material Support and Resources to Terrorists Resulting in Death”—that is the charge now. But in the days after the attack in Benghazi the word “terrorist” was edited out and changed. Now, the administration uses the word “attack”. But in the days after the attack in Benghazi the administration edited out and changed the word “attack”. Its one thing to get it wrong and then eventually get it right. It was right initially. It was right the first time. Then it was edited and changed to be wrong.

The Select Committee asked about the security lapses at Benghazi and received no answers. Hearings are nice, but Judicial Watch wants answers and results. Just as Judicial Watch exposed the White House involvement in the cover-up to which Trey Gowdy refers, we exposed yet another Benghazi cover-up and yet another set of lying talking points about the very issue the Committee was being stonewalled about—the failure of security at the Benghazi facility.

State Department documents obtained by Judicial Watch show the scandal surrounding the security lapses in Benghazi, Libya, will continue to grow and fester in the months ahead. The documents acquired through a court order in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit highlight the State Department’s $783,284.79 contract with U.K.-based Blue Mountain Group (BMG) and show that BMG did not have a license to operate in Libya at the time of the attack. As it turns out, BMG did not have a license because of a business dispute with XPAND Corporation, which was its local partner in Libya. The documents also quote a State Department official describing the Benghazi security issue as “an emergency situation.” Even so, it is now apparent that there was no sense of urgency on the part of those in charge.

Here’s what we know: BMG informed State Department Contract Officer Jan Visintainer of the dispute on June 5, 2012. Visintainer advised the company that the department “is not required to mediate any disagreements between the two parties of the Blue Mountain Libya Partnership.” The letter goes on to say that “it is in the best interests of both of the 50/50 partners to resolve their differences and successfully complete this contract.”


Despite all the alarm bells and warnings, the State Department documents include details about an agreement dated August 20, 2012, between Blue Mountain Group and XPAND Corporation to dissolve their partnership. On September 9, 2012—just two days before the terrorist attack—an unidentified partner at Nabulsi & Associates (the law firm representing XPAND) wrote to Visintainer advising the department that XPAND, which owned the security license under which BMG was operating, that it would “hereby bar and prohibit BMUK [Blue Mountain U.K.] from utilizing such license.”

The response to the XPAND letter is very telling. An unidentified BMG official wrote the following to Visintainer on September 11, 2012:

I have never experienced anything like this in business before. The agreement was signed and we were to operate under the [Blue Mountain Libya] license and confirmation of this was due through from [sic] the partners. However, they have had a change of mind and now this. I will call you very shortly.

The documents show that the State Department had planned to terminate the contract with BMG in response to the dispute over licensing.

On the morning of September 11, 2012, David Sparrowgrove, a State Department regional security officer, wrote to Visintainer and others, “The dissolution of the partnership leaves BMG without a security license to operate in Libya and the Libyan partner has no capacity to manage the guards or the contract. As a result, we feel the best course of action is to terminate the contract in short order…” Sparrowgrove also writes, again, just hours before the attack, “I’ve CC’d OPO Branch Chief Ricki Travers who has had the unfortunate pleasure of dealing with these types of emergency situations in the past.”

The fact that the dispute between BMG and XPAND meant the company was operating without a license is completely glossed over in an email from Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Mark Toner dated October 17, 2012. The email contains talking points to share with Congress that are fundamentally misleading. For instance, the talking points leave out any specific references to the key September 9 and September 11, 2012, security emergency dates at the Benghazi facility.

Our records also reveal that Blue Mountain Group was not the only security contractor to bid on the Benghazi contract. A February 1, 2012, email from State Department contractor Neil Kern identifies two other bidders, including Torres Advanced Enterprise Solutions. According to federal contracting records, Torres, a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business based in Virginia, has won nearly $70 million in contracts with the department (including those to provide guard services in Pakistan, Iraq, and Jordan).

So why was the Benghazi contract awarded to BMG when it had never previously provided security for U.S. government agencies?

There’s another issue we uncovered that deserves further scrutiny and exposure. That would be the “Benghazi Group supporting the Secretary,” which was managing responses to press and Congressional inquiries. What was this “Benghazi Group”? Who participated? Is it part of the alleged cover-up operation that was witnessed to have scooped up documents to protect Hillary Clinton?

As we have previously reported, Judicial Watch has obtained records revealing significant and ongoing problems with BMG’s security operations in Benghazi. These included several guards walking off the job out of fear for their safety and an altercation between the BMG guard force commander and a member of the 17th February Martyrs Brigade that led to the commander’s dismissal.

The role BMG played in protecting the security of the Benghazi Special Mission Compound first came to light shortly after the September 2012 terrorist attack when State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland emphatically denied on September 18, 2012, that the State Department had hired a private firm to provide security at the American mission in Benghazi. The department later was forced to retract that false claim.

These documents show the Obama administration withheld vital information from the public and from Congress. It appears to us that it is more than an odd coincidence the Middle East firm providing security for the Benghazi facility desperately wanted out two days before the terrorist attack.

The full production of documents can be found here, here, and here. This document find was first reported on Fox News by Catherine Herridge.

So, as the House Select Committee reportedly is figuring out how to narrow its inquiry, Judicial Watch is doing the hard work of ferreting out the truth about the Benghazi cover-up that even a historic Select Committee can’t manage to find or disclose.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...l-Watch-Dismantles-another-Benghazi-Cover-up/

http://wrongologist.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/COW-Ebola-Imports.gif


Comshaw

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

Yeah bullshit. At the very most we're talking under two million people out of 320 million, many are young, don't vote, don't give a fuck.

Oh, they give a fuck all right, and they vote.

For years the majority of his show was dedicated to bashing Bush, 47% I think I read. Fake news.

That would not make TDS fake news.

 

[Adre]

Yeah bullshit. At the very most we're talking under two million people out of 320 million, many are young, don't vote, don't give a fuck. For years the majority of his show was dedicated to bashing Bush, 47% I think I read. Fake news.

I'd say that was going pretty easy on W.

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

"Fake news" is their description of their show.

Oh, of course TDS is fake news, but W-bashing would not make it so.

 

[unregistered]

 

[AllyRose]

If it was false, which much of it probably was, it would. You folks are guilty of inflating by magnitudes of order the mistakes of the Bush administration for political gain. I will add, and in doing so you've been quite successful in corrupting the low information demographic's concept of reality when it comes to Bush. Mission Accomplished!

If [Fox News] was false, which much of it probably was, it would. You folks are guilty of inflating by magnitudes of order the mistakes of the Obama administration for political gain.

 

[unregistered]

 

[AllyRose]

Care to list those exaggerations?

Let's start with the bogus War on Christmas and then work our way from there.

 

[KingOrfeo]

You folks are guilty of inflating by magnitudes of order the mistakes of the Bush administration . . .

That would be impossible.

 

[AllyRose]

That would be impossible.

"Are you trying to make me look stupid in front of the other guests?"

"You don't need any help from me, sir."

"That's right!"

 

[miles]

Care to list those exaggerations?

Can't wait to read her drivel.

 

[unregistered]

 

[AllyRose]

Yes I know as Fox News has run zero exaggerations of the Obama administration worth talking about. Much of their reporting is unnecessarily kind.

Oh please. Sean Hannity had to inflate his ego by comparing his "workout routine" to Obama's.

As if people really give a !@#$ about his exercise habits.

 

[unregistered]

 

[AllyRose]

There may not be much of a difference between Hannity's exercise regimen and the President's golf course workout. However, we are still trying to figure what else the President does besides play golf and beg for money.

Hannity actually talked about Obama jogging on an elliptical and using weights.

But you're not an informed viewer, so I'll forgive you for your cynicism.

 

[unregistered]

 

[AllyRose]

Yes, Obama struggles with five pound weights, we've seen the video.

I have more information, education, and experience in my little finger, little one, than you have in your whole body. Just sayin'.

You have an abundance of misinformation, right-wing education, and experience jerking off to Breitbart articles than I do.

Just sayin'.

 

[unregistered]

 

[AllyRose]

What misinformation?

American education.

How many times has your pussy been plundered by Jon Stewart in your mind?

The New York Post Op-eds, Breitbart articles, and that leaflet from the National Enquirer don't count as an education. They do, however, count towards your misinformation tab.

And zero.