Hillary told Benghazi lies as SEALs still fought for their lives

An armed man stands near the burning U.S. special mission in Benghazi Sept. 11, 2012

An armed man stands near the burning U.S. special mission in Benghazi Sept. 11, 2012

The Obama administration told two completely different versions of the Benghazi terrorist attack for the sake of political expediency and even began spreading the story of a video triggering the violence while Americans were still fighting for their lives.

That’s the main takeaway of Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, after the special, months-long investigation into Benghazi by a select committee concluded this week.

On Sept. 11, 2012, terrorists attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, murdering U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and his subordinate, Sean Smith. Hours later, two former Navy SEALs, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were killed by terrorist mortars at the CIA annex near the consulate.

On Tuesday, the Republicans on the committee, led by chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., released its official report, detailing the Obama administration’s failure to provide appropriate security for the U.S. consulate in Benghazi for months before the attack, its failure to launch any response to the attack and its willful deception in blaming the attack on a YouTube video.

But Rep. Jordan and Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., issued a supplemental report on their own. Jordan told WND and Radio America the official account adds great clarity and more information into what happened, where it happened and when. He said the additional report explains why it happened and the answer is simple.

“Politics. They were 56 days before an election, eight weeks out from an election,” Jordan said. “Libya was supposed to be their legacy.”

The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’

He said the Obama administration’s actions during and after the attack betray its real priorities.

“What was the motive to stay [in Benghazi] when everyone else was leaving?” Jordan asked. “What was the motive to be talking about whether military should go in military or civilian clothes and making them change clothes? What was the motive for talking about going in unmarked vehicles? And what was the motive to mislead the American people and blame it on a film when everyone knew right from the start the film had nothing to do with it and there never was a protest?”

Jordan said the troubling answer to all of those questions is the same.

“The evidence clearly shows the motive was political concerns that outweighed everything else, including getting planes off the ground in a timely fashion to maybe get there in time to help Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty,” he said.

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio: 



Jordan said while the Obama administration ignored multiple warning signs to either pull out or beef up security, the attack itself threatened one of the Obama-Biden campaign’s top talking points, that the U.S. had al-Qaida on the run.

“[Hillary Clinton] was the one who pushed for [Moammar] Gadhafi’s ouster a year before. They’re doing victory laps. They’re saying this is how foreign policy works. No boots on the ground. You can oust a dictator as part of the Arab Spring,” Jordan said. “Then they have 13 months of all kinds of violence, all kinds of dangerous situations, assassination attempts on the British ambassador, the security situation deteriorates, and we stay when almost everyone else leaves. And then it happened.”

Most galling for Jordan is the intentional duplicity from Obama, Clinton and other administration officials. He points to a statement issued at 10:08 p.m. Eastern time the night of the attack, blaming the mayhem on a protest over a YouTube video defaming Muhammad. Yet an hour later, Clinton emailed her daughter, Chelsea, to say it was a terrorist attack. The next day, Clinton told the Egyptian prime minister via email that the video had nothing to do with it.

Three days later, then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was continuing to publicly attribute the attack to the video even though State Department officials in the region were saying exactly the opposite.

“They were consistent,” Jordan noted. “Privately, they would tell the truth. Publicly, they would mislead. Privately, it was a terrorist attack and publicly a video-inspired protest that leads to this attack. Every step of the way, it was done for political concern.”

He said that mentality left Woods and Doherty to fend for themselves.

“At 10:18, when she issues that statement, Tyrone Woods is still on the roof of the annex fighting for his life,” Jordan said. “It’s not until an hour and 10 minutes later, approximately 11:15, when the mortars hit the CIA annex building and take the lives of Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.”

“He’s still fighting. At 10:08, she’s already blaming a video in the official statement from our government that evening,” Jordan said. “They started the political spin right from the get-go.”

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

Jordan said there are still questions that remain unanswered, thanks to constant obstruction of the committee’s work – namely whether there were weapons being funneled from Libya to Syrian rebels and what the president was doing throughout the evening.

“You had Democrats on the committee who really didn’t want to help it and you had an administration that did everything it could to put up impediments and road blocks, blocking us from getting access to certain witnesses and documents and information,” he said.


U.N. denies knowledge of military trucks labeled ‘U.N.’

Bloggers were quick to point out the curiosity of U.N. trucks being transported on U.S. highways.

Bloggers were quick to point out the curiosity of U.N. trucks being transported on U.S. highways.

The identity of the owner of the military-style trucks painted with the United Nations’ initials seen being transported through Virginia this week was narrowed on Wednesday. A little.

They most probably are owned by Afghanistan. Or Albania, Algeria, Andorra or Angola … or any of the rest of the 193 member states of the international organization. All the way through Zambia and Zimbabwe.

“These are not our vehicles. … We don’t have vehicles,” U.N. spokeswoman Ismini Palla told WND.

But she said it’s possible that a member state placed an order with an American manufacturer, and they simply were being transported to their new owner.

“I assume, and that’s a big assumption, that possibly there has been an agreement for the U.S. to manufacture, to produce these vehicles,” she said.

Any such arrangement would be “bilateral,” she pointed out, with details made available only from the seller and the buyer.

Just a day earlier, WND consulted with a couple of major defense contractors who denied they knew anything about the vehicles.

Alpine Armoring had reported earlier to a fact-checking website that the vehicles “seen in these photographs were purchased by the United Nations for use outside the United States.”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

The explanation continued, “A number of defense industry manufacturers are based in and around Washington, D.C. (a region that includes Virginia) for obvious logistical reasons, and the representative confirmed that the trucks were ordered by the U.N. for use in locations abroad.”

But when WND contacted Alpineco, a spokeswoman denied the vehicles were produced by the company.

WND then was referred to another company, BAE Systems, where a spokesman also denied his company’s divisions were in any way connected to the vehicles.

WND originally reported on Monday when a wave of blogs reported trucks painted with the United Nations initials were being moved by flatbed through Virginia.

The issue got attention after the story,”UN military vehicles seen rolling down Virginia interstate,” appeared in the American Mirror. Writer Olaf Ekberg asked: “What were United Nations vehicles doing in Virginia! … That’s what motorists were left to wonder when they saw UN tactical vehicles – with bulletproof glass – on a flatbed truck and rolling down Interstate 81.”

Photographs, posted by Jeff Stern on Facebook, showed the vehicles were military style, painted white with U.N. logos.

“Can’t begin to tell you how many of these I passed today on 81 near Lexington, VA. Interesting times ahead!” Stern noted.

From there, readers of Stern’s post expressed concern as well.


“Tactical Vehicles, with bullet proof glass? What ever could those be for, and why are UN vehicles here, in THIS country?!” wrote Fernando Johnson, the American Mirror reported.

Another Facebook reader, Vincent Simmons, also noted, “They are sealed against gas, too.”

And it isn’t the first time U.N. vehicles have been sighted on America’s roads.

A year ago Tim Brown with Freedom Outpost wrote: “There are a lot of stories that are reported about United Nations vehicles being transported on U.S. highways. The latest comes by way of video footage that shows U.N. trucks that seem to be attempting to hide their logo as they are transported on a U.S. highway in Northern Louisiana. The trucks appear to be brand new U.N. medical trucks, as identified with red crosses.”

The site then reported how brown paper covering the trucks had blown off on one side, revealing the U.N. logo. Brown wrote: “The question I have is, why cover up the U.N. logo? It certainly isn’t to protect it. After all, there is no covering over the red crosses that adorn the sides and rear of the vehicles.”

In 2014, America’s Freedom Fighters asked, “We have U.N. vehicles being shipped on U.S. highways. One has to wonder why?”

The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’



Stunner! DOJ wants to keep Clinton Foundation docs quiet until 2018

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton

Only a couple of days after Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s tête-à-tête with former President Bill Clinton in Phoenix, her department is asking a federal court for permission to delay release of Clinton Foundation communications with federal employees until 2018 – when Hillary Clinton hopes to be half way through a first term in the White House.

The Daily Caller reported the DOJ motion asking for permission to delay for 27 months producing the correspondence between Hillary Clinton’s top aides while she was secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation’s private operations.

“If the court permits the delay, the public won’t be able to read the communications until October 2018, about 22 months into her prospective first term as president,” the Daily Caller noted. “The four senior Clinton aides involved were Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Michael Fuchs, Ambassador-At-Large Melanne Verveer, Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, and Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin.

Pre-order your copy of No. 1 New York Times best-selling author Jerome Corsi’s newest blockbuster, “Partners in Crime: The Clintons’ Scheme to Monetize the White House for Personal Profit,” from the WND Superstore and you will receive it weeks before the August 2, 2016, release date!

New estimates suggest there are more than 34,000 “potentially responsive documents,” which include communications between Hillary Clinton’s aides and either the Clinton Foundation or Teneo Holdings, where Bill Clinton was a paid consultant, the report said.

The documents had been sought by Citizens United, whose president, David N. Bossie, said the plan is “totally unacceptable.” He accused the federal government of “using taxpayer dollars to protect their candidate, Hillary Clinton.”

Previously the government was supposed to release the documents by July 21, well in advance of the November election and in plenty of time for voters to learn what went on.

But DOJ lawyers told U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras they wanted more time.

A report developing at virtually the same time documented the calls for Lynch to recuse herself from a DOJ decision over whether to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her handling of classified information through an unsecure private email server.

The calls were prompted because of a brief meeting Lynch held with Bill Clinton.

WND reported Wednesday that Lynch confessed to meeting with Bill Clinton briefly at the Phoenix airport, which raised questions because of the time and location.

At the time, Lynch claimed the two talked about grandchildren, travels and the like but not the FBI investigation.

Now, Michael Cutler at Front Page Magazine is offering a simple solution to all the questions of propriety that are being raised.

“The stakes could not be higher – yet Loretta Lynch acted in a way that she should clearly understood created that illusion of wrong-doing. … It is impossible to understand her motivation or what she was thinking as she sat on her airplane meeting with Bill Clinton – but one thing is now perfectly clear, she must recuse herself from any involvement in the decision making process where the investigation/prosecution of Hillary Clinton is concerned,” he wrote.

The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’

Former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams, at PJ Media, sounded off.

“Whenever Bill Clinton gets on a plane to meet a woman, he’s usually up to no good,” he wrote. “Attorney General Loretta Lynch said her impromptu tarmac summit at Phoenix Sky Harbor was a purely social affair. Golf and grandchildren were on the agenda, she said – and not how a home-brew server crammed with classified information ended up in Bill’s basement.

“However, the attorney general normally doesn’t meet with family members of a target in an active FBI criminal investigation. Hillary is just that – a target in an FBI criminal investigation.”

He continued: “Many won’t believe Lynch and Clinton only discussed grandkids and golf in her cozy jet. But I do. That’s all they needed to discuss for Bill to interfere with a criminal prosecution. Sophisticated insiders don’t need to use clumsy and explicit language. Merely having the tarmac summit interferes with the investigation, even if golf and grandkids were the only topics discussed. The tarmac summit sent a signal. It is a signal to all of the hardworking FBI agents who have the goods on Hillary.

“The attorney general has made it clear what team she is on. The attorney general isn’t on the side of justice. She’s on the Democratic Party team. This is the unspoken message from Lynch to all of the FBI agents on the case and to all the front-line lawyers at the Justice Department: When you send your recommendation to refer Hillary’s case to the grand jury, you had better realize your burden to convince me I should sign off on a grand jury request is higher than you thought. These are my friends.”


Majority of Democrats want 3rd term for Obama

(The Hill) A strong majority of Democrats would cancel the 2016 presidential election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump if it meant President Obama could serve another term, a new poll found.

Data provided to The Hill by the conservative polling outlet WPA Research found that 67 percent of Democrats would take a third term for Obama over a potential Clinton administration.

Only 28 percent said they’re ready to move on from the Obama White House, while 6 percent are undecided.


White House defends Lynch from Clinton-meeting fallout


(TheHill) The White House on Thursday defended Attorney General Loretta Lynch from criticism over her private meeting with former President Clinton.

The meeting took place in the midst of a federal investigation into his wife, Hillary Clinton, and her private email server during her tenure as secretary of State, but White House press secretary Josh Earnest said both Lynch and President Obama are committed to conducting a fair investigation.

“I think the bottom line is simply that both the president and the attorney general understand how important it is for the Department of Justice to conduct investigations that are free of political interference,” he told reporters.


Trump slams ‘sneak’ Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting

(Talking Points Memo) Donald Trump on Thursday hyped a private meeting between Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton as one of the biggest stories of the year after the interaction inflamed ring-wingers hungry for an indictment of Hillary Clinton.

“I think it’s so terrible, I think it’s so horrible,” Trump told conservative talk radio host Mike Gallagher. “I think it’s the biggest story, one of the big stories of this week, of this month, of this year.”

Trump, who said the meeting “was really a sneak,” went on to say it was evidence of “the rigged system” and showed poor judgment.

“You see a thing like this and, even in terms of judgment, how bad of judgment is it for him or for her to do this? Who would do this?” he asked.


Pentagon ends ban on transgender troops in military

(Associated Press) Transgender people will be allowed to serve openly in the U.S. military, the Pentagon announced Thursday, ending one of the last bans on service in the armed forces.

Saying it’s the right thing to do, Defense Secretary Ash Carter laid out a yearlong implementation plan declaring that “Americans who want to serve and can meet our standards should be afforded the opportunity to compete to do so.”

“Our mission is to defend this country, and we don’t want barriers unrelated to a person’s qualification to serve preventing us from recruiting or retaining the soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine who can best accomplish the mission,” Carter said at a Pentagon news conference.