…we have this reminder from Paul Mirengoff of, that the report did no such thing:

I’m told by a former senior government official who has participated in rescue discussions like the ones Team Obama had (or should have had) on Sept. 11, 2012 that it’s the Secretary of State’s job to secure permission from the country in question (here Libya) for our military to enter its territory. Alternatively, it is her job to decide not to obtain permission and simply act. Until the Secretary of State does one or the other, apparently the military can’t proceed.

If this is true, then the most likely explanation for why the military didn’t deploy, as Secretary of Defense Panetta had ordered, is that Hillary Clinton didn’t obtain timely permission and didn’t authorize the military to proceed without it — the obvious thing for her to have done, given that American lives were at stake. The fact that the State Department was fretting about whether our military personnel should wear civilian clothes and use vehicles without U.S. markings seems consistent with this explanation. The State Department appears to have been bargaining with the government of Libya over clothing while our people were under deadly attack.

Hillary Clinton hasn’t always been so fastidious about obtaining foreign government approval. The Qaddafi government obviously did not grant the U.S. permission to deploy aircraft to topple it.

When the object was to aid Islamists in overthrowing a friendly (at that time) Libyan regime, Clinton had no qualms about violating a sovereign government’s air space. When the object was (or should have been) to rescue Americans under attack deadly by Islamists, Clinton apparently felt compelled to negotiate.

Four Americans dead, the Secretary Of State does nothing to prevent it either beforehand (despite repeated pleas for security) or while it happened…

…and media tell us this report has “exonerated” her – then quickly go on to other news as if that ended the issue and there was nothing left to talk about.

These people may call themselves journalists.  Their business cards may say they are journalists.  But they are not.  They are paid propagandists.for one side of the political aisle.

Please remember that every time you read their “reporting”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *