Skip to content

Dianne Feinstein admits she reviewed over 200 threat warnings before the Benghazi terrorist attack

December 2, 2012

 While Susan Rice and her lies have been the focus of the investigation, as well as the media coverage,  into the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11th which took the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods it is not the biggest issue in the scandal. Sure, Susan Rice and the cover up which ensued is A big issue but it is not THE big issue; while the question of who changed the CIA talking points for political reasons is a question in need of an answer there are many more important questions which need to be answered.

  The Obama regime is more than happy to see all the attention paid to Susan Rice because it takes the focus off the questions which really need to be answered, among the questions are: Why did the Obama regime ignore Chris Stevens’ pleas for more security? Why did the Obama regime remove security teams before the attack in spite of Chris Stevens’ pleas? Why did the Obama regime ignore the warnings that an attack was imminent? Why did Barack Obama skip intelligence meetings in the week leading up to September 11th when everyone knows this is a date terrorist would love to target for another attack? Why did Barack Obama not send in help after the attack started when it was in the area? Why did Barack Obama lie during the debate and claim he linked the attack to terrorism on September 12th if he really thought the link was too tenuous? How is it that the Obama regime already had the You Tube video excuse cued up and ready to go and is it because they were warned an attack was coming and did nothing to prevent it? Was the CIA annex in Benghazi really an illegal CIA black prison site? Was the Obama regime smuggling weapons recovered in Libya through Turkey and into Syria? And lastly, does Barack Obama still feel the deaths of four Americans was just “a bump in the road?” 

  Today Democrat Dianne Feinstein appeared on ‘Face the Nation’ and she admitted that as Senate Intelligence Committee chairwoman she reviewed over 200 threat warnings in regards to Benghazi before that fateful day:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she has reviewed “well over 200″ threat warnings that applied to the Benghazi mission before the Sept. 11 attack that killed four Americans.

“Now, it couldn’t say at a certain time or on a certain day. There had been prior attacks. It’s well known, the attack on the British ambassador, attack on the Red Cross. They both pulled out for a period of time,” she said today on CBS’Face the Nation.

The Senate Intelligence Committee chairwoman also noted homemade improvised explosives that had been thrown over the fence in April and caused some damage to a wall, “which is not much, but it’s an indication.”

“If you look seriously at the intelligence, the country is spotted with training camps. The country is a magnet for all of these groups, and there is a kind of lawless history about the Benghazi area, also,” Feinstein added.

  She received and reviewed over 200 threats although she claims none of them provided an indication to the date which the attack would occur. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that the anniversary of the biggest and most successful terrorist attack on America–September 11th–would be a target date and yet Chris Stevens was not provided the extra security he begged for prior to his death. Somebody dropped the ball here big time, and where does that proverbial buck stop again?

  While Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (And why wasn’t she the one addressing the talk shows instead of Susan Rice when Barack Obama stated Susan Rice wasn’t involved in Benghazi in the first place if it wasn’t to shield Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?) tried to throw the intelligence community under the bus before we learned from General Petraeus that someone higher up in the Obama regime changed the talking points to downplay the terrorist angle before Susan Rice became a household name we are now learning the intelligence was good:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), appearing with Feinstein, agreed that “the intelligence was good.”

“I mean, the threat stream was very clear leading up to that 9/11 event,” Rogers said, noting that two days later al-Qaeda affiliates killed four Tunisians protecting the U.S. embassy there.

“The intelligence said, hey, they’re looking for Western targets. They want to be more aggressive. All of that was right. What I find just absolute gross negligence was that they did not take the right precautions to protect the ambassador and the consulate employees,” he said. “Nor did they have the right plans in place to get them out. And that’s what, I’ll tell you, this is a serious, serious event here.”

  He is 100% right, it was gross negligence on the part of the Obama regime not to fortify the Libya consulate on the anniversary of September 11th in spite of the warnings and Chris Stevens’ pleas for help. The propaganda arm of the Obama regime has turned the Benghazi scandal into a sex scandal and an issue of Susan Rice’s involvement in the cover up when they should be asking if Chris Stevens was sacrificed by Barack Obama for political reasons in the days leading up to the November 6th election–after all, Barack Obama was running on the position that his policies had al Qaeda on the run and Benghazi flew in the face of that lie. The Obama regime had a vested interest in playing down the terrorist angle of this story and that is precisely what they did before the election and continue to do to this day.

14 Comments leave one →
  1. December 2, 2012 9:21 pm

    I wish more people would do posts asking why there is no focus on what our people were doing in the months prior to the attacks. That is where the answers are that all Americans deserve to hear. Thanks for this post, Steve.


    • December 2, 2012 9:31 pm

      You are welcome Jim. The regime has successfully executed a feigning maneuver designed to take the focus off of where it should be, on the days leading up to the attack and the response to the attack, and I can only hope that this will all come to light at some time in the future.


  2. December 2, 2012 10:32 pm

    So we’re to surmise that a public that voted for a man who proved himself incompetent in foreign relations, the economy, Hurricane Sandy, a man with an incompetent and corrupt justice department, a man responsible for trillions in new debt, a man responsible for killing jobs and stifling the employment market, runaway regulations, runaway EPA, a man who has reduced the CIA and FBI to the status of a praetorian guard, a man who promised to gut the military and raise taxes as well as reneging on 99% of what he promised during his 2008 campaign could give two shits about Benghazi or four dead Americans? Don’t bet on it.


    • December 3, 2012 6:36 am

      He doesn’t care about those four men other than how it could hurt him politically and isn’t it funny that three high ranking military men were removed from their posts in the days following the attack?


    • Anonymous permalink
      December 5, 2012 12:32 pm

      Since Obama is responsible for trillions in new debt that means he inherited a stable economy and a balanced budget when he came into office right peter?


  3. December 2, 2012 11:02 pm

    Reblogged this on The D.C. Clothesline and commented:
    Reblogging this Steve. Thanks for everything you do.


    • December 3, 2012 6:37 am

      Thank you!


  4. Anonymous permalink
    December 3, 2012 5:38 pm

    but he’s the teflon president. Nothing sticks to him


    • December 3, 2012 8:35 pm

      You’ve got that right!


  5. Anonymous permalink
    December 5, 2012 12:36 pm

    Just think. President Obama will soon be known as America’s most successful president. He helped America recover from the Bush Depression, put millions back to work, cut the deficit, and the list goes on, and on, and on. All this with 100% Republican obstruction to every single thing that might create jobs, and after 30 years of Reaganomics hollowing out the middle class.

    President Obama is a hero.


    • December 5, 2012 1:20 pm

      You will rethink that position when Obama’s policies lead to a double dip recession or even a depression before his second term is over. Stock up on food.


    • December 5, 2012 4:09 pm

      Since you will not put a name, “Anonymous”, what flavor Koolaid have you been consuming?


  6. Anonymous permalink
    December 6, 2012 12:52 am

    Reality. What you won’t hear anything about on Fox Lies lou222. Bush came into office with a growing surplus that was going to (if not screwed with) pay off our entire national debt in 8 to 12 years. He left office with America burning down, and talk of another great depression and a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit handed off to Obama. Millions had lost their jobs, and their homes so some Wall Street scum could bank a few million in the Caymen Islands.

    And you want to complain about Obama…..

    Obama has done a great job beginning to stop the Bush / Reagan nightmare and hollowing out of the middle class. Now it is time for the rich to start paying their fair share. You know someone making minimum wage pays a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the Mitt Romney’s of this world.

    That’s ok right righties?


    • December 6, 2012 8:46 am

      Well, “Reality” must be very tasty to you! Enjoy it while you can. I don’t watch FOX, but apparently you watch all the best shows, I can tell that.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: