It was odd in that for several weeks, the Obama administration had finally dropped the idiotic narrative that the attack on the Benghazi consulate was caused by a “mob turned violent” over an obscure anti-Muslim video that no one had seen.
A closer look at the video shows that it was in fact taped on September 12, a few hours after Obama made vague remarks about the attack in the Rose Garden. That it was part of a 60 Minutes interview that CBS had clearly suppressed.
Why was the video suppressed?
It didn’t fit the narrative. Even though we later found out that Obama watched the attack on the Benghazi consulate in real time. Even though we later found out Obama had received an email that went directly to the White House Situation Room blaming the al-Qaeda-linked group Ansar al-Sharia, Obama in this suppressed video refused to call it terrorism. That Obama, in the suppressed video, oddly at the same time, thought the “mob turned violent over a anti-Muslim video” was equally ridiculous.
It was obvious what Obama was trying to do in the interview. He wasn’t sure what lie he was going to tell the American people about the attack and wanted to be as vague as possible.
But it wasn’t vague enough. It didn’t fit the narrative.
So it had to be suppressed.
What we now know is that Barack Hussein Obama was shipping weapons from Libya to Syria—arming the al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood-linked Syrian rebels—yes, our enemies—with Ambassador Chris Stevens as the point man—and needed a cover story to keep it out of the public’s eyes.
Arming of our enemies?
That’s treason in my book.
And if I remember correctly, that’s grounds for impeachment.