Many people would like to see Obama impeached. But so far, other than dissembling, I’m not sure what he is guilty of concerning the Benghazi fiasco.
The biggest grievance seems to be that he gave a stand down order when he could have sent in the military and likely saved some American lives.
But a stand down order is a military decision and far be it from me to second guess the commander in chief. Obviously he has access to more information concerning the circumstances on the ground than anyone else.
For all we know, our relationship with Libya was at a turning point and we were about to receive huge amounts of intelligence that would have given us the upper hand against al Qaeda top operatives for years. Had we sent in the military, we would have jeopardized years worth of negotiations, risked the lives of multiple agents, and be set back in the war in terror for years.
Or perhaps there was immediate knowledge of a nuclear device that had been planted at the embassy and were the military to detonate it, thousands would perish.
Given his special knowledge of the circumstances, the commander in chief would have to weigh all the options and make a decision for the greater good and hope the diplomats would be spared.
Were these, or something similar, the facts, the order to stand down could be justified.
If that were the case, then one would expect the CIC to own that decision. He would have to say that it was his, he deeply regrets the loss of life, and provide some level of explanation about his reasoning.
But that’s not what happened. Instead, we have everything from denial that a stand down order was issued, to admission that there was an order, but no knowledge of who gave it.
With the denial and lame cover up story of a spontaneous riot started by a comical, vulgar B-movie portrayal of Muhammed, we are left to speculate about his reasoning.
It’s hard not to think that the denial was nothing more than a faltering campaign’s weak effort to shield the incumbent candidate from the certain deleterious effects of a terrorist attack on American interests during his watch.
The sickening thought is that, rather than taking responsibility, Obama tries to shift the blame from the Islamist terrorists to America and the First Amendment. What he was saying, in effect, was, “There needs to be limits on our free speech. Were it not for this absurd portrayal of Muhammed, we would not be having this problem.”
With the existing known behavioral patterns of Obama, one is left to conclude that this effort to curtail free speech to any degree is part of a greater plan to limit more freedoms of the American people.
Even if the video was the cause of a spontaneous protest, embracing American values means no amount of blasphemy and vulgarity justifies riotous murder. The president should know, believe and defend this.
It makes my stomach turn to think that a man who is such a weasel and a coward who will do and say any lie and go to any length to retain his office was elected twice by the American people.
Truth and Trouble 