Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner announced this morning that the House of Representatives will vote on the establishment of a select committee to investigate the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans. The focus of the investigation will be the efforts of the White House to deceive the public about the nature of the attack leading up to the 2012 elections. The committee will also inquire as to whether the White House has concealed any other critical information about the attack in Benghazi.
By now, those who have paid attention to those events are very familiar with what happened, for the most part. Immediately after the attacks, the White House and State Department repeatedly claimed the deaths of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans resulted from a protest against an Internet video that grew out of control. However, there was never any evidence of a protest. The intelligence community knew within 48 hours that the attack was well planned. The attackers were heavily armed, including rocket propelled grenades. They also knew the attackers had ties to Ansar Al-Sharia, an affiliate of Al Qaeda The White House and State Department repeatedly recited the story of a protest even after they knew the story was false.
The real controversy here is why the White House has tried to prevent Congress and government watchdog groups, Judicial Watch in particular, from discovering how the false narrative became the story presented to the public. Over the course of many hearings, testimonies of how the talking points were prepared have been riddled with conflicting information, and also conflicted with the contents of e-mails. Recently released e-mails flatly contradict some of the Congressional testimony. As seen in the attached video, White House answers about the conflicting e-mails have been unsatisfactory.
As reported previously, one of the accomplishments President Obama claimed during the 2012 election was the killing of Osama Bin Laden and the purported destruction of Al Qaeda. The attack in Benghazi completely undermined that claim. The false narrative created enough doubt that the Romney campaign was not able to directly criticize the President's failure there. As seen during a critical Presidential Debate, any discussion about Benghazi quickly devolved to a discussion about who said what about the attack, rather than a discussion of the underlying policy failures. This raises the question of whether the false narrative was presented in order to deflect criticism of the President because of the upcoming election. If so, the actions of the White House resemble those of President Nixon and the Watergate scandal.
As an update, not only is Al Qaeda not on the run, as President Obama tried to convince the country prior to the 2012 elections, it is still alive and well. Ansar Al-Sharia attacked Libyan forces just yesterday.