Earlier this week, Fox News Channel analyst Brit Hume asserted that for the investigation of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, “to become the scandal it surely deserves to be,” it will require relentless news coverage.
Hume is quite right, of course; however, there is another requisite for definitive results to develop with regard to Benghazi, and that is the willingness of Congress to see the process through to a just conclusion.
And what would be a just conclusion?
I suppose that depends on two things: One, what is revealed in the hearings, and two, whom one asks. I have always leaned in the direction of the administration having orchestrated the attack for reasons of its own – given his connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and legendary understanding of all things Islamic, it is possible that President Obama could even have arranged for the assault on the compound without the foreknowledge of his Cabinet.
A bold charge, to be sure, but I am operating with such questions as the unresolved Trinity United murders before me. Then there are the possibilities that the tragedy came about as the result of less grave criminal action or a series of irresponsible and craven decisions.
The burning question at present (and which may remain so for some time) is why efforts were not made to rescue the beleaguered staff at the facility and whether or not a stand-down order was given to military personnel in the area. If the latter becomes the case, then obviously we want to know who issued the order. Depending on the outcome, measures might be as severe as charges filed against Cabinet officials or the impeachment of Obama himself. While this president reasonably deserves to be occupying a cell in some federal penitentiary anyway, impeachment presents many troublesome aspects.
A major reason Obama has skated for so long – and particularly with Republican leaders – is that no one wishes his or her legacy to include having brought down America’s first black president. There is the very real concern that such action might ignite civil unrest. The latter is a realistic concern, since both activists and the administration might catalyze said unrest as a “push back” to impeachment.
On May 7, radio host Rush Limbaugh suggested a difficult-to-believe but entirely possible reason for many Democrats (both rank-and-file and politicians) and the press having stood by Obama for so long. Limbaugh put this down to their naïveté; they simply bought into Obama’s PR. I would go further by saying that as a result of this, they could not see how dangerous he truly is. If the abject criminality of this administration becomes apparent to enough Americans, however, and if enough Democratic lawmakers abandon the president, impeachment may become a risk Congress is willing to take.
We must remember that this administration is about as slick an operation that has ever slithered into the corridors of power in Washington – slicker than the Clinton administration, if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s present embarrassment is any indication. While the astute remain aware that she is still the Democratic leadership’s heir apparent, this may not preclude Obama and his closest co-conspirators’ attempting to sling her under the bus.
These being the case, we are still reliant upon the GOP leadership and any Democrats who perceive that public opinion weighs in favor of their flipping on Obama. That may take a lot, but it is actually an increasing possibility. This administration has been very successful in shielding its internal weaknesses from the public; part of this has been due to press complicity, but this could change if too many Democratic leaders start bailing on the president, and some are already distancing themselves from him.
The fact that the establishment press has begun to cover the Benghazi hearings is extremely significant. The dire economic impact of Obamacare and the universal economic hardship in the offing is becoming apparent to Americans, and this is also gaining press coverage as its implementation draws near. The specter of what amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants will do to our toxic economy is a major concern, and there is widespread distrust of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle on this issue. The most recent Rasmussen poll showed the president’s disapproval rating at 51 percent.
All in all, it appears that Americans are not happy with Obama.
This week should be telling, not only as to the direction the investigation into Benghazi will take, but whether it is the beginning of the end for the Obama administration.
But if Congress allows Benghazi to be put down to a mere lapse of leadership skills – whether former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Secretary Clinton or Obama himself are blameworthy – then we can expect an increase in the administration’s impudence, because they will have gotten away with yet another crime. The press will play it off as an unfortunate learning experience. I’m sorry … I dropped the baby. I swear it won’t happen again. …
Then, Benghazi will go the way of Obama’s eligibility and identity fraud, Fast and Furious, military action in Libya sans congressional approval, millions in illegal foreign contributions during the 2012 campaign, the multi-billion-dollar bailout of teachers’ unions using money from food stamp programs, widespread voter fraud during the Democratic primaries in 2008, the attempted bribery of Rep. Joe Sestak, the Department of Justice’s race-based prosecution (or non-prosecution) policies, illegal contributions (of taxpayer money) to foreign political campaigns, voter fraud during the 2012 election and so much more.