BREAKING: White House Told During Benghazi Attack That It Was Terrorism

UPDATE: Greta van Susteren and Liz Cheney discuss the president’s debate statement he did all he could to protect our people during the attack, while our forces only an hour’s flight away in Italy weren’t deployed during any of a 7 hour, multi-wave attack our leaders were able to watch from drones overhead. Even an F-18 flyover may have scared the attackers off, but nothing was done. Meanwhile on one occasion Reagan acted within 90 minutes to scramble fighters to take down a possible terrorist threat in the sky. Decisive leadership can get things done. The question is: where was the president? Where was the Secretary of State? Wouldn’t the Secretary of Defense have given the president a choice of assets to deploy in the region? Nothing was done, and our president says he did all he could? Greta: “we just sat and watched.”

This reported tonight by Reuters, CBS, Fox and others.

Watch Fox’s principal report here:

Reuters reported:

Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

Three emails were obtained.

The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time – or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began – carried the subject line “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack” and the notation “SBU”, meaning “Sensitive But Unclassified.”

The text said the State Department’s regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was “under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well.”

The message continued: “Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four … personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.”

A second email, headed “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi” and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that “the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared.” It said a “response team” was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

The message reported: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

Were these just a few emails lost in the rush? Nope. According to the Examiner:

“Fox is told that approximately 300-400 national security figures received these emails in real time almost as the raid was playing out and concluding,” van Susteren added. One of the addresses that received the emails “is the White House Situation address,” she said.

What else do we need to know? Hundreds received these emails, including the White House situation room. There’s no room for confusion. Immediate reports did not suggest a spontaneous protest to a YouTube video. They clearly indicated a terrorist attack.

While I have a hard time calling anyone a liar, it’s getting harder and harder to come up with plausible excuses for how the White House could possibly have maintained in all honesty a position that the attack in Benghazi, which they watched through military drones, was a reaction to the YouTube video. It’s getting nigh impossible to come up with any possible explanation other than utter incompetence or dishonesty. For all Obama’s bluster in Monday night’s debate about “one thing [he] learned” is the need as Commmander-in-Chief to send clear messages and avoid changing positions, his record on this point is disastrously inept.

With this information, how can the White House get to a place where it blames an irrelevant YouTube video for 2 weeks rather than saying it was a terrorist attack? How can it send out the UN ambassador to perpetuate this story with such certitude?

While officials did [early on] mention the possible involvement of “extremists,” they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

It would be one thing to come out and say “we just don’t know what happened, we are investigating and will let you know when we know something.” But it’s clearly another to blame a cause the evidence before you indicates is wrong.

Here’s CBS’ video report:

If, as this report suggests, the president really thought terrorists were behind the attack, why didn’t the administration slow down and say they just didn’t know? Why take such a definitive position contradicted by the evidence?

Something is really off here, and the president needs to come clean. Was it that the White House truly believed the CIA report mentioned by the Washington Post that suggested the Benghazi attack was a result of the video? If so is this a case of willingly believing the story that suits you best despite significant evidence to the contrary? What does it say about the president or his administration that he’s willing to ignore facts staring him in the face? My bottom line is that it’s getting tougher to find ways to let the White House off the hook here.

About Paul Johnson:

Paul Johnson is an attorney for venture capitalists and their portfolio companies by day, husband and father of three teenage boys by night. He’s an avid supporter of Mitt Romney for president and, as a graduate of Brigham Young University, a BYU football and basketball fan. Paul also enjoys competing in triathlons. Because he’s in the “Clydesdale” (over 200 lb.) class, he has even had podium finishes from time to time. Paul also has the distinction of being a big enough U2 fan to be willing to travel to Dublin to see them in their native environment.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to BREAKING: White House Told During Benghazi Attack That It Was Terrorism

  1. Cathy says:

    Just watching this right now….this should be the nail in the coffin and the smoking gun! Time to come clean and take the punishment. This will be the true test of the liberal media if they jump on this story or continue to be traitors to the American people. We want answers and the families of the 4 men that perished are owed answers.

  2. ccr says:

    WHO started the barely-viewed-internet video excuse that was used for days/weeks, even by the Obama at the UN.

    It’s either total wrecklessness/incompetence……..or they are hiding something that can’t be known before the election.

  3. James says:

    I find it a political statement for nObama to blame a video when he clearly knew – nearly in real time that the attack was an ACT OF TERROR – which he has not yet really called it…

    Then he blames Mitt of making a statement that is politicizing the event when he doesn’t know the details? Sir – you did – and do know what it is… Grow a pair and call it what it is.. Make a true statement..

    Yes, I outsourced the security of the consulate to an organization whose parent is the same group that tweeted and face book boasted about the attack….

    Yes, I disregarded repeated requests of the ambassador for security.

    Yes, I could have scrambled us forces and been there – but, well I didn’t…

    As for Mitt’s statements? He most likely has access to the same security briefings as president Obama, though, he probably actually READs and participates in the briefings. So, for his statement, he probably knew just as much if not more than nObama did.. so now we can say no his statement was not political it was presidential where nObama’s were purely political.

  4. Victor Lundquist says:

    I just checked the NYT and the Washington Post and they have no story on this! It is truly stunning how the MSM is covering all the way for Obama. STUNNING!

  5. Cathy says:

    Not surprising Victor. Hopefully FOX and all the REAL news agency’s, bloggers, tweeters, and people for truth in America will keep the pressure on so this administration will be held accountable.

  6. ccr says:

    The LACK of MSM covering this needs to be posted all over FB……….and tweeted. Media COVERING for Obama…..again…..and ignoring Obama’s responsibility with Benghazi!!!

    I wish a PAC ad would run on the alpha stations during news hour when some older people get their ONLY news. They will never know the truth!

  7. sherms says:


  8. Annette S says:

    Good Article Paul….This story does not surprise me especially with all the intelligence and technology that we have access to.

  9. AfricanforRomney says:

    The entire govt is corrupted! Shame on them! They don’t seem to work for the people truthfully until someone expose their lie. Of course, this is not a one party issue, however, where are GOP leaders on this issue? How come i don’t see congress on the capitol steps demanding justice, truth, and demanding resignation from Hillary-cover up Queen and Susan Rice a scumbag, a cover up queen from Rwanda war? These two have no shame, i heard a rumor Susan Rice may take secretatry of state job in the 2nd term of Obama admin? Are you f…kidding me? Shame on this govt!

    The govt are sending millions patriots at the war zone, thousands diplomats around the world and congress don’t seem to care to finding out the truth. Shame! Shame! Shame!

    Fire! Hillary and Susan Rice ASAP!!!

  10. Dave says:

    Watergate pales in comparison to this pack of lies coming from Obama and his administration. Obama, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, and other should resign. Seriously people is this someone we want in the White House another term? For me the answer is absolutely not! I’m still angry for Obama and Hillary apologizing for the American people for being insensitive regarding the Muslim religion. The U.S. must be the laughing stock of the Islamic terrorist and the Middle East. I will express my anger in full on November 6. Romney/Ryan 2012

  11. Ann says:

    If Obama were doing his job as president, he would have been more alert and called our military in for help; or supplied necessary security that Ambassador Stephens repeatedly asked for. Time to get rid of the slacker in the White House who doesn’t do his job!! Consequences: 4 Americans were murdered while O was sleeping, or campaigning for another term! NOT THIS TIME!!!! I feel so very sorry for the four dead Americans and their loved ones. OBAMA LIED WHEN PEOPLE DIED!
    Time to get a real leader in the White House! GO MITT ROMNEY AND PAUL RYAN!!!!

  12. Joan C. says:

    Are we not surprised that Obama did not know about anything. He is seldom in the White house and never attends the intelligence briefings. Bush attended every day. Obama does not. Also, are we surprised that he would not call this a terrorist attack. He still will not call the Fort Hood murders of our soldiers a terrorist attack. He must be politically correct, whatever that means. It means not insulting anyone but putting our solders and embassy workers in harms way. Let them be killed, just don’t label it a terrorist attack. He has won that battle you know. I agree OBAMA LIED WHEN PEOPLE DIED!