Benghazi Whistleblowers' hearing held...little news coverage. Why?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/06/Source-Only-President-Could-Have-Made-Stand-Down-Call-During-Benghazi-Attack

Why you ask? Because those in this administration don't want to admit that terrorist want to kill Americans. And when it does happen they make excuses. You cant tell me our soldiers were to far away to stop all that happened there. No matter what they should have sent our boys to help!!! I don't care if they think they wouldn't have made it in time. At least try. Do something to save the lives of our people. Don't give an order to stand down and watch Americans be murdered!!! I want the truth of what happened within the White House and the defense department. Heads need to roll!!!!

The frustrating thing is the marine killed (seal?) was lighting up a target with a laser for an air support strike, which never came. He risked, and paid, the ultimate price to try and help the ambassador.


The media is out to protect this administration, except for FOX news...imo.

Buried by the liberal media.

Hillary was never sworn in before her testimony. Therefor she is not subject to perjury or lying..

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/

The revelations were so strong that even ABC took notice and roasted Obama's spokesman today.

There is no longer any doubt from anyone (who matters) that the administration lied and covered up the true events to help get Obama elected.

OK, so what difference does it make if the attack was the result of terrorists in the area or anti-Islamic videos posted on YouTube?

The cover up. remember watergate?

Where did you get that story? There were no strike aircraft anywhere near, so why would the guy fire a laser designator? I'd think a Marine, and especially a Navy SEAL would know that. Of course they would, but probably not the blogger who's story you ripped that from. Nice try.

I was maybe five years old when Watergate happened.

There's no cover up over Benghazi. The reason motivating the attacks are a tiny point that doesn't really matter, especially in the perspective of who's trying to fix the damage. How can you know what was in the minds of the attackers on that day in Benghazi, and why would one reason matter over the other? How would that have changed the response to the attacks?

When the attacks were announced in the press conference, or even before Congress, the statements made reflected intelligence reports at the time. Intelligence reports are evolving things. Especially early on, but throughout the investigation, until they can completely nail down the causes and steps to prevent in the future the reasons could bounce all around.

I wish Republicans in Congress tried this hard to find out about the original 9/11 attacks, but they couldn't blame that on Obama, so they don't care.

Drink your kool-aid and go to bed.

If you were up on the story you would know that there was an 11 hour battle before Stevens was captured, SEAL teams were only 3 hours away and support aircraft were even closer.

Also the larger support group (20+) that was to accompany Stevens was reduced to 4 members before take-off.

They were all told to "Stand Down"!

This whole situation was orchestrated to cover a bigger agenda and it blew up in their faces, now coming back to haunt them, but something else will happen soon so we all forget this fiasco....unless that's what Boston was supposed to do.....

According to an ABC news release...."Benghazi occurred seven weeks before election day. The administration's strategy was simple: Downplay the terror attack, change the narrative, and run out the clock. And that's what it did. "