What Was Really Behind Benghazi?

“COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE”

by Joseph DeMaio, ©2016

(Aug. 13, 2016) — INTRODUCTION

Let us be clear from the outset: what follows is not proof that Hillary Rodham Clinton (“HRC”) and/or Barack Hussein Obama (“BHO”) and/or their agents and surrogates were directly responsible for the deaths of the four Americans – Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty – who were abandoned and allowed to perish in the Benghazi attack of September 11-12, 2012.  While their policies and directives may have set the stage for the catastrophe, they were not (as far as we yet know) “on the ground” firing guns at the U.S. “Special Mission Compound” that night.

Moreover, like all other criminal defendants – assuming, of course, they are first indicted by a principled prosecutor – they are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of competent jurisdiction.  There are, of course, judicial courts of law; but then there is the far more important and influential court of public opinion.

Instead, what follows is a compilation of facts, unanswered questions and compelling circumstantial evidence pointing in the direction of a plot so sinister, so criminal and perhaps even so treasonous that even the most hardened of leftists would be compelled – or perhaps not compelled, if as committed liberals they have purged from their brains anything resembling a conscience – to say: “Lock them up.”

And yes, what follows may likely also be trivialized and dismissed as being just another fevered rant advanced by unabashed critics of Clinton and Obama and unsupported by any proof or evidence; yet another “birther” conspiracy theory masquerading as truth.  In that regard, however, recall that the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky affair was initially attacked and outright dismissed by Mrs. Clinton as nothing more than a “vast, right-wing conspiracy.”  Sooooo, HRC…., how did that lame defense work out for you and your impeached “spouse?”

In a nutshell, the plot – first adverted to here; here; here; and most recently here  – centers around the possibility that the Benghazi disaster was the fallout from a botched kidnapping plan.

Under the plot, Ambassador Christopher Stevens was first to have been “abducted” from the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi by agents of then-newly-elected Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.  His “safe” abduction would have been designed and facilitated by lax to non-existent security at the Benghazi facility, consciously designed to be anemic by decisions and directives of either and/or both the president, his secretary of state and/or their respective agents and surrogates.  If anything went wrong, security forces would simply be told to “stand down” and not interfere.  Why?  Don’t ask, don’t tell…, just obey your orders.

According to the plot, Stevens was to have been held in “safekeeping” in Benghazi (or somewhere) until just prior to the November 6, 2012 general election.  For public consumption between his abduction and late October 2012, of course, Stevens’ life would be “threatened” daily and his status as a doomed “infidel” repeated 24/7 by the media.

Then, just prior to the election, the president would “reluctantly” yield to intense mounting pressure from the media and “human rights” groups – excluding, of course, the Black Lives Matter gang, since it was not yet in existence and, even if it had been, because Stevens was Anglo – and with “deep anguish” agree to the “kidnappers’” demands that he exchange the imprisoned “Blind Sheik” for the safe “release” of Ambassador Stevens.

Recall that the “Blind Sheik,” Omar Abdel-Rahman, was convicted of criminal sedition and conspiracy in the investigations following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.  He is (purportedly) serving a life sentence without possibility of parole in a federal prison in Butner, North Carolina.   Egyptian President Morsi had publicly made the effort to free Abdel-Rahman from U.S. prison for “medical and humanitarian” reasons a top goal of his administration.

By exchanging the terrorist for Ambassador Stevens, both BHO and Morsi would get what they wanted.  Morsi would get Abdel-Rahman freed from an infidel prison, to the joy of his Muslim Brotherhood thugs and Islamists worldwide, and BHO would be lionized by a sycophantic media as the hero who saved Ambassador Stevens’ life.  BHO would thereby also avert the threatened video beheading of Stevens by his “captors” – speaking of “vile videos,” seventh-century savages have some nasty habits – and give him a much-needed campaign boost.

In the months leading up to the 2012 general election, polls showed him to be virtually tied or “within the margin of error” with Mitt Romney and in real danger of losing the upcoming election.  What better way to bamboozle the electorate and detonate a devastating “October Surprise” on Romney and the GOP?  It would have been a slam-dunk “win-win” gambit for Morsi and BHO.  What could possibly go wrong?

Far-fetched?  Perhaps.  Is there hard, “smoking-gun” evidence of such a plot?  No…. at least not yet.  Is there a rapidly-growing body of circumstantial evidence consistent with the theory?  Oh…, oh, yes.

The theory, if supported and corroborated, would answer a lot of questions about what was actually behind the Benghazi attack still lingering even after the issuance of the final House Select Committee on Benghazi Report and the private-citizen “Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi Report.”  Neither document addresses the theory, even in the context of marginalizing or, much less, debunking it.  This omission is particularly odd in that one of the members of the private Citizen’s Commission – retired Four-Star Admiral James (“Ace”) Lyons – is the same individual who, in 2013, first brought the theory to the attention of the general public.

Interested?  Read on.

——————-

Editor’s Note:  Please watch for the next installment of this article.