The President’s culpability:
President Obama on David Letterman, September 18th 2012:
here’s what happened the you had a video that was released by somebody who lives here – sort of a shadowy character who there is a extremely offensive video directed at Mohammed and Islam, making fun of the profit, so this caused great offense in much of the muslim world
Unbelievably, inventing another propaganda narrative does not, and should not, astonish anyone. Those paying attention called “bull shit!” four years ago. The hallmark of the ‘Obama has always been Duplicity. So, the coverup does not shock me; it is it is way the administration went about it. Did they think nobody would notice? Which over-educated midwestern grad-student staffer concluded that triggering global anti-American riots was a ‘swell idea?”
On September 16, 2012 (5 days after the attack) Barack Obama’s UN Ambassador Susan Rice appears on five talk shows bolstering the administration’s foreign policy. Specifically, Rice emphasizes that Christopher Stevens‘ death resulted from a spontaneous demonstration that turned violent. Later, during the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee‘s hearing on the 9/11 attack, state department officials testify under oath that indeed no protest existed.
“Why did you lie”
Lastly, 14 days later Obama defends our values (read 1st Amendment freedoms, particularly speech) in response to a “disgusting video”. By the end of the speech the President refers to this video on six separate occasions. By the second presidential debate, the intelligence community, the state department and yes, you saw it live, the President himself conceded that a video never sparked a protest that never happened.
So the question is:
How, when and why did the Administration conclude that a 5-6 month old video on YouTube precipitated the death of Christopher Stevens? There was no protest, no video and an awareness of increased hostility in Libya.
The President wagged the Dog – manufacturing a protest resulting from an obscure video to deflect negative attention from his campaign so close to election day. And, incidentally and unnecessarily (with unparalleled help – albeit unknowingly by major news networks) questioned the scope of the First Amendment and sparked worldwide anti-American riots.