'No Statute of Limitations When it Comes to Finding Out the Truth' on Benghazi, Anti-Terror Expert Says
Remember when Chuck Todd said that “All questions” on Benghazi “have been answered?” His comments came over a year after then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton famously responded to inquiries on how Benghazi was handled by telling Congress: “What difference at this point does it make?”
"Why was Ambassador Stephens still in Benghazi, even after the British and all other foreign governments closed their embossed and pulled out their personnel?" asked Brigitte Gabriel, CEO of Act for America, an anti-terrorism grassroots organization.
In a powerful delivery, she presented a series of questions about Benghazi that have not been answered, and asserted that the answers do make a difference.
"Was there a weapons swap program between Benghazi and Syria, and who authorized it, and was Ambassador Stephens involved - was that the reason he was still there?
"Why were additional requests for security denied? Ambassador Stephens sent 13 additional requests for security to the State Department, and every single one of them went unheeded." Gabriel went on, speaking at a meeting of the Benghazi Accountability Coalition held at the Heritage Foundation yesterday.
"And why did our leadership, our government, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the time, sit back the night of the attack and not order immediate military support to save our personnel and get them out of there? And why [were] those who were close by and able to help told to stand down?
"Why did we entrust the security of our embassy and our personnel to a contracted-out Muslim Brotherhood front entity?
"And why would Susan Rice lie five different times to the American public about a video? Lie - five different times on five Sunday shows. Who told her to lie? Who gave her the marching orders to deceive the American public?"
"There is no statute of limitations when it comes to finding out the truth, and we are determined to get down to the truth," Gabriel concluded.
“A lot of mainstream media said, ‘We’ve already had four committees on Benghazi,” Gabriel said, adding that the media questioned the need for another committee.
“The difference [this committee] can make is [that] none of the other committees had subpoena power to call someone and put them under oath, and force them to speak the truth. That is what we have now, with the Select Committee under [Rep. Trey] Gowdy,” she added.