Did Obama Suborn Perjury?

3 years ago

Let me begin by reminding you of what I started voicing only days after Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods were murdered at the American diplomatic mission at Benghazi in Libya. It wasn’t an attack by protesters. Nor was it an attack by militants. It was a full-out terrorist attack.

I’ve also been saying since September 14, 2012 when former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told the media “We don’t have and did not have concrete evidence to suggest that this [the Benghazi attack] was not in reaction to the film” that it was highly likely that Obama could be found guilty of subornation of perjury or of conspiracy to commit perjury. I said that because it was obvious that Carney was lying, and with that being the case, it was also obvious that the lies wouldn’t stop with him but that someone else would be brought front and center to carry the lies. And as president, Obama had to be fully informed as to what the factual scenario, of what had taken place. There was absolutely no plausible way he would not be aware of the truth. Knowingly allowing lies to be told made him complicit even if, by some stretch of the imagination, he wasn’t briefed on the lies first – which he would have to have been because he was going to be making the initial statements.

[adsanity id=8405 align=alignleft /]Susan Rice was the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations at the time she was briefed, and sent out to tell the world on “Meet The Press,” that there had not been a terrorist attack; rather, the murders of four Americans and nearly a dozen wounded was the result of protests because of a “very hateful, very offensive video that [had] offended many people around the world.” That was a categorically untrue statement and she knew it, and by that time some in the media knew it as well. Rice continued to tell the media that she was iterating “the best information that we had at the time,” something she continues to do today.

Rice was either lying knowingly or unknowingly, but she was lying. Unknowingly lying could potentially remove the specter of subornation of perjury because Rice could argue she was only repeating what she was told and provided to say. This could be the reason why she was selected instead of someone from the State Department. But what is not in question is that someone provided Rice with false information and the red herring of it was “the best information that we had at the time” is preposterous even by the poor performance record of the Obama administration to that date.

Someone briefed Rice. Talking points are not pulled out of thin air. And specific to those points, there is no scenario known to man by which Rice would be allowed to face the media (five times on that Sunday alone) without being prepped pursuant as to what to say. With that said, I see no way the White House and the State Department; i.e., Obama and Hillary Clinton could not be involved. Plausible deniability be darned, Rice’s stories had to be approved and signed off on at the very highest level of government, and that had to be Obama.

When I say Obama was involved and informed, I see no possible way for him not to be – he is the president. What plausible scenario can there be that would legitimately absolve him of not being involved? When I say that he is singularly responsible for the murder of the four Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, I say it because the evidence finds him responsible.

In a conversation with a source just days after Susan Rice made her appearance on “Meet The Press,” I was told Obama had watched the events in Benghazi unfold in realtime. My source said the ariel drones supplied the live feed, and in fact, the first drone providing feed was running low on fuel and was replaced by a second drone. I was also informed that with Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty still fighting for their lives, Obama, after watching for a period of time, retired to the family’s private quarters for dinner.

On October 28, 2012, Breitbart.com reported: Lt. Col. Tony Schafer told Fox News that sources were telling him that the President was watching the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya in real-time. Schafer told Fox that “only the President” could have ordered backup for the Americans who were under siege by terrorists so the President was most certainly informed of the situation as it was unfolding. “I hate to say this,” Schafer said, “according to my sources, yes, [the President] was one of those in the White House situation room in real-time watching this. And the question becomes, ‘What did the President do or not do in the moments he saw this unveiling?’ He — only he — could issue a directive to Secretary of Defense Panetta to do something.”

Obama, while the ground was still wet with the blood of our Ambassador and three brave Americans, being fully aware of what had taken place, then boarded the presidential jet and went campaigning. Even more damning, on September 13, Obama gave a speech in Golden Colorado in which he paid erroneous tribute to those he permitted to be murdered in Benghazi, saying: “[They were] killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Libya.” He did what he typically does; he gave a speech that focused more attention on himself than those he was supposedly talking about (in this case, he warrants more condemnation because the men that he could have saved he allowed to die). Obama said: “We enjoy our security and our liberty because of the sacrifices they make … I want people around the world to hear me; to all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world.”

Now two years after the fact, Obama has lied and covered up (as emails obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act revealed), and he has repeatedly ignored the families of the murdered Americans, including ignoring the father of Tyrone Woods, who was the guest of Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK), at Obama’s State of the Union Address earlier this year.

Obama didn’t just ignore the father of Tyrone Woods, he did it in grandiose fashion. He singled out and acknowledged several guests attending the Address, and he mentioned himself 74 times in his speech, but he not only refused to acknowledge Mr. Woods, he also failed to mention Benghazi or the names of the men he allowed to be murdered there.

And now, after many months of posturing, hollow threats, and pontificating for the cameras, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), has been tapped to lead a select committee charged with investigating the Benghazi attack. Once again for the record I state without a moment of hesitation that this hearing will amount to nothing more than the equivalent of a failed off, off-Broadway play that not even vagabonds would want to see. But that’s not to say many, if not most non-reasoning Americans will buy into the theater and believe something is being accomplished.

The simple fact is that Trey Gowdy is the quintessential establishment Republican and I can think of very few who give sound bites more flamboyantly than he does. But that won’t solve the truth of what actually happened in Benghazi; why it happened, who was involved in it, and most importantly why Obama fears the truth of Benghazi being exposed more than he does the truth of his past.

In a statement shortly after being selected chairman of the committee Gowdy said: “While people are free to draw different conclusions from the facts, there should be no debate over whether the American public is entitled to have all of the facts.” The truth is the American people will never have the facts if it is left to Gowdy, et al.

There is no question of what took place that fateful night in Benghazi. Four Americans were permitted to be murdered, one of whom was an Ambassador, as the President of the United States watched it unfold in realtime. That is what happened.

The primary question that demands an answer is: Why did Obama refuse to lift a finger to help those Americans? I do not view the “why” of why Susan Rice was chosen to mislead the people pursuant to what factually took place, as important to know as I do who briefed her on the lies she was to tell. As I said, signing off on the lies Susan Rice told Sunday, September 16, had to come from the White House, and if from the White House Obama had to be aware.

Some in the media are sniffing around the edges of why Susan Rice was chosen to advance the White House lies, but none are asking the most important question of why Obama literally sentenced Americans to death by not directing every effort be made to help them. It has been well documented that there were ample military resources that were available to save Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. Why was the stand down order issued?

We have witnessed any number of select investigation committees and Congressional hearings take place since Obama has been in office and the one thing they have all accomplished amounts to little or nothing. Not one of the key persons involved in Fast and Furious were punished. If justice has truly been served, the heads of Homeland Security, the State Department, the Justice Department, and even the White House would have at the very least been forced from office – but that was not the case.

I predict that Susan Rice will not be placed under oath if she is called to testify. I predict she will testify under what is commonly referred to as “truthful deposition” which amounts to little more than her being told to tell the truth, her saying she will, and then continuing to lie, or the White House will claim is protected under “executive privilege.”

The answers to the questions and scenarios I have outlined are predicated upon what was actually taking place in Benghazi at the time of the attack. The answers lie in why the attack took place when it did. And the answers to the questions I proffered lie in why Obama was either afraid or warned not to send in fighter planes.

What I can tell you now is that Obama covering up and lying about the attack so as not to have the attack torpedo his reelection is only partially true. The whole truth has to do with who the terrorists obtained the second generation stingers that are able to bring down the fighter jets that would have flown in that night.[adsanity id=11817 align=alignleft /]

Mychal Massie

About the Author

Mychal Massie

Mychal S. Massie is an ordained minister who spent 13 years in full-time Christian Ministry. Today he serves as founder and Chairman of the Racial Policy Center (RPC), a think tank he officially founded in September 2015. RPC advocates for a colorblind society. He was founder and president of the non-profit “In His Name Ministries.” He is the former National Chairman of a conservative Capitol Hill think tank; and a former member of the think tank National Center for Public Policy Research. Read entire bio here

Join Over 50,000 Other Daily Rant Free Thinkers

The best way to stay connected is by signing up to receive free alerts from The Daily Rant.