What difference does it make? - Hillary Clinton during her cross examination in front of congress where she probably perjured herself a dozen times - you know the old saying "The couple that perjures together, stays together".

Benghazi whistleblowers allegations: US forces in Tripoli told to stand down on night of attack; Hillary cut department’s counterterrorism bureau out of the loop

By Doug Powers  •  May 6, 2013 04:27 PM

Yesterday we discussed the upcoming congressional hearing during which three Benghazi “whistleblowers” are expected to testify that there never was a demonstration at the consulate that grew out of control, and that Benghazi was a planned terrorist attack “from the get go.”

The “drip drip” is fast turning into an open fire hydrant. Today, there are two more accusations from the whistleblowers that directly contradict the administration’s previous claims. Here’s the first:

On the night of Sept. 11, as the Obama administration scrambled to respond to the Benghazi terror attacks, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a key aide effectively tried to cut the department’s own counterterrorism bureau out of the chain of reporting and decision-making, according to a “whistle-blower” witness from that bureau who will soon testify to the charge before Congress, Fox News has learned.

That witness is Mark I. Thompson, a former Marine and now the deputy coordinator for operations in the agency’s counterterrorism bureau. Sources tell Fox News Thompson will level the allegation against Clinton during testimony on Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

Fox News has also learned that another official from the counterterrorism bureau — independently of Thompson — voiced the same complaint about Clinton and Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy to trusted national security colleagues back in October.
[...]

Sources close to the congressional investigation who have been briefed on what Thompson will testify tell Fox News the veteran counterterrorism official concluded on Sept. 11 that Clinton and Kennedy tried to cut the counterterrorism bureau out of the loop as they and other Obama administration officials weighed how to respond to — and characterize — the Benghazi attacks.

“You should have seen what (Clinton) tried to do to us that night,” the second official in State’s counterterrorism bureau told colleagues back in October. Those comments would appear to be corroborated by Thompson’s forthcoming testimony.

A Clinton spokesperson said allegations that Hillary cut her own department’s counterterrorism bureau out of the loop are completely untrue. As always, when pondering two competing sides of a story, consider which party has the most to gain or lose. To decide who that might be in this matter, I’ll give you some time to decide — maybe until 2016 or so.

The second story: According to whistleblower Greg Hicks (via CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson), on the night of the attack, rapid reaction troops in Libya that night were told to stand down:

The Obama administration has claimed that “neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any requests for assistance in Benghazi.”

Jay Carney deflected questions about this accusation by citing a report from the Accountability Review Board that was led by two men of “unimpeachable expertise”.

Too bad nobody followed up by asking Carney if the deputy coordinator for operations in the State Department’s counterterrorism bureau and the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time of the attack do have impeachable expertise.

More about the “unimpeachable” review board Carney referenced:

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General is investigating the special internal panel that probed the Benghazi terror attack for the State Department, Fox News has confirmed.
The IG’s office is said by well-placed sources to be seeking to determine whether the Accountability Review Board, or ARB — led by former U.N. Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen — failed to interview key witnesses who had asked to provide their accounts of the Benghazi attacks to the panel.

What could be more impartial than a State Department review of the State Department’s review of the State Department’s actions the night of the Benghazi attack?

All together now: “What difference does it make?”

**Written by Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe