Categorized | Governor Palin's Posts

Governor Palin: Americans Deserve Answers

Governor Palin posts another Facebook note today laying out a list of questions that the media in this country SHOULD be asking the Obama administration.

Via Facebook:

There are many questions about the Benghazi attack that Americans deserve answers to. It’s been too long an “investigation” and too tragic for the families of lost loved ones for the White House and its friends in the media to ignore these questions:

– When and why did the YouTube trailer of the anti-Muhammad movie surface as any kind of credible reason for the attack?

– Where is the proof that that video was linked to Benghazi? It’s a weak excuse to claim some supposed rumored link between Benghazi and the attacks on our embassy in Cairo. Benghazi was very different. “Spontaneous” protestors don’t come armed with rocket-propelled grenades.

– What was the President’s response to the previous Benghazi embassy attacks in April and June? Why did officials ignore the requests for beefed up security to protect Americans after these attacks?

– Why did the Obama Administration assume a YouTube video was the reason for the Benghazi attack but not all the evidence to the contrary from the postings and emails that circulated that night in real time as the attack took place and Americans were being killed? And why weren’t those emails disclosed until this week?

– Why did the Obama administration spend our tax dollars to make and air television ads that ran in the Middle East apologizing for the YouTube video when they had so much credible evidence that it was nothing but a red herring?

– How much did President Obama know about this? In an interview he gave to CBS News on September 12, President Obama alluded to the fact that the Benghazi attack was not—as his U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and other officials were characterizing it—a “spontaneous” protest triggered by the Cairo embassy attack and the video. He told CBS News in that interview, “my suspicion is that there are folks involved in [the Benghazi attack] who were looking to target Americans from the start.” If he suspected this then why did he allow his administration to continue blaming the attack on the YouTube video? And why didn’t CBS News call him out on this when his comments in their interview with him, which they didn’t air until a month later, belie the administration’s YouTube narrative?

Someone in the media must demand answers. Until the media does its job to give us the Who What Where When and Why of this cover-up, there will be even less trust for this “cornerstone of our democracy” – if less trust and respect for the media is even possible today. We sincerely want to be able to trust the media. We need to be able to trust them. Their job is so important, and we appreciate all the good journalists in America. Our troops fight to protect all our freedoms including the freedom of the press.

– Sarah Palin

Tags: , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • Steve_Flesher

    Excellent!  Details, substance, and common sense.  Surely all good things which the press will ignore.

    • MaMcGriz

       …but millions upon millions of Americans will not.

      The truth will out.

    • StandProudNow

       The press probably will… but she has created quite a buzz with her jivin’ statement, and as many eyes are upon her she comes out with this :)

      She is masterful!



  • angeleno

    Sarah is being too polite to Obama, who panders to Islamofascists while they are in the act of murdering Americans, Good questions though, which won’t be answered because the media is in cahoots with Bo to cover up all his treason.

    The best response to all this is to VOTE OBAMA OUT on Election Day! Romney will win if every loyal American votes to throw out Obama the Manchurian candidate.

  • SusanWo4p

    WOW!!! She asks some wonderful questions.
    I am so glad she is DEMANDING TO KNOW SPECIFICS…because, I too, have spent a lot of time just trying to piece it altogether…and it STILL DOESN’T MAKE ANY SENSE.
    Nothing adds up.  Too many lies have been told and there is no way they can try and smooth out all the inconsistencies.
    As a result, we, the American People, are being lied to by our President, and everyone in his Administration…and are being GUIDED by a propagandist Media to STOP ASKING QUESTIONS, SUSPEND OUR REASON AND JUST DO WHAT WE ARE TOLD.
    Maybe that kind of media brainwashing works with people in Communist countries, but we are Americans and we expect to be treated with some dignity and respect by those in public office.
    There is no doubt in my mind, that the Obama Administration starting telling lies and covering up the truth, because they had EVERY ASSURANCE THAT THE MEDIA WOULD PROVIDE PROPAGANDA SUPPORT.  
    Thank God, Sarah is pushing this.  I pray to God, people will continue to DEMAND ANSWERS.

  • 1776er

    Great FB post from Sarah.  It is clear that Obama and the Administration are now stonewalling Benghazi– refusing to answer questions– until after the election. 

    I would add a few questions of my own to Sarah’s well aimed list:

    –why did we have a ‘consulate" in Benghazi?
    –what was the real reason for the American presence there?
    –what was the real job in Benghazi?
    –were there any diplomats working at the "consulate"?
    –who was in day to day charge of the "consulate" and what was his/her title?
    –when will we hear from that person about what happened in Benghazi?
    –how many tourist visa applications were processed in Benghazi?
    –how many commercial and cultural interchanges took place at the Benghazi consulate?
    –what was the day to day purpose of the CIA "Annex" about a mile from the "consulate"?
    –were weapons being stored at the Annex?
    –was Benghazi a trans-shipment point for CIA gun running activities?
    –if so, where did those weapons originate and where and to whom were they going?
    –who was Ambassador Christopher Stevens negotiating with at Benghazi and what was the subject of negotiation?
    –was Ambassador Stevens in negotiation with Al Quaeda operatives to ship weapons to Syria?
    –is it the policy of the Obama Administration to cooperate with Islamic revolutionary organizations to destabilize Middle East governments?
    –why was no help sent to Benghazi for the duration of the 7 hour battle?

    So many questions. So little time before the election.

  • RightMom

    The most important question is why Americans under attack received no help.  The two former Seals were killed 7 hours after the attack began.  Supposedly, there was a drone and planes flying overhead monitoring the attack and there was constant communication between those on the ground in Benghazi and Washington. 

    Americans were left to die.  Why?

    • 1776er

      Exactly.  It is chilling to KNOW that Obama was meeting in the White House at 5:00 PM on Sept. 11 confering with top national security officials, steps from the Situation Room if not actually in the Situation Room– 55 minutes after the attack alert came into the White House.

      They watched, or somebody at the White House watched, the live feed from the drone circling overhead as the attack bore in and our people on the ground desperately fought for their lives.

      Yet they did nothing.  Obama went to bed.  Got up the next morning, made an incoherent rambling noise about Benghazi in the Rose Garden, and hopped on Air Force One for a joy ride to Las Vegas to meet with Beyonce and raise some money for his campaign.  

      Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty died as nothing was done to come to their aid by this Administration.  

      Their lying and misdirection and now stonewalling on Benghazi simply has to be in service of protecting a dark, sinister truth about the real nature of the Benghazi American presence.  The truth of the purpose and nature of our "work" there must be truly devastating for Obama and his cronies to go to this much trouble to keep the American people in the dark.  

  • AyePatriot

    Americans Deserve Answers.

    And America NEEDS a President Palin!

  • MiaBelle

    Glenn Beck lays it out and connects the dots:

    Scroll down to the bottom to see the video.

    • 1776er

      My goodness.  The comments on the bottom of the page in response to Beck’s analysis contain even darker suspicions and allegations than even I could entertain.  

      A couple of those posters put forth the notion that Ambassador Stevens was set up for an assassination by our own people!  That is why they took no action for 7 hours.  It all went according to plan.  

      There is a question of what actually happened to the Ambassador from the time the main house at the compound was attacked until his body turned up at the Benghazi hospital.  We saw grainy video of his apparently lifeless body being dragged out of some kind of building–perhaps the main building of the compound.  The people dragging him didn’t seem to be bothered by fire and smoke.  Timing is curious.  They must have been there for hours until the fires burned out.   But it is curious that somehow he went mysteriously "missing" from the security detail during the torching of the main house on the compound.  Everybody else got out except the Ambassador and his communications assistant from the embassy in Tripoli.  That is curious. 

      This line of speculation is so far off the wall I don’t even want to contemplate it.     

    • Laddie_Blah_Blah

      It is no secret that we have been running guns to the rebels in Syria via the Saudis and the Qataris. It should not be surprising that we would also use the Turks. After all, the Turks are a NATO ally, and are the most reasonable Muslim player with enough clout to make an effective partner in sorting out the factions fighting in Syria. 

      It would appear that the ambassador was facilitating a CIA covert op to arm the rebels against the Assad forces in Syria via a Turkish intermediary. No one will be prosecuted for a covert op approved by the WH and carried out by the CIA, if that is what was going on. It does seem foolish to use the ambassador for such operations, though. The CIA station chief was reportedly back in Tripoli.

      If an ambassadorial meeting with the Turks was required, that could have taken place in Tripoli, with the CIA’s covert operatives handling the transfer of arms, or other material, to the Turks in Benghazi, if that was what was planned.

      We are not likely to learn of the CIA’s involvement, whatever it may be. It is certainly classified. The CIA personnel will not talk to anyone except the properly designated representatives in Congress. Any leaks as to the nature of any CIA role will be leaked by Congress, if it is leaked by anyone. 

      State personnel would not know what was going on, either, except on a need-to-know basis. Stevens was certainly one of those, and Hillary another. There would not have been many such people, depending upon the sensitivity of the mission. The Benghazi venue may have been chosen to keep the number of knowledgable people at the embassy to an absolute minimum. The ambassador and the station chief may very well have been the only two in Tripoli in on the mission.

      We are not likely to get any classified stuff on this from the WH, either, as we did when they recklessly disclosed so much sensitive info on the bin Laden raid. On the contrary, they will classify everything and make it criminal for anyone in the WH, or anywhere else, to disclose the classified info to any unauthorized official, reporter, or anyone, period, especially including Glenn Beck or any other high-profile media personality.

      Beck is dreaming. The WH has this covered, except for an impeachment proceeding, which ain’t gonna happen.

      • 1776er

        You make a lot of sense, Laddie.  

        But what the heck was Ambassador Stevens doing talking with the Turkish Ambassador in Benghazi, a place he knew to be incredibly dangerous, and a place that he requested more security for on the very day he was killed?  That makes no sense.

        And, as you point out, there is not much new about CIA gun running.  You go to extraordinary lengths, perhaps jeopardizing your whole Presidency,to hide the facts on something mundane like arming the opposition of one country or another?  That makes no sense. 

        There is something else going on here that they are taking extreme measures to hide.

        • Laddie_Blah_Blah

          "But what the heck was Ambassador Stevens doing talking with the Turkish Ambassador in Benghazi, a place he knew to be incredibly dangerous, and a place that he requested more security for on the very day he was killed?  That makes no sense."

          There are a couple of possibilities. The guy may not even have been a Turk, nor a Turkish government official. That may just be his cover. Meeting in Benghazi instead of Tripoli keeps his identity secret.

          Another possibility is that the covert op was so sensitive that the administration did not want the diplomatic corps in Tripoli to have any idea of what was transpiring in Benghazi. Except for the CIA station chief they left behind, there may not have been another soul in the embassy in Tripoli who had any idea why the ambassador was going to Benghazi. He appears to have taken only one top aide and a guy who seems to have been his body guard. No wonder he was concerned about his safety.

          Leaving the CIA station chief behind makes it appear that the Benghazi trip was for diplomatic purposes, only. Besides, the station chief could monitor the situation from a safe distance and could be the Benghazi mission’s communications lifeline back to Tripoli in case something went wrong. It did, and we know it was the CIA station chief who reported to DC that an Al Qaeda affiliate was in the process of attacking the Benghazi mission.

          "And, as you point out, there is not much new about CIA gun running.  You go to extraordinary lengths, perhaps jeopardizing your whole Presidency,to hide the facts on something mundane like arming the opposition of one country or another?  That makes no sense."

          Remember that Reagan helped arm the jihadis in Afghanistan to help them drive out the Soviets during the 1980s. The CIA has been doing this kind of thing ever since it was formed by Truman. In this case, I think it may make some sense. The Saudis and Qataris have reportedly been funneling our arms to radical fundamentalists, i.e. factions in Syria who are sympathetic to Al Qaeda. Hizbollah is also there, and they may end up fighting each other for control of the country after Assad is gone.

          The Turks have no interest in either an Al Qaeda or Hizbollah dominated Syria on their southern border. They may be working with a more moderate faction in the hope that Syria would become a client state after the civil war is over. Our interests would coincide with the Turks on Syria. Cleansing Hizbollah from Syria would emasculate them in Lebanon, which would also be a boon to Israeli security. And, of course, we have no use for Al Qaeda, either.

          So channeling our arms to Syria via the Turks makes more sense than using the Saudis or Qataris. That may be why an Al Qaeda affiliate attacked – to prevent those arms from falling into the hands of its opponents in Syria. 

          "There is something else going on here that they are taking extreme measures to hide."

          If Al Qaeda has seized those armaments, the Turks will never see them, and the really bad guys may have hit the mother lode of weapons caches. That is a big, big problem, if true. And it should never, ever have happened.

      • Guest

        And even IF Romney wins….this whole issue dies with the 0bama Admin.  I don’t remember who it was that said it….but there is a VERY select group of men in a VERY exclusive club…it’s called The President’s Club.  And there is an unwritten code of not investigating the previous administration.  So unless we get the answers NOW…..we will NEVER get the answers.  Bush didn’t investigate Sandy Sock Stuffing Burglar…..0bama didn’t investigate the reasons why we went into Iraq even though as a candidate he promised he would.  The media NEEDS to get off their  @sses and do their jobs NOW or we will never get the answers.  And congress isn’t going to do it either.  They may not know where the bodies are buried….but they sure know about the secret handshake that goes on right after the inaguration!   

        • Laddie_Blah_Blah

          This may be different, if ground-to-air missiles start to bring down commercial airliners. What Berger did was criminal, but he did it mainly to cover up the transgressions of the Clinton administration. Its different when people start getting killed, or air traffic is brought to a screaming halt.

          Whether Romney wants it investigated, or not, there are those in Congress who may want to expose the whole thing, or at least hold executive sessions to get the scoop from the CIA. I missed Bret Baier’s report on this situation last Saturday, but I will watch the update they are planning for Saturday night.

          This is getting interesting.

  • patnatasha

    how i wish sarah would confront the dufus. that would be gold.

  • Laddie_Blah_Blah

    Sarah is not going to back down on this. So the media will attack her for asking the obvious questions. Instead of doing their job, they will attack her for doing it for them. She is a one-woman truth-seeker about to sweep away the universal deceit which has characterized this disgraceful episode from day one.

    I would also ask why Stevens was meeting with the Turks in Benghazi, when we have a perfectly good embassy in much safer Tripoli. The ambassador and the others would still be alive if they had. I mean, duh!

    And if they planned on using the Benghazi facility for ambassadorial purposes, as they obviously did, then why did they DECREASE the level of security personnel there after the ambassador had personally asked them to increase it, or, at least to keep it at the same level.

    Sarah, you are asking for all of us. Thank you.

    • 1776er

      There are so many unresolved and loose issues with respect to Benghazi.  If left unchecked and unanswered by the Administration it is going to demoralize and divide the public even beyond where we already are both before and after the election.  Could lead to real paranoia about our Government.  

      Obama needs to come clean for the sake of the country not just for the sake of saving his own sorry political butt.  That’s what a patriot would do and let the political chips fall where they may.

      • Laddie_Blah_Blah

        Obama was already starting to cover up while the raid was taking place. We now know the annex was a CIA facility. They don’t just put up CIA facilities without a purpose. The annex had more security personnel than the consulate, it appears. 

        No one will say so until long after the fact, but it does appear that a CIA covert op was under way, but that the local bad guys got wind of it, or had been cut out of it, or had an ideological opposition to it, or maybe they just wanted to steal the weapons for resale to the Syrian opposition – you know, for money.

        A lot of that can be made, especially if air-to-ground missiles were in the mix.

        What would terrorists pay for air-to-ground US missiles? They wouldn’t need to smuggle box cutters through airport security to take down an airliner. They would not even have to endanger their operatives to cripple civilian air transport anywhere they wished. Wouldn’t the Iranians love to have that little chip in their bargaining arsenal. Those missiles could be worth billions, if they got hold of them.

        Losing something like Stinger missiles to an Al Qaeda affiliate would be enough to turn this election, all by itself. Especially since the administration dropped the security ball so badly. What happened in Banghazi on 9/11 should never have happened. Obama was so preoccupied with his re-election chances that he stopped attending his daily security briefings! The draw-down of security forces in Benghazi seems inexplicable. It was certainly irresponsible.

        We are now learning that we did not even have a contingency plan in place, let alone a response team within striking distance, if things fell apart in Benghazi. When they did, this administration was caught with its pants down, and our guys in Benghazi were caught in a death trap.

        This story is not going to go away, no matter how hard the Obamunists try to kill it. They may have been able to bury it, except that 4 Americans were killed. Now we are finding things out that may make it an even bigger story. The desperation in covering it all up with a cock-and-bull story about a video was the best they could come up with in a short period of time.

        Add it all up, and the sum total is a massive administration clusterf**k.

        • Banda31

          General Petreus, a man whom I have liked and respected, now as the CIA Director has joined the chorus of the Obama Administration saying that " it was the video that caused the spontaneous demonstration in Benghazi that in turn led to the death of the Ambassador and the three other Americans". When I heard him say that I lost all respect for him. He proves this saying true " Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts absolutely".

          BTW, why was the General made CIA Director and not Secretary of Defence? I always found that very strange.

          • Laddie_Blah_Blah

            "General Petreus, a man whom I have liked and respected, now as the CIA Director has joined the chorus of the Obama Administration saying that " it was the video that caused the spontaneous demonstration in Benghazi that in turn led to the death of the Ambassador and the three other Americans"."

            That’s the cover story. The CIA will go with the cover story, no matter how ridiculous. Too late to back down now. They will only tell the truth to members of Congress who have oversight responsibility, and then, only, in executive session.

            I was thinking about Petraeus last night, and my guess is that using the Turks to funnel arms to more moderate factions among the Syrian rebels, if that’s what they are doing, was probably his idea. It makes a lot of sense. If he had the responsibility for security at the Benghazi mission, instead of State, this fiasco may never have happened.

            "BTW, why was the General made CIA Director and not Secretary of Defence? I always found that very strange."

            That was Binkie’s idea, I suspect. By nature, the CIA Director takes a low profile. He is where Binkie wanted him – out of sight.

  • Mr.L


  • gahanson

    We deserve answers, but we are not going to get them.  Even if Romney wins, he won’t have the attack investigated, because that wouldn’t play well with the dems in congress.  If 0bama wins, we already know that he isn’t about to tell us the truth.

  • dave84060


  • RedDaveR

       Gov. Palin asked very good questions.  However, I’m not holding my breath waiting for this Administration to answer them. With the help of Issa and others, hopefully we’ll start getting answers as of 1-20-13.

  • CharterOakie

    Keep swinging that nightstick, Governor.

  • MiBones

     If you like conspiracy theories, how about this. The Ambassador was going to be taken hostage and Obama would negotiate his release. That would explain why they watched this happen in real time and did nothing. It wasn’t suppose to happen in the death of the Ambassador. This would also explain why there was a refusal in the increase of security and would give a good explanation why the Ambassador got separated from everybody else. Obama’s October Surprise, blew up in his face.

  • hoosfoos1

    Nightline started as a result of the Iranian hostage crisis.  Maybe this is just the opportunity Fox needs to start a nightly program with Gov. Palin as host to explore in detail the Libya situation.  

  • John

    Lets focus on what is really important.

    Our people were left to die. There was no attempt to try and save them. At least try! (Did Obama really go to bed while the attack was ongoing?)

    Anyone associated with not trying should be forced out of office, made to resign, shunned or punished by all in any way possible within the narrow limits allowed to an ordinary citizen.

    I just hope those with a public voice like Sara Palin will do everything in there power to push this into the unwilling main stream media so more of our citizens know what was not done.

  • The Ranger

    Whatever happened to the era where reporters were willing to go after anyone involved in a scandal, regardless of which political party they belonged to?

    Oh, wait…that era died before I was born.

  • 1776er

    It now appears there was much, much more at play in the Benghazi debacle than has so far been explored.  The Iranians apparently involved in a Mid East wide general war on American interests of which Benghazi was a central part.  Russians also involved.  Stevens meeting with a Turkish go-between to review Russian satellite photos of an American/Turkish false flag operation to bring down Assad using Kadaffi’s chemical weapons being shipped to Turkey through Benghazi.

    Post-Assad Syria is the object in play.  America and Turkey hoping to influence who runs post-Assad Syria.  Russia and Iranian interests also at play.  This is Nation State vs. Nation State covert warfare.  A hot, covert war now underway in Middle East.  American interests now being pummeled by Iranian military forces with Russian intelligence assistance.  Big stuff.

    According to article there were at least 3 Iranian attack teams involved in Benghazi.  They were setting up a trap for any rescue mission by our forces to save the guys in Benghazi.  Panetta and presumably Obama had electronic intercepts and knew it.  

    Thus, no attempt to save the Americans on the ground.  They wrote them off and watched them die.  Went to bed and got up to go to party with Beyonce in Las Vegas and raise some cash.

    Amazing factoid in link above:  40 million tons of weapons–chemical weapons?–run through the Benghazi CIA gun running operation.  40 million tons!  

    No wonder there is a cover up.  No wonder there are lies.  They have to.  They have no other choice.

    Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty are dead.  Pawns in a secret hot war now ongoing in the Middle East between Russia/Iran and the U.S./Turkey.  

    Are we on the verge of WWIII?  

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets