Why the CIA Weapons Trafficking Claims Were “Unsubstantiated”: They Were Not “Allowed” to Investigate, Witnesses “Refused” to Testify

by Scott Creighton

Unsubstantiated Claim that CIA Shipped Arms From Libya to Another Country” Elijah Cummings, Democrat’s minority report on Benghazi Committee investigation

Here is the answer as to WHY the allegations of the CIA and Hillary’s State Department running guns from their terrorist destabilization team in Libya to their terrorist destabilization team in Syria were found to be “unsubstantiated” in the new Benghazi report released yesterday (minority white-wash) and today (official report): the NSC forbade the commission from reviewing specific evidence and all the State Department and CIA witnesses took the 5th whenever they were asked about it.

See? She’s innocent of illegally transferring weapons of mass destruction from one group of terrorists to another. What more do you need?

The National Security Council would not allow the House Benghazi committee to review information about possible U.S. covert action in Libya that might have preceded the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi.

And employees at the CIA, State Department and Defense Department refused to answer specific questions about whether the U.S. sent, oversaw or was otherwise involved in weapons transfers to Libyan rebels, according to an exclusive copy of a section of the final Benghazi committee report provided to POLITICO.

“Over the course of nearly a dozen interviews with the State Department, the Defense Department and the CIA personnel witnesses consistently refused to answer questions related to certain allegations with respect to the U.S. activity in Libya even though the House specifically gave the committee access to materials relating to intelligence sources and methods,” reads an excerpt from the “compliance” section of the report.

Most of these questions related in some way to allegations regarding weapons,” the report continues. “These refusals meant significant questions raised in public relating to Benghazi could not be answered.” Politico

Any questions? Only in the purest versions of bullshit legalese does witnesses taking the 5th and the NSC refusing to allow investigations into a matter equate to anyone being deemed “innocent’ of an allegation.

Of course, we live in “MERIKA!!! and all sorts of things qualify as proof of innocence when it comes to our glorious leaders.

3 Responses

  1. Hi willy!
    Congrats on 9 years! That’s a long time and a whole lot of work, here is hoping it’s all appreciated.
    Being around nearly as long as you (began my 9th year late march)
    Anywhooooo…. I would appreciate if you could stop by and read my post on the patching up between Turkey and Israel- for me it doesn’t seem to be that which is presented but then when is it ever?!
    Suddenly Turkey drops it’s objection to Israel being in NATO- Whaat!


    • thanks Penny. I will take a look at it a little later. Trying to do some housework at the moment. I see Lendman covered the patch-up story and found a way to worm in some more hate for Erdogan while he was at it. Perhaps Rycip wants to stay alive so he’s backing off his opposition to the new Israel in the Middle East (aka Greater Kurdistan) or perhaps they are simply demonizing him on the alternative left by linking him to the Likudniks. I don’t know. Have yet to look into it. So much other crap going on. But I will stop by later today and have a look at what you found.

  2. sure, she will likely rot in hell later, but I’d sure like to see her doing some rotting in prison here on earth beforehand!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: