Democrat Congressmen refuse to hear Benghazi families testimony

On 19 September, Congressional Democrats sitting on the House Oversight Reform Committee investigating the disastrous Benghazi debacle, in large unison, absented themselves by design from listening to the testimonies offered by two grieving parents of slain American patriots, Sean Smith and Navy Seal, Tyrone Woods.  How disrespectful and disgraceful were the personal actions of Democrat Congressmen.  Smith and Woods were two of the four valiant and patriotic Americans slain in Libya who died defending American sovereign interests.   Their parents have waited in agony for answers that the government promised, but failed to provide.

It is a sad commentary in today’s decadent political climate where elected Congressional Democrats feel liberated from the normal bounds of common decency, courtesy and morality to demonstrate their utter disdain for the American servicemen and their families who sacrificed their offspring in the defense of this nation.  Are we really to believe that these Democrats were just too busy on other affairs to attend their own committee assignments?    No, not for a second!  What would the media say if Republicans walked out on the families of the 1986 Space Shuttle, Challenger Congressional testimony? 

What were these Congressional Democrats afraid of hearing?  Maybe after a year of empty rhetoric, the parents would have demanded answers on why terrorists who killed their sons enjoy freedom, and why no American official is held accountable for the egregious State Department blunders, the failure to act on intelligence reports, and the urgent requests up the State Department chain for additional security personnel and funding for the Libyan consulate prior to the American Ambassador’s death.  

Maybe the parents are not convinced of Obama, Clinton and Rice’s knowingly false, feeble spins that an unseen video caused the Benghazi attack, instead of an orchestrated maneuver by Al Qaeda terrorists as indicated by the real-time flow of intelligence.   Although Obama voters are typically minimally informed, Americans overall are not as naïve as Obama or his liberal clones in Congress think us to be.   Americans are acutely aware that the Obama administration, aided by zealot Democrats in Congress and joined at the hip by the mainstream media, is complicit in a cover-up.

After reading the recent Accountability Review Board Documents on the Benghazi affair, the parents probably perceived, like most Americans, that the report lacked credibility and was designed to “whitewash” the dirt in order to shield Hillary Clinton and President Obama from their colossal failure of leadership.  The parents may continue to ask why the State Department’s internal review board failed to interview Hillary Clinton or scrutinize senior level managers instead of shifting blame to mid-level State Department bureaucrats. Why did they provide advance knowledge of the content to Hillary Clinton prior to the report’s release? Indeed, in this lackluster political internal report, no single individual is held accountable today.  Yes, four mid-level employees were identified for action, but they were recently reinstated with full pay and no punishment. The entire Benghazi situation is a case study of pure liberal politics and corrupt power over our national security interests. 

Obama and Hillary are betting that the passage of time and a suppressive media will fade the memories of voters, but as long as there are true patriots, the voice of the American dead of Benghazi will remain in our minds and hearts.  The basic facts rest on their own weight and no spin machine can alter the Benghazi events.   We know that requests for an enhanced security posture in Libya were denied.  Al Qaeda terrorist groups were known to be training in the vicinity of the American consulate.  Prior to the main attack by the Al Qaeda insurgents, the consulate was attacked by explosives on two separate occasions.  On the second occasion, exploded ordnance blasted a large gaping hole through the consulate barrier wall, and yet, the ambassador’s urgent requests for security upgrades and personnel were repeatedly denied. The intelligence reports of explosion or attacks upon the Benghazi consulate would be instantly “flashed” communicated back to the White House Situation Room, the State Department, the CIA, FBI, and the Combatant Commander in the Region.  Executives at each of these levels would or should have received an immediate briefing or notification.  At the very least, the critical information would be presented in the morning daily briefings.

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is solely responsible for the inadequate security posture and the devastation of the Benghazi consulate.   We remember the flagged draped coffins escorted into the hanger shortly after their arrival on American soil, and hear the anguish of the families that Hillary Clinton audaciously lied to while stationed in the hanger area.  Hillary looked them in the eyes and declared that a degrading video on Islam caused the riots.  We now know that Hillary Clinton was briefed by the Senior State Department Official in Libya within minutes after the attack started.  Why then the tall tale?   Maybe the Presidential election season was well underway and a foreign policy failure would devastate Obama’s reelection bid.

  Hillary attempted to absolve her reckless and irresponsible leadership during her feisty testimony at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when she feigned acceptance of personal responsibility for the Benghazi affair, but the focus quickly shifted with the statement, “What difference at this point does it make?”  Her contrite, insincere gesture was never accompanied by her resignation, nor did Obama contemplate firing her for her abysmal ineptness as Secretary of State that led to four American deaths and critical, substantial losses of intelligence resources in the region.  The one-two foreign policy punch of Obama and Hillary’s mediocrity has spelled disaster for American national interests on the world stage for decades to come.

Now that a year has passed, we see the usual line of liberal, in-the-tank-for-Obama reporters collude with these “brave,” anti-patriot Congressional Democrats to “surround the wagon” to protect Obama and Hillary Clinton from lasting political fallout.  Their acts are despicable and a disservice to the memory of the truly brave American servicemen who died in Benghazi. 

The Benghazi cover-up will not be sustained indefinitely. These shameful Democrats who brazenly refused to hear testimony given by two Benghazi parents clearly demonstrate that their souls and integrity are easily sold.  They are the new, progressive, aristocratic class of elites engaged in transforming America into a collective malaise of inequality, inefficiency and government supremacy.   They are of the same stench that arbitrarily rules the Senate.  The radicalization of Democrats in Congress has jumped leaps and bounds in recent years. They have morphed into a class of political zealots thriving in a cult of a new-age, entitlement state built on the breastworks of collectivism.  These progressive Democratic Congressmen stand as a symbol of the decline of American culture, and they are an affront to human dignity. 

The cover-up of Benghazi, and the failure of these Democratic Congressmen to honor their oath to the US Constitution, stands as a national disgrace.  American servicemen in combat arenas feel betrayed by a government that denied assistance to the beleaguered American warriors left to their mortal fate on the field of battle. The legacy of trust and confidence between soldier and government has been shattered. The day of honor and patriotism by progressive Democrats in the halls of Congress was over years ago.  Their actions on Thursday just served as a reminder to the nation.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author/contributor and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Nolan Chart or its ownership


    • Craig says

      maui4201, what is your definition of
      traitor? The article is talking about our ambassador being killed and was
      it investigated correctly. Something is funny since not a single person

      has been identified as being responsible for the killing. Remember, attacking

      an embassy is most of the time a state of war if sanction by a

      government. Do you have the answers to the killings? I don’t have

      any answers. Fill me in. What are your qualifications to make such a
      judgment on this Marine. Are you a high ranking military officer? Are you even an American citizen? You sound like a WW2 NAZI. Have you even been
      able to write your own article? You just
      comment. Do you have any intellectual ability to write your own article?

  1. Larry Patterson says

    The silence and the echoing cries for answers shows how empty their hearts are. Funny how so much MISINFORMATION was pumped through fire hydrant CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN. Now that all of those reports have been proven false…….crickets.

  2. says




    NOW: Media Matters’ David Brock Urges CBS News To Re-Open
    ’60 Minutes’ Benghazi Investigation



    David Brock Letter Calderone: the Backstory David Brock Cbs Benghazi 60 Minutes Benghazi 60 Minutes David Brock Benghazi David Brock Media Mattters David Brock Hillary Clinton

    Brock, founder of Correct the Record, speaks at the Clinton School of Public
    Service in Little Rock, Ark., Tuesday, March 25, 2014. Brock is a former
    Clinton critic who has since spearheaded efforts to defend Bill and Hillary

    Media Matters chairman David Brock is urging top CBS News executives to
    re-open the network’s internal investigation over its discredited “60
    Minutes” report on the Benghazi attack.

    Lara Logan, the network’s chief foreign correspondent, and Max McClellan,
    her producer, went on leave
    following the network’s internal review and have not
    returned. A New York magazine
    report, published Sunday night, has renewed interest in the network
    controversy and provided new details about how the erroneous Oct. 27 story —
    which featured a discredited “eyewitness” and several unsourced claims
    about the September 2012 attack that killed four Americans — ever made it on

    Brock, who founded the progressive media watchdog,
    addressed Monday’s letter to CBS News chairman and “60 Minutes”
    executive producer Jeff Fager and CBS News president David Rhodes. In the
    letter, he wrote that the New York magazine story “raises critical
    questions about the validity of CBS’ investigation.”

    “Re-opening the investigation is warranted as it now
    appears that CBS’ internal investigation was not thorough, was wrong on
    critical points, and omitted key facts — facts that would have revealed that
    Logan’s report was tainted by partisanship and unprofessional conduct,”
    Brock wrote.

    Specifically, Brock noted that the internal review said
    Logan had reached out to security firm Blue Mountain, the State Department and
    the FBI regarding Dylan Davies, the security contractor who claimed to have
    witnessed the attack but was later revealed to have told his employer and the
    FBI that he did not reach the compound that night. New York magazine’s Joe
    Hagan reported that Logan did not contact the State Department or FBI.

    Find out more:
















    and their SPONSORS:




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *