For several months, the Benghazi scandal lay dormant, apparently forgiven and forgotten. Then, inexplicably, it reared its ugly head when Congressmen Ron Johnson and Jason Chaffetz smelled Obama's blood in the water.

After feigning affliction with the flu, and then ostensibly tumbling down a carpeted stairwell resulting in an unconfirmed concussion, then-Secretary of State Clinton was finally forced to testify before Congress. Clinton's desperate attempt to put the Benghazi scandal to rest with her now-infamous impassioned declaration -- "What difference, at this point, does it make?" -- only fanned the flames of American outrage at the needless deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, his aide Sean Smith, and two valiant Navy SEALS, Tyrone Woods and Glen Dougherty.

At this point, the focus of the investigation was confined to the failure of the Obama regime to adequately protect the American consulate in a hostile country and its subsequent attempt to cover up that ignominy. Nobody, except us conspiracy theorists, was asking about the real reason for the coordinated terrorist attack. Hint: it was not a video mocking Islam. Here are the questions that should have been asked, but were not:

Why was American security systematically withdrawn and transferred to incompetent Libyan operatives several month before the attack?

What were the missions of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Dougherty?

Why was the order to "stand down" given to ready and able military rescue forces?

The Obama regime frantically feared that these questions were forthcoming. Desperate to change the subject, the nefarious regime serially released a spate of "gates" intended to inundate the news media outlets in order to provide a smokescreen obscuring the lethal Benghazi questions.

The first feint was AP-gate: revealing the illegal DOJ inquisition of the world's largest newsgathering agency. This titillated the media and put Benghazi in the rearview mirror. When that furor waned, along came Reporter-gate, proclaiming that Fox News journalist James Rosen had been the subject of a similar inquest. Again the media feigned horror at the atrocity committed against one of their own. Benghazi what?

On the heels of AP-gate comes IRS-gate, alleging egregious acts of power abuse by the most powerful government agency in America. Never mind that the shocking, illegal targeting of politically incorrect enemies of incumbent administrations has been rampant within the IRS for decades. The media cooperated as if those corruptions were breaking news. Benghazi who?

Alas, as revulsion with IRS-gate began to decline, another "gate" was needed to anesthetize the populace against Benghazi-gate. Conveniently, the IRS debacle was extended by revealing their half-a-billion-dollar "seminar" parties, which have been going on for years but suddenly are splashed as breaking news.

Now the latest news flash is telephone-gate, swiftly followed by internet-gate. Never mind that these practices have been going on since at least 2006 during the Bush administration. Benghazi when?

Put on your tinfoil hats, folks. I submit that this chain of coordinated releases of scandal after scandal is a ploy by the most corrupt regime in American history to divert national attention from the most damning political catastrophe Obama has ever faced: Benghazi-gate. Was the stratagem a botched attempt to have Stevens kidnapped by al-Qaeda and then to offer the Blind Sheik in exchange for the ambassador? Was the subterfuge a failed attempt to divert the massive Gaddafi weapons cache into the hands of al-Qaeda? Don't get me started.

Whatever was going on in Benghazi, Libya before the nefarious 9-11-2012 attack is a dark secret, the revelation of which the Obama regime mortally fears. That is why this coordinated serial release of humiliating scandals, reproachful as they may be, is far, far better than the truth about Benghazi -- at least for the Obama regime.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013...l#ixzz2Vinh2dkM
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

While I don't question that the regime is desperately involved in burying Benghazi-gate, I'm not sure all of the other leaks were done for the purpose of obscuring Benghazi. Benghazi would have to be very, very, very bad indeed if it seems reasonable for the regime to take the heat on the other leaks just to obscure it. It may be that my imagination is limited, and I just can't imagine anything bad enough for them to justify taking the heat for these other leaks just to hide their true motives in Benghazi.

I tend to think that some critical mass has been reached, and a few people with integrity in the regime are leaking. But, I may well be wrong.

Edited to add: "Was the subterfuge a failed attempt to divert the massive Gaddafi weapons cache into the hands of al-Qaeda?" That's the only thing I can think of that might be seen as reasonable to release other scandals in order to hide this one.

Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #3

---

While I don't question that the regime is desperately involved in burying Benghazi-gate, I'm not sure all of the other leaks were done for the purpose of obscuring Benghazi. Benghazi would have to be very, very, very bad indeed if it seems reasonable for the regime to take the heat on the other leaks just to obscure it. It may be that my imagination is limited, and I just can't imagine anything bad enough for them to justify taking the heat for these other leaks just to hide their true motives in Benghazi.

I tend to think that some critical mass has been reached, and a few people with integrity in the regime are leaking. But, I may well be wrong.

Edited to add: "Was the subterfuge a failed attempt to divert the massive Gaddafi weapons cache into the hands of al-Qaeda?" That's the only thing I can think of that might be seen as reasonable to release other scandals in order to hide this one.

---

Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #3

---

While I don't question that the regime is desperately involved in burying Benghazi-gate, I'm not sure all of the other leaks were done for the purpose of obscuring Benghazi. Benghazi would have to be very, very, very bad indeed if it seems reasonable for the regime to take the heat on the other leaks just to obscure it. It may be that my imagination is limited, and I just can't imagine anything bad enough for them to justify taking the heat for these other leaks just to hide their true motives in Benghazi.

I tend to think that some critical mass has been reached, and a few people with integrity in the regime are leaking. But, I may well be wrong.

Edited to add: "Was the subterfuge a failed attempt to divert the massive Gaddafi weapons cache into the hands of al-Qaeda?" That's the only thing I can think of that might be seen as reasonable to release other scandals in order to hide this one.

---