Over the last few weeks, very subtly, a pattern has emerged. It goes without question that a President who is willing to say, “We will do everything to protect our citizens abroad,” just scant months after he sat idly by in the White House Situation Room and allowed four of them to be murdered by an Al Qaeda group, cannot be held in high esteem for his honesty.
But a pattern seems to be emerging, as we publicly inspect the facts surrounding that fateful day, September 11, 2012.
That Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others were afforded completely ineffective-security for their activities in Libya is unquestionable. One only need know that they had asked 120 times for reinforced security, only to have their Special Forces detail taken away, to forge that assumption. It is clear that President Obama’s administration, and the normal flow of pertinent information through subordinates was lacking, if one were to assume that protection of life in a dangerous area was important.
But let’s compare this concern for human life to that which goes on daily when certain staff people go out in public and/or travel. Let’s take Valerie Jarrett, long time Obama friend and confidante. In her role as Senior Advisor to the President of the United States, Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs and Chair of the White House Council on Women and Girls, Valerie Jarrett gets a full Secret Service detail.
What visible difference can you see between Ambassador Stevens and Advisor Jarrett?
Let’s move to the President’s most recent Press Conference (as an aside, I’ll note that this is the first formal Press Conference he has offered in eight (8) months). During this Press Conference, the President’s most vehement and emotionally charged response was to the question about Ambassador Susan Rice giving inaccurate information, regarding those who perpetrated the attacks on the CIA compound, which led to Ambassador Stevens’ death.
Obama not only affords Ambassador Rice a ’round the clock’ armed-American-detail, but he also provided her strong verbal protection from criticism. Yet, Obama denied Ambassador Stevens his requested Marine detail on more than 100 occasions.
What visible difference can you see between Ambassador Rice and Ambassador Stevens?
Finally, let’s look at the reports of ‘actionable intelligence’ that came out of the administration in the time frame subsequent to the Benghazi attack.
We were told, by Rep. Peter King that former CIA Director David Petraeus testified that he was aware that the attack was a coordinated attack by terrorists from the beginning and that a briefing was prepared for the White House that included the word “terrorists.” He also apparently testified that it was subsequently removed in reviews by other agencies in some amorphous review process. As it turns out, that revision was made by the Justice Department, headed up by Eric Holder.
Why the Justice Department would have purview over an intelligence briefing, this writer will never understand, but that begs the question pertinent to this article.
What visible difference can you se between General Petraeus and Attorney General Holder?
The difference is clear to me, and the implication is startling. It forces an objective observer to ask the question: “Is President Obama choosing to value people of color over Caucasians?” And if the answer is persuaded by these visible facts, we, as a country, need to do some deep soul searching again, as we have for a century and a half.