Benghazi Lawsuit, Benghazi movie reveal History Facts
Benghazi Parents Sue to Find the Truth
RUSH: “The parents of two of the four Americans who died in the Benghazi attack in 2012 filed a lawsuit Monday against … Hillary Clinton, alleging her ‘reckless handling’ of classified information contributed to their deaths. The case was filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch USA on behalf of Patricia Smith, the mother of Sean Smith, and Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods [nickname: “Rone”], for allegedly wrongfully causing the death of their sons as well as for defamation and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
“The lawsuit suggests that Clinton’s use of a private email server contributed to the deaths of Smith and Woods, adding that terrorists were able to ‘obtain the whereabouts of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and thus the US State Department and covert and other government operations in Benghazi, Libya and subsequently orchestrate, plan, and execute the now infamous September 11, 2012 attack.’ … In addition to the wrongful death and negligence charges named in the suit, the parents also claim that Clinton defamed them in statements to the media, according to court documents.”
13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, Trailer
And that is, I think, related to Hillary telling them numerous occasions that it was a video that caused the protests that led to the attack in Benghazi, and Hillary assured these parents that they were gonna get to the bottom of this guy that did the video and that he was gonna be held accountable. If you haven’t seen the movie 13 Hours, you can rent it. I don’t know if it’s on Netflix yet, but you can rent it or buy it at various places. It’s the story of what happened in Benghazi, and I’ll tell you the lesson you’ll come away with watching this.
They don’t delve into the politics of it all. By design, they don’t. There are a couple of instances in the movie where some of the combatants on our side are on the ground in Benghazi. When they’re told that somebody is saying the video (some video nobody’s ever seen) caused this, they laugh about it and think it’s craziest thing they’ve ever heard, because this was an organized attack. It was a large, strategic, and tactically executed attack.
It had mortars that were strategically targeted. Some of the perps, what they did in lulls between the fighting… There were waves of fighting in the attack on the annex in Benghazi, and in one of the lulls, our guys happened to see some dilapidated car drive up which they were waiting for friendlies. The whole attack, they’re waiting for support. They’re waiting for support from the United States or from allies, and none ever came.
And it got to the point that, when they realized none was coming, they made a futile request, “Could you just send a couple of F-16s to fly over? If you’re not gonna launch anything at these terrorists, could you just have ’em fly over and scare the hell out of ’em and make them think that you are coming?” And they wouldn’t even do that. But in the movie, it is — and the people involved in the movie say that it was done with precise care in replicating events as close to reality as they could.
And they portray an incident in a lull between the waves of attacks. Some dilapidated, broken-down car with three people drives up to the compound. The wall is still up separating the compound from the street, and they’re on needles and pins. I mean, they’re waiting for anything to be another attack, but they hold off thinking something that’s approaching might be friendly, and so they don’t fire on this dilapidated car. It sits outside the wall for a couple of minutes, and leaves.
And they figure out that what it was doing, is the occupants of the car were using their cell phones to geotag the location of the troops inside the annex so that they could be eventually targeted precisely by mortar fire. This was not a protest. It was not anything related to a video. And these families have gotta be outraged at what happened here, because there wasn’t one effort to help. Nobody lifted a finger to help until it was all over. And that’s the thing you’ll come away with when you watch this, is that they were begging.
The CIA, the security people — which, beside the ambassador, the three deaths were from the security team, the Rangers and CIA people. And they were begging for help. And none ever came. The only help they had was local Benghazi gangs that they were paying to stand guard outside the annex and to help them return fire. Now, the Benghazi gangs were not part of the opposition, but they caved the moment the opposition showed up and they ended up being pretty much worthless after not too long.
It’s just infuriating to watch it. You understand the parents’ reaction and why they don’t want to let it go. And it’s gotta be offensive as it can be to them that the woman who stood by and let this happen because of whatever other objectives they had. There is something that we haven’t been told about why we were in Benghazi in the first place, because every other nation had pulled out. It was a hellhole. It was pure anarchy. After Khadafy was taken out by virtue of Hillary’s policy, the place was total anarchy.
There was no government; there was no stability. It was being… Control was being waged by one disparate gang of terrorists versus other gangs, and every other nation got the hell out. We didn’t. We kept a CIA station. We kept an ambassadorial… Well, we kept a complex that would serve as an ambassadorial residence ’cause Chris Stevens came in. He came in and he met and he tried to do good works diplomatically, had a couple of meetings with locals and talked about helping them rebuild a library and this sort of thing.
But he ended up being murdered. And one of the stipulations — one of the bits of conjecture — as to why he was there is that we were actually using Benghazi to run guns to the Syrian “rebels.” And that’s why we couldn’t acknowledge our presence and that’s why we couldn’t defend anybody there, because we couldn’t afford that to be known, or we couldn’t afford that to be learned. Running guns to the Syrian rebels? Who were the Syrian rebels? When you boil it down, the Syrian rebels were ISIS! But they weren’t called that.
They were called the rebels, and that meant they were on our side, because they were rebelling against Assad, who we didn’t like. And I remember Assad was accused of gassing his own people (i.e., the rebels) and it turned out to be the other way around, which we knew from the get-go here.
So watching the movie, if you haven’t seen it, will provide pictures, and it will help you understand even more why people remain to this day really bothered by this, and why so many people think it would just be the biggest mistake we could make to have the woman in charge of that debacle become the commander-in-chief.