The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller

Why did the State Department leave Ambassador Christopher Stevens undefended in Bengazi?

Benghazi, remember that? The U.S. Ambassador to Libya was murdered by Islamic terrorists on the anniversary of 9/11, and ever since, the Obama administration has done nothing but lie about it. Why? At first it was because there was an election coming up, and now it’s because Obama won and therefore nobody’s supposed to ask questions anymore. And why do they think they can get away with this? Because that’s what most of the media lets them do.

That doesn’t mean it’s going away, though. Kerry Picket at Breitbart.com gives us another piece of the puzzle:

A source with personal knowledge of the security situation in Benghazi told Breitbart News that Senators who listened to closed door testimony about the Benghazi attack were shocked to learn State Department security personnel agents were not immediately armed.

Additionally, agents separated from Ambassador Chris Stevens left to retrieve their M4 weapons in a separate building. Only one returned to protect the Ambassador, while the other two hunkered down in the barracks, the source relayed…

Questions as to why the consulate security force was unarmed within the confines of the consulate will likely be asked of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She will be appearing in front of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs according to Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL).

Well, if you can’t trust Hillary Clinton to be completely honest and forthright, who can you trust?

Read the whole thing. The State Department was completely unprepared for this attack. But hey, how were they supposed to know that Islamic terrorists might be planning something on 9/11, in a country we invaded unilaterally, just because Stevens himself kept telling them so?

P.S. Paul Blart could’ve done better in Benghazi.