You may recognize the name Susan Rice from the former Obama Administrations. She was a prominent figure who served not only in his original campaign, but also in both terms in different positions from 2009-2017. As noted by Ballotpedia, Rice served in the first Obama Administration as the US Ambassador to the United Nations until 2013. From 2013 to 2017, she served as Obama’s National Security Advisor.
Susan Rice was at the center of the Obama-Biden administration’s deception about the September 11, 2012 Islamic terrorist attack in Bneghazi. Now she’s back.
While her portfolio of experience in government is largely in the foreign sphere as a diplomat, President Joe Biden had other plans for her once he began appointments in his administration. Now, Rice will be in a prominent domestic position, as Head of the Domestic Policy Council. According to archives from the Obama Administration, the Domestic Policy Council was founded:
“…by Executive Order in 1993, the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) coordinates the domestic policy-making process in the White House, ensures that domestic policy decisions and programs are consistent with the President’s stated goals, and monitors implementation of the President’s domestic policy agenda.”
And MSN notes, “As head of Biden’s Domestic Policy Council, Rice will have broad sway over everything from health policy to immigration to rural affairs.” But why was Rice chosen for this position, after years working for Obama on foreign affairs? Perhaps Biden was avoiding a difficult confirmation process, which would have likely hinged on one word: Benghazi.
On September 11, 2012, Islamist radicals stormed a US diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya on the 11th anniversary of America’s deadliest terror attacks. America had been involved in the Libyan uprising against dictator Muammar Gaddafi since the year before as part of a NATO coalition, providing mostly air-support, leading to Gaddafi’s ouster. On the night of September 11th, more than 100 insurgents stormed the compound housing US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, diplomats, and security specialists. By the next day, Stevens and three others were dead.
But in the initial days after the attack, the Obama Administration did not link the deaths of 4 Americans to a coordinated Jihadi attack. Instead, then-Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, spearheaded the administration’s narrative that an anti-Islamic video released in the run-up to the attack fomented protests which turned violent.
Clinton released a statement condemning the attacks and linking them to an online video on September 11th:
“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”
This, of course, was unfounded at best. The attack was not a protest gone awry, nor was it over a video. It was an act of terrorism against the United States.
Susan Rice Infamous Benghazi Interviews
But this didn’t stop Susan Rice from spreading the official storyline during a series of infamous “Sunday morning” interviews.
ABC’s “This Week:”
“…it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.”
CBS’s “Face the Nation:”
“… based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy– –sparked by this hateful video.”
Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday:”
“The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video.”
Over time, investigations and inquiries into the Benghazi incident revealed that the Obama Administration, specifically Hillary Clinton, took a different position in private, one which had nothing to do with an offensive video in Egypt, and acknowledged the Al Qaeda inspired plot.
The Washington Times noted in early 2016:
“Privately, in a summary of a call between Mrs. Clinton and the President of Libya Mohammad al Magariaf about three hours earlier, there was no talk of a viral video, only terrorism.
‘[O]ur diplomatic mission was attacked[.] … [T]here is a gun battle ongoing, which I understand Ansar as-Sharia [sic] is claiming responsibility for,” a transcript of the call read.
After Mrs. Clinton made her public statements, blaming the video, she then emailed her daughter with the truth: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al Qaeda like group.’”
Despite evidence that Clinton, and other members of the Administration, including Rice, openly pushed a false narrative regarding Benghazi, none were ever held to account. Worst of all, investigations revealed the Clinton State Department repeatedly denied extra security details to the Benghazi outpost leading up to the attack.
While there is evidence in the public domain that Rice, Clinton, and others lied about the Benghazi attack, to this day she displays no remorse for her role in the public response.
“Not one of them found that I had deliberately misled the American people, but I don’t doubt that the Republicans will use this, and they’ll attack whoever is Joe Biden’s choice to be his vice president. But let’s be honest about what this is. This is dishonest, and it’s a distraction.”
For Susan Rice, it appears the death of 4 Americans in Benghazi is nothing more than a political inconvenience. While she could not have personally prevented the attack, or aided them in their hour of need, she played a direct role in manipulating the public perception of the incident to provide political cover for an administration who could have done more to save their lives.