If you have "no place to go," come here!

Is Sean Smith Responsible for the Deaths at Benghazi?

The last time I talked to Sean, the night before the terrorist attack, he told me, "Mom, I am going to die." All security had been pulled from the embassy, he explained. 
Patricia Smith (mother of Sean Smith) to the Republican National Convention, 7/17/16

According to Patricia Smith, her son Sean, an “Information Management Officer” for the State Department, disclosed sensitive information regarding the security posture of a US diplomatic outpost in a phone call to his mother. Moreover, based on Patricia Smith's statement, Sean lied to her about the security situation, making the temporary Benghazi mission sound much more vulnerable than it was.

Yet this same Patricia Smith is now suing Hillary Clinton for the wrongful death of her son, based upon the theory that “, Defendant Clinton, as Secretary of State, sent and received information about Ambassador Christopher Stevens and thus the U.S. Department of State activities and covert operations that the deceased were a part of in Benghazi, Libya. This information was compromised from the second that it left Defendant Clinton’s private e mail server and easily found its way to foreign powers including, but not limited to Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea. As a direct result of Defendant Clinton’s reckless handling of this classified, sensitive information, Islamic terrorists were able to obtain the whereabouts of Ambassador Christopher Stevens...”

First off, while there is abundant evidence that Stevens communicated often with the State Department, there is zero evidence of any communication between the State Department and Clinton regarding Steven's trip. In other words, the State Department servers showed no emails to Clinton about Steven's trip to Benghazi. Even if Clinton's server had been hacked, there would have been no information regarding Steven's trip on it.

Secondly, its rather absurb to suggest that China, or Russia, or North Korea, or (especially) Iran would be in contact with local Benghazi Islamist militants, and would provide them with information derived from what would have been a highly compartmentalized and classified “hacking” effort by any of those nations.

So, which is more likely? That local Benghazi terrorists were provided with intelligence derived from a super secret hacking effort by a foreign power that had no reason to divulge any information to such terrorists, let alone risk compromising the “hack” by doing so?

OR, that Sean Smith's phone call, telling his mother that there was no security at all in the Benghazi compound, was intercepted by local Benghazi terrorists?

Occam's razor tells us that, given the absurdity of the “hacking” claim, that the Sean Smith betrayal is the right answer.

Of course, the reality is completely different. Patricia Smith flat out lied to the RNC, and in doing so, inadvertently made it appear that her son gave out highly sensitive information over the phone to someone unauthorized to receive it.

1) Sean Smith was a member of the diplomatic corps. He would never have referred to the temporary mission at Benghazi as an “embassy”.
2) Sean Smith had been in Benghazi for a week before the attack, and would not have known about the security situation at the embassy in Tripoli regardless.
3) “All security” had not been pulled from the Benghazi mission. In fact, in addition to the three security personnel who were stationed there when Smith arrived, Ambassador Stevens brought an additional two guards. Plus, there was a CIA outpost less that 2 miles from the compound.
4) Moreover, there was no need to “hack” into the Clinton server (which was not public knowledge until after she'd left the State Department) to know what Stevens was up to. As per protocol, Steven's had notified the Libyan government, as well as local Benghazi security forces, of his itinerary in Benghazi. And his dinner with the City Council from Benghazi at a local hotel on September 10 had been covered by the local media.

And lets not forget:
5) Does anyone really believe that a son in the diplomatic corps would tell his mother “I am going to die?” I don't know of any sons who would put their mother through that kind of worrying and anxiety. Instead, even if a son was concerned for his safety, he would reassure his mother that he was fine.
6) There is no record of Patricia Smith ever claiming to have lifted a finger for her son on September 11th, despite her claims that her son told her he was going to die. Can anyone imagine a mother, thinking her son's life was in imminent danger, not doing everything in her power to protect her son? To call the State Department? To notify the media? To do SOMETHING but sit around the entire next day, acting as if things were perfectly normal? Yet there is no evidence, even from Smith herself, that she'd done anything to save her son.

Bottom line --- Patricia Smith is a woman who has been driven mad by a combination of grief, right wing media propaganda, and the willingness of people like Donald Trump to exploit her regardless of the damage it does to her.

Her son Sean wasn't responsible for Benghazi, but neither was Hillary Clinton.

No votes yet