Why was Rice involved with reporting attack?
Since U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice took the stage (five times) to explain the “Benghazi debacle,” much has been made, even by the president, of her innocence. We are told that she was only relating what she knew from the CIA report. First, she really had no business making the statements when it should have been President Obama’s most senior advisers, David Axelrod or Valerie Jarrett. Given the accusations of changes made to the report by the head of the CIA, removing any mention of al-Qaida’s involvement, could it be that Axelrod or Jarrett were being shielded from making a statement of perjury?
Frank A. Gugino Sr.