Bill O'Reilly: Was there an abuse of power after the American ambassador to Libya was assassinated?

By Bill O'Reilly

Many American are sick and tired of hearing about Benghazi. The left saying it's just a conspiracy against the President. But that is not true. The assassination of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Libya on September 11, 2012 is a very important story. The reason: someone misled the world about the terror attack. And now a year and a half later we still don't know why we were misled or who designed the deception.

On Super Bowl Sunday I asked the President about it.


O'REILLY: General Carter Ham, you know the General, security in Africa.


O'REILLY: He testified that on the day that the ambassador was murdered and the three other Americans, all right, he told Secretary Panetta it was a terrorist attack. Shortly after Ham -- General Ham said that Secretary Panetta came in to you.

OBAMA: Yes, yes.

O'REILLY: Did he tell you, Secretary Panetta, it was a terrorist attack.

OBAMA: You know what he told me was that there was an attack on our compound.

O'REILLY: He didn't use the word terror?

OBAMA: You know, in -- in the heat of the moment, Bill, what folks are focused on is what's happening on the ground.


O'REILLY: Well, I never did get an answer as to whether the President was told by Leon Panetta that a terror attack killed Ambassador Stevens. The President has not clarified that and Mr. Panetta will not answer our questions. He is running from us.

Enter this man. Then-deputy CIA Director Mike Morell who it is alleged was behind the bogus information put out by the administration. Morell was second to CIA Director David Petraeus and apparently an agency memo issued shortly after the terror attack implicates him as a liar. Mike Morell will testify tomorrow in front of the House Intelligence Committee under oath.

According to the "Washington Times" the memo was issued on September 15th, 2012, four days after the attack and said the assassination was not, was not due to any escalation of protests. The memo was allegedly written by the CIA station chief in Libya.

So Mike Morell may be in serious trouble because, as everybody knows, the Obama administration put out Ambassador Susan Rice to tell the world that intense protests may have incited the attack, after, after that CIA memo.

Now, the big picture President Obama was running for re-election when the terrorists hit Benghazi and his campaign was touting his effective policies on terrorism. So there could have been a political motivation to keep terrorists out of the Benghazi debacle. If the Obama administration lied, that's an abuse of power. If the CIA cooperated in the lie, that's an abuse of power. As we all know from Watergate, abuses of power can lead to very bad things.

So Benghazi is a big story whether the left wants to admit it or not. To be fair we need to hear from Mr. Morell tomorrow under oath and people should not be making blanket accusations against the President or anyone else. But this whole thing is very suspicious. If that CIA memo counters what Ambassador Rice said, all hell should break loose, even with apathetic media.

And that's the "Talking Points Memo".