In the continuing scandal over what took place in Benghazi, Libya, who knew, and when they knew it, we are discovering the facts are coming out exposing the lies of the Obama administration. Now we are learning the the CIA and the State Department both had eyewitnesses that reported that there were no protests at the consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. On September 18, 2012, just three days after the eyewitnesses made their reports, both Barack Obama and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney both openly and publicly tied the attacks to protests over an anti-Muslim video that had been posted to YouTube months before.

According to the Senate Homeland Security Committee report titled Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi there were other attacks in Benghazi from May 22 to June 18, 2012. Among those were:

• On May 22, 2012, the International Committee for the Red Cross/Red Crescent (ICRC) building in Benghazi was hit by two RPG rounds, causing damage to the building but no casualties. Several days later, the Brigades of the Imprisoned Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman claimed responsibility for this attack, accusing the ICRC of proselytizing in Libya.

• On June 6, 2012, the U.S. Temporary Mission Facility in Benghazi was targeted by an IED attack that blew a hole in the perimeter wall. Credit for this attack was also claimed by the Brigades of the Imprisoned Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, which said it carried out the attack in response to the reported drone strike on al Qaeda leader Abu Yahya al-Libi in Northern Waziristan.

• On June 11, 2012, an attack was carried out in Benghazi on the convoy of the British Ambassador to Libya. Attackers fired an RPG on the convoy, followed by small arms fire. Two British bodyguards were injured in the attack. This attack was characterized afterwards in an incident report by the Department of State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security as a “complex, coordinated attack.”

• On June 18, 2012, the Tunisian consulate in Benghazi was stormed by individuals affiliated with Ansar al-Sharia Libya (AAS), allegedly because of “attacks by Tunisian artists against Islam.”

The report went on to say that the "threat to western interests in eastern Libya and in Benghazi specifically was high even prior to the attack of September 11, 2012."

The report goes on to confirm that personnel that worked at the CIA "Annex" on September 11 in Benghazi said that there was not protests that took place and additionally State Department security personnel that survived the attacks told FBI agents during and interview that they had seen no evidence of any protests. Both of these reports were issued on September 15, 2012, with the FBI interviews carrying over into the 16th.

Jay Carney went before reporters claiming that the video apparently sparked protests that got out of hand. He was asked on September 18, 2012, "It seems that the U.S. and Libya have sort of different accounts of the attack in Benghazi last week. There are reports that Libyan officials warned the U.S. of the growing extremist threat prior to the attacks, that they admitted they could not control some of these militias. That seems to run counter to what administration officials have been saying, that this was just a spontaneous reaction to this anti-Islam film. Can you kind of reconcile this?"

Carney answered, "Well, what I can tell you is that we have provided information about what we believe was the precipitating cause of the protest and the violence, based on the information that we have had available. There is an ongoing investigation. The FBI is investigating. And that investigation will follow the facts wherever they lead."

This is at least two days later, after the State Department and the CIA had already confirmed there was no evidence of a protest over a video. Additionally Carney went on to state, "I would point you to what Ambassador Rice said and others have said about what we know thus far about the video and its influence on the protests that occurred in Cairo, in Benghazi and elsewhere. And all I can tell you is that steps are taken, both seen and unseen, in advance of and in preparation for times like the anniversary of 9/11 when it is judged that there might be greater threats. And those steps are based on the threat assessments that we have at the time. But I would refer you in terms of specific security for specific facilities to the State Department."

Clearly he was attempting to lead in that direction. After all the media had put out the story days before. In fact, virtually the next day, CNN had the entire story of the video concocted. Additionally The Atlantic had the inside information on the creator of the film as well.

Terence P. Jeffrey writes, "Also, an internal State Department email exchange on Sept. 18--the same day Carney made his claim at the White House briefing and Obama made his on Letterman—shows that State Department security officers new by that date that there had been no protest in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012."

"Video recordings from the diplomatic mission’s closed-circuit television security system, according to the Senate Homeland Security Committee’s report, would also demonstrate that there had been no protest there before the terrorist attacks," he wrote.

So in addition to the eyewitness testimony and video evidence, the Obama administration had to have knowingly lied to the American people about the YouTube video. The question still remains, why? Was it to keep things quiet about the secret CIA prison? Was it to send the media on a witch hunt for the producer of the film? Or was it a political opportunity for Obama to go after the First Amendment? It seems we are just scratching the surface and there is more light needed to expose the darkness on what happened in Benghazi.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.