Allen West: I have a little message for you Mr. President, re: your REFUSAL to answer Benghazi questions

And to any of the progressive socialist detractors who wish to support these people, you’re no better than the enemy who sought to kill our fellow Americans that night in Benghazi, Libya. You would rather align yourselves with these dismissive liars than stand with those deployed into harm’s way to safeguard our liberty.

Allen West Stop Iran Rally

As Written By Allen B. West:

I am seriously angered by this belligerence and disregard of the American people and the perversion of our Constitutional Republic.

On the day our Constitution was signed, September 17, 1787 (for those of you who didn’t know), Benjamin Franklin was met by a Philadelphia socialite, a woman named Mrs. Powell. She made a simple but powerful inquiry of Franklin asking him, “Well, Doctor, what is it that we have, a monarchy or a republic?” Franklin with his well-renowned precision wit responded, “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

The United States of America is not a democracy; it is a Constitutional Republic. However, when we don’t teach our history, instead choosing to revise it; when we don’t teach civics, instead choosing to create a generation of subjects, mindless drones, and not citizens — we cannot keep the Republic. The reason is we don’t even know what a Republic entails, and as Franklin once quipped, we then get the government we deserve.

We live in a representative Democracy, and our representatives in political office are selected to represent and be accountable to us — that is a Constitutional Republic. But what happens when we’re too ignorant to know the difference between that which we were created to be, and that which we are becoming — a Constitutional Monarchy? We find ourselves not being governed, but rather being ruled, by a class of political elites enabled by a complicit media and entertainment elites. They see themselves as above us, the common folk, and direct us to do as they say, not as they do, and accountability to us be damned.

That has once again raised its ugly head from the highest office of this land. Asreported by POLITICO, “The White House and the House Select Committee on Benghazi are at a standoff over whether President Barack Obama should answer a series of questions about the 2012 terrorist attack in Libya that left four Americans dead.

Neil Eggleston, counsel to the president, blasted the committee for sending the president a list of questions about the attack — an inquiry the administration deemed inappropriate and a partisan attempt to frame the White House as uncooperative.

Eggleston has encouraged Obama not to answer the committee’s questions “because of the implications of his response on the constitutional separation of powers,” according to a letter sent Saturday to Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) and obtained by POLITICO. “If the president were to answer your questions, his response would suggest that Congress has the unilateral power to demand answers from the president about his official acts,” the letter reads.

Eggleston also accused the panel of asking questions it already knew the answer to — something the committee denies. And Gowdy’s panel criticized the White House’s response as unhelpful to its investigation.

Committee members have been trying to answer several unresolved questions before releasing their final report in the coming weeks. “It’s no surprise President Obama would rather take questions from Derek Jeter than answer questions for the American people about the Benghazi terrorist attacks, which followed what he himself has called his worst mistake — failing to plan for what happened after the State Department pushed U.S. intervention in Libya,” said committee spokesman Jamal Ware, referring to Obama’s chat a few days ago with the former New York Yankee.

“The White House’s fictional narrative today is the latest chapter of the story it has been spinning since 2012, when four of our fellow citizens were murdered by Al-Qaida-linked terrorists in the tragic terrorist attacks in Benghazi.”

First of all, let me explain something to ol’ Neil. The separation of powers, coequal branches of government, and checks and balances were instituted in our system of governance by James Madison for a purpose. It was intended to ensure the executive branch didn’t set itself up as a monarchy and ruler in America.

Remember Thomas Jefferson spoke of the consent of the governed — not subjects. And his document was a listing of grievances against King George III and the British crown — there is no such adornment upon Barack Obama’s head.

There’s a reason why the legislative branch is the most powerful branch in our federal government – if you don’t believe me, read the Constitution. Perhaps Mr. Eggleston, if you’d read Montesquieu’s seminal work “Spirit of the Laws,” which is what Madison — and I — read, you would have a clearer comprehension of the raison d’être for those principles and concepts.

Second, buddy, you need to understand President Obama isn’t answering to a committee, or a political party; he’s answering to US, the American people.

You see, dude, here in the good ol’ U.S. of A., no one is above the law, the rule of law. And that’s why we’re a Constitutional Republic. Perhaps that genius of a constitutional scholar whom you are protecting should share that lesson with you — then again, he was just some adjunct teacher who has demonstrated abject disrespect for our Constitution. And so he has you enabling the same once again.

This is the deal, slick. President Obama violated the War Powers Act and “outsourced” our military to support Islamic jihadists in Libya. He furthermore delivered weapons into the hands of said jihadists, a violation of U.S. statute in providing materiel support and comfort to the enemy, aiding and abetting their …..

Full Story Here:

That’s it. I’ve had it. – Allen B. West –

Leave a Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.