In the Presidential debate “moderated” by Candy Crowley, President Obama told one of the biggest lies since Bill Clinton said he “didn’t have sex with that woman:”

“And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our UN Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as President. That’s not what I do as Commander-in-Chief.”

Actually, that is exactly what he did.

When Clinton told his lie, one senior political analyst said that if he was lying, it was the end for him.  As we now know, it wasn’t the end, because every single Democratic Senator voted for acquittal.  They decided it wasn’t an important lie because it was just about sex.

We already know that when Obama made the above statement, he was lying.  The evidence is overwhelming that the White House and the State Department knew the truth and they deliberately lied.  It is impossible to believe that Obama was not part and parcel of the cover-up.  The only real question is who was leading on this dance, Hillary or Barack.

Now the only remaining question is whether Democrats will ignore this too, because lying by a liberal Democrat apparently doesn’t matter.  Democrats like to pretend that Bush lied and people died, but they have a problem.  There is not one single instance where there is evidence that Bush lied about anything.  When Bush said he thought there were WMDs in Iraq, it was because he believed there were WMDs in Iraq. The United States Intelligence community believed there were WMDs in Iraq.  The head of the CIA said it was a slam dunk.  John Kerry, Hilary Clinton, John Edwards, Jay Rockefeller and a whole lot of other top Democrats believed there were WMDs in Iraq.  Bush was wrong, but he wasn’t lying about what he believed.   Democrats searched desperately for one lie by George W. Bush and they came up empty.  That is why they screamed loudly about the 13 words in the State of the Union address, that also turned out to be accurate.  It was as close as they could come to finding a lie.  With Obama, we have the opposite problem.  There are so many lies that it is hard to choose which one matters the most.

Obama told a lie, a paper thin red lie and the main stream media knew or should have known that.  I believe this was, to quote Hillary Clinton, the “willing suspension of disbelief.”  The news media knew that the administration’s theory that the Benghazi attack was caused by a video was utter nonsense.  Even Candy Crowley knew that, which is why she pretended that Obama called this a terrorist attack.  I think the main stream media hoped that someone in administration really believed this.  Apparently having our government run by people who are naïve and stupid wasn’t a big concern.  But now we have cold hard unambiguous evidence that they knew the truth and they deliberately lied.  They came, they saw, they lied and the media played along.

No one in the administration really believed that the Benghazi attack was the result of that video.  The CIA and the local State Department employees on site reported within minutes that it was connected to al Qaeda.  They told the White House and the State Department this in writing.  There is no possibility that anyone at the White House or the State Department misunderstood the information.  It was far from ambiguous.  This was a deliberate decision to lie to the American people for purely political purposes.  How on earth can anyone in either party trust an administration that would do this?

TDM