By Ben Barrack

What is known about the night of the Benghazi attacks is that Barack Obama called Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 10pm. Clinton issued a statement at 10:08pm that pointed to “inflammatory material on the internet” as being “blamed” by “some”. By 10:58pm, the Associated Press reported that the State Department said the “video” was responsible.

Hillary and Barack need to get their Benghazi stories straight.

It sounds like Hillary and the President need to get their stories straight, which could explain why they would wanted a lunch meeting to remain secret. Unfortunately for them, the paparazzi may have inadvertently performed some journalism before reneging on it.

If you’ve ever watched congressional hearings, administration officials tend to deny talking to other administration officials they should have spoken with. A quick perusal of the testimony given in Operation Fast and Furious hearings will substantiate that. We’re often left speculating as to why but invested parties getting their stories straight is as good an answer as any.

That’s what is cause for suspicion about a secret meeting at the White House between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The reason for the secret being revealed is, ironically, People Magazine, which tweeted out a photo of Hillary at the White House with the Magazine’s Washington Bureau Chief, Sandra Sobieraj Westfall. The tweet was deleted a mere three minutes after it was posted:

Why the secrecy? Why does the president need to have an unscheduled lunch with a former administration official?

The answer may have come courtesy of a news report published just one day prior to the secret lunch meeting:

An array of Democrats — including Hillary Clinton’s allies — are meeting this week to hammer out a united front on national security issues, including a clear response to Republicans over the Benghazi controversy.

They see an opportunity to wrest control of a narrative that some allies fear could be damaging to Clinton if she moves ahead with a 2016 presidential campaign.

A major milestone in the effort will take place this Friday, when a coalition of Democratic-leaning groups and influentials converges at the headquarters of the centrist think tank Third Way for a briefing that includes top Clinton adviser Philippe Reines.

On Wednesday, it was learned that “Clinton’s allies” and “an array of Democrats” would be working toward a “united front” on Benghazi at a meeting to be held on Friday. Clinton’s secret lunch with Obama was sandwiched in between, on Thursday.

Would any such “array” include the guy who called Hillary at 10pm ET on the night of the Benghazi attacks. Hillary’s statement pointing to the video being responsible was first issued at 10:08pm, as reported by Shoebat.com. Is it possible that the contents of that phone conversation came up in the lunch meeting?

A little more than a week ago, it was reported that these Clinton “allies” carried out a “back channel campaign” that pressured Democratic lawmakers not to boycott the Select Committee hearings as they had threatened:

Hillary Clinton’s world was so worried about a Republican investigation of the Benghazi attacks, they sent a message to House Democrats: We need backup.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) publicly considered boycotting the panel, an idea that Clinton supporters feared would leave the potential 2016 candidate exposed to the enemy fire of House Republicans.

Here is House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi before she decided to obey the wishes of the Clinton “allies”, dodging questions about whether her Party would boycott the hearings:

It’s obvious that House Democrats were so concerned about trying to discredit the Select Committee that they didn’t see how destructive to their cause, not showing up would be. The fact that Elijah Cummings will have a seat on the Committee is beyond ludicrous. He’s already been caught working with the IRS to target conservative groups, demonstrating that he should at the very least recuse himself from the IRS investigation. At worst, it shows he’s compromised and/or complicit in pushing the Obama administration’s agenda.

Would that not include assisting in the Benghazi coverup?