President Barack Obama tried to reassure Americans in an Oval Office address on Sunday night, telling the nation: “So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas, or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home.”
That statement, however, contradicted evidence already found about possible terror links to broader networks.
On Sunday morning, the Los Angeles Times had reported that the wife, Tashfeen Malik, had “used to talk to somebody in Arabic at night on the Internet. None of our family members in Pakistan know Arabic, so we do not know what she used to discuss.”
In addition, Fox News’ Adam Housley reported Sunday morning that federal agents “believe that the money trail leads outside the United States” and that they were “leaning towards the possibility that these two worked with, or contacted, which is a better way of putting it, at least two terror organizations in the Middle East.” Housley added that Malik, was linked to a radical mosque in Pakistan.
On Sunday evening, literally minutes after Obama’s speech, Housley expanded on that reporting, noting that agents had found “significant tips” about the “international connection possibly to training as well as money.” There was, he said, a “digital footprint” and “significant evidence with regards to the money train.”
All of that is “evidence”–evidence Obama denied.
As in the 2012 Benghazi attacks, President Obama has sought to downplay the possibility of radical Islamic terror–insisting last week that the San Bernardino attack could have been “workplace violence,” and drawing connections between this event and attacks involving random gun violence by deranged individuals.
There is no doubt that Obama knows, or should know, that evidence has already emerged–perhaps not conclusive evidence, but “significant evidence” nonetheless–of precisely the kind of “conspiracy” he told Americans did not exist.
It seems Obama has learned little since Benghazi about being honest with the public.