Let's see if we can draw some parallels between the Watergate incident and the Benghazi-gate incident. Watergate consisted of a break-in to "steal" some political advantage and was covered up by then-President Nixon. He denied for months that he knew anything about it. Finally he was caught in his tangled web of lies and was forced to resign or be impeached.
Then we have Benghazi-gate, in which we have subsequently found out that virtually the entire administration was involved in covering up the fact that this was a terrorist attack, for which all timely assistance was denied, and as a consequence four Americans lost their lives so we could "save" the president's re-election. To this day the White House states (through Jay Carney, press secretary) that they would have done the same thing over again — because it worked — the president got re-elected and only four Americans lost their lives to pay for it. And Nixon was threatened with impeachment for lying about the knowledge of a "break-in." Where is Bob Woodward when you need him?
- In our opinion: Perry indictment a concern
- Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: Families battling...
- Scandals hiding in plain sight
- A. Scott Anderson: The world needs America to...
- Charles Krauthammer: The role of a great...
- Join the discussion: Is Rick Perry's...
- Michael Gerson: No time to lead from behind
- Mary Barker: The real 'Hunger Games' —...
- Mary Barker: The real 'Hunger Games'... 81
- Robert Bennett: Contrary to Krugman,... 61
- In our opinion: Perry indictment a concern 56
- Letter: Utah's birthright 49
- Letter: Irreparable damage 48
- In our opinion: Avoid blurring the line... 46
- Join the discussion: Why is young adult... 42
- Michael Gerson: Rand Paul's bogus outreach 37