Comments about ‘Topic of the day: Explaining Benghazi’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, May 11 2013 11:30 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Moderate
Salt Lake City, UT

"I reminded Mrs. Clinton that multiple requests were sent to the State Department asking for increased security measures," Paul said in an op-ed for the Washington Times.

I am reminded of the smug smile Representative Jason Chaffetz had when proclaimed he "absolutely" voted to cut funding for embassy security.

Hemlock
Salt Lake City, UT

The White House, Ms. Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney have all been documented as mendacious. It was pathetic watching Mr. Carney twisting in the wind as reporters asked direct questions and were given "stylistic" answers. Mr. Obama's feigned indignation during the debates when Romney implied that there was a Benghazi cover up, was pure deceptive theater. The president should extend an apology to Mr. Romney for lying during the debates.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

@Moderate,

So Obama's failure to protect Americans on American soil is Jason Chaffetz's fault? Maybe Jason should be sitting in the Oval Office.

People died. Obama lied. Jason did not ask Obama to lie. Jason did not ask Obama to issue a "stand down order" to the military. Jason did not tell Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice to lie about the attack. Those were all Obama's doings. Obama wanted to sit in the Oval Office more than he wanted Americans to live. His upcoming election was more important to him than his duty to Americans. He got his wish. He gets to sit in the Oval Office.

I hope he enjoys that office. The day will come when he will make a full accounting to someone who will not accept his excuses nor allow him to lie. On that day, he will certainly have a different perspective on what an oath means and what duty should have required.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Paul mischaracterized Sec. Clinton's response.

Clinton stated "Congressman, that cable did not come to my attention. I have made it very clear that the security cables did not come to my attention or above the assistant secretary level … 1.43 million cables a year come to the State Department. They are all addressed to me. They do not all come to me. They are reported through the bureaucracy.”

Officilas at the Defense Department. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified in February that he had heard about the concerns in the August cable via a weekly report sent to him by Gen. Carter Ham, head of U.S. Africa Command.
But, backing up the account of the slow-moving State Department bureaucracy, Dempsey told the Senate Armed Services Committee that “we never received a request for support from the State Department, which would have allowed us to put forces on the ground.” He added: “General Ham actually called the embassy to see if they wanted to extend the special security team there and was told no.”

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Rather than have actual witnesses (whistle blowers) testify of what they experienced first hand, let's attack them and try to shatter their credibility to save Hillary's credibility!

Moderate
Salt Lake City, UT

Mike Richards went into a long rant about President Obama, and ignored the obvious. This dust up by the Republicans isn't about Obama. They are posturing for 2016. Find the truth? No, they don't even care about finding the terrorists.
I hope they don't think Benghazi is their ticket to win the next election. But if they want to run with it, good luck. As they run ads touting how they care about the security of American lives, the Democrats need only run a commercial of Jason Chaffetz proudly talking about his security cutting vote because "choices have to be made".
Benghazi will only hold Republican interest as long as Hillary Clinton is a potential candidate. They'll latch on to something new if another candidate looks strong. Whatever they latch on to, it will have nothing to do with Obama. That is history.

MapleDon
Springville, UT

The new talking points:

1. Label the investigation into what took place in Benghazi as partisan politicizing.
2. Say that this was already looked into long ago.
3. Accuse all Republicans involved in the hearings of being only interested in hurting Hillary Clinton's chances in 2016.
4. Blame an un-named low-level staff person.
5. Keep Obama clean.

And the Deseret News, as always, obliges.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Where is the documentation that the White House ignored additional security? Who are the people being threatened and suppressed (per Chaffetz)? So far the right wing only makes vague references but when pinned down for details they can't provide any.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

This non stroy is hardly to be discovered on objective news, but four to five articles on extreme right wing agencies.

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

Moderate went into a long rant about Mike Richards, and ignored the obvious. Obama/Hillary lied

Ernest - An Ostrch response does not work - the entire hearing was about giving voice to the whistle blowers providing the details you claim do not exist - you simply choose to ignore the inconvenient

One vote - So lying about an incident where Americans were murdered in order to protect politcal status is a non-story? Only if the source it is a horrifically biased left wing news outlet (that is the point)

WHAT NOW?
Saint George, UT

@counterproductive

Republican ICON President Ronald Reagan spent 19 months spinning/lying about IRAN-CONTRA.

No problem?

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Mike Richards
Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden the following day. Within 2 weeks after the attacks the Administration had it straightened out and had dropped the video matter in relation to Benghazi. Secretaries Clinton and Rice were not given talking points from Obama but were given information from others. It is those other people who made things messy.

@Counter Intelligence
There's a difference between lying and being wrong. I suppose I can forgive you and Mike for not knowing the difference since I can't tell if the two of you are just wrong or lying.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Counter: The burden of proof is upon you and faux news

LetsDebate
PLEASANT GROVE, UT

@Ernest T - CBS has also felt a journalistic burden to find the truth about this matter. We certainly can't put the burden of proof on NBC, CNN, or ABC, given that they see no evil, hear, no evil, and speak no evil about our current administration. There are clearly no Woodward and Bernsteins on the trail regardless of anything Obama might do, even though the Benghazi incompetence and cover-up are far, far more serious than anything Watergate turned up. Corruption only matters when Republicans are involved.

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

WHAT NOW? - Are you saying that you want Obama treated differently than Reagan? That is a problem

atl134 - When the Obama administration tells people a riot is about a video long after they know it is not - it is both wrong and a lie - not a mistake

Ernest T. Bass - Ah yes the faux news quip - a tired joke and sure sign of vapidity; but surprizingly you have a point. The internet has allowed the public to get around the gatekeepers and witness just how biased the mainstream media is - mostly by their selectivity.

We now see that NBC routinely edits stories to change their meaning.

CBS News President, David Rhodes, brother of Obama's deputy national security, Ben Rhodes, who was instrumental in changing the Benghazi talking points - is trying to dump Sheryl Attkisson, the only CBS investigative reporter reporting on Benghazi and who broke the Fast & Furious story.

CNN irrelevant/inaccurate

Pew Reports that MSNBC is by far the most partisan netwrk in its NEWS stories and opinion fills 85% of the channel's airtime.

So it is true Fox is the only one who actually follows stories others try to suppress. Good

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments