Did I miss Deseret News coverage of Rep. Chaffetz' apology after the
"60 Minutes" retraction?
Republicans are so completely predictable. Obama is an evil, lying despot who
should be impeached because the CIA outpost in Benghazi was attacked. However,
numerous attacks during Republican administrations were no big deal. Hypocrisy
much? Typical, nutty tea party logic.
I applaud Chaffetz for all his effort to open this nightmare of Benghazi. The
Obama Administration as usual are trying to cover their behinds and hopefully
someone will be able to finally get the Obama Administration to admit to the
coverup. What about the lives that were taken unnecessarily...aren't they
important - don't their families deserve some truth? Good for
Chaffetz...got my support.
Guy with Brain:Obama has lowered the budget deficit to its lowest
point in years.Yes, the debt has increased under his watch.
That's what happens when your predecessor puts two wars and a Medicare
expansion on a credit card. Very, very little of Obama's deficit spending
is spending he initiated -- it's almost entirely spending that he
Duh. This isn't about Obama.The GOP, having committed
themselves to no other agenda besides hating on their political enemies, is
simply using this to try to get a jump start on their (surely doomed) campaign
Thank you Rep Chaffetz. You have my support.
@ JoeBlow - Far East USA, SC "wasn't it under Obama that for the first
time Americas credit rating was lowered?" "One of the country's
three major credit rating agencies signaled Tuesday that it could downgrade the
United States' rating, citing the impasse in Washington over raising the
debt ceiling." Thank Mike Lee and Ted Cruz."Thank Mike Lee
and Ted Cruz?You're kidding, right?Obama has added
over $3 TRILLION in debt (from $14 to $17 trillion), more than any single U.S.
President, and you blame Mike Lee and Ted Cruz?Does.Not.Compute.
May I remind everyone that Benghazi was a CIA camp, under the guise of a
consulate?We can thank "Representative" Chaffetz for leaking
that piece of secret information.
Funny how some can spell Benghazi but not FOY.January 22, 2002.
Calcutta, India. Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami gunmen attack the US Consulate, kill
5.June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. al Aqeda bomber attacks the US
Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.February 28, 2003. Islamabad,
Pakistan. Gunmen fire upon the US Embassy. Two people are killed.May
12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic
compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. July 30, 2004.
Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Suicide bomber from Islamic Uzbekistan attacks the US
Embassy, kills two.December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda
terrorists storm the US Consulate, kill 9.March 2, 2006. Karachi,
Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the US Consulate killing four people,
INCLUDING DIPLOMAT DAVID FOY.September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria.
Four gunmen storm the US Embassy. Four killed, 13 wounded.January
12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Greek terrorist group fires an RPG at the US Embassy.
No fatalities.March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Islamic Jihad of
Yemen fire a mortar at the US Embassy. Embassy missed, two in school killed.July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four terrorists attack the US Consulate.
Six killed.September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen --Second attack in
I silently wonder if Jason - upon seeing Mike Lee stumble in recent KSL/BYU
polls -- might be eyeing and shoring up a possible run for the Senate...
"wasn't it under Obama that for the first time Americas credit rating
was lowered?""One of the country's three major credit
rating agencies signaled Tuesday that it could downgrade the United States'
rating, citing the impasse in Washington over raising the debt ceiling."Thank Mike Lee and Ted Cruz.
Chaffetz voted to cut funding directly tied to this mess. While he should not
be allowed to 'have it both ways' the conservative right will let him
get away with it. They're more interested in finding fault in others then
taking a good look in the mirror. I don't believe for one
minute Chaffetz or any other member of this committee cares about the facts in
this case... they're starting the Republican Party campaign verses the
likely candidate for the Democrats.
I found it interesting and enlightening that President Obama was not considered
the most powerful person in the world in a recent article I saw on MSN.
Traditionally the President of the U.S. has always held that spot. Now it is
Putin of Russia. The article said that seeming weakness in handling foreign
policy, like Syria, contributed to this change. Also, wasn't it under
Obama that for the first time Americas credit rating was lowered? I believe so.
Yes, he wasn't kidding when he said "change we can believe in."
And this is it. And I believe it. Don't like it, but I believe it.
@Mountanman:Coverup? Ha ha ha, in your dreams.
"“Chris was not willing to be the kind of diplomat who would strut
around in fortified compounds. He amazed and impressed the Libyans by walking
the streets with the lightest of escorts, sitting in sidewalk cafes, chatting
with passers-by. There was a risk to being accessible. He knew it, and he
accepted it,” Jan Stevens writes, without mentioning the diary.
“What Chris never would have accepted was the idea that his death would be
used for political purposes. There were security shortcomings, no doubt. Both
internal and outside investigations have identified and publicly disclosed them.
Steps are being taken to prevent their reoccurrence.”“So
rather than engage in endless recriminations, his family is working to continue
building the bridges he so successfully began,” he adds.(Jan
Stevens, father of Ambassador Chris Stevens)
Ultra Bob,Obama has not needed any help from Republicans in making
himself and America look weak. He has done that all by himself, unfortunately.
No doubt lessons need to be learned from poor judgment and inaction regarding
Benghazi, but is this what the hearings really are about? When does this
supposed outrage become an obsession.Mountanman Do you
have the same outrage for the 250 some American civilians that died in the
recent wars. Are their lives seemingly less significant. Many of their lives
could have been saved with better intelligence and better protection. Speaking
of lies, it appears now that "lies" were perpetrated by some to get us
into the Iraq war. The claim that Obama lied about Benghazi is obvious
conjecture and hope on your part.
re:Mountanman"Can you name three Democrat members of congress that did
NOT vote for the Iraq war?" Democratic "no" votes:Barbara Boxer-CAChris Dodd-CTJoe Biden-DEBob Graham-FLMax Cleland GADaniel Akaka-HIRichard Durbin-ILEvan
Bayh-INJohn Breaux-LABarbara Mikulski-MDTed Kennedy-MADebra Stabenow-MichiganMark Dayton-MNJean Carnahan-MOMax
Baucus-Montanaanother 10 Democrats in the Senate.126 members
Democratic members of the House.
The number of Americans killed by foreign interests because the war on President
Obama has so discredited, weakened and emasculated President Obama and America
is the epitome of the mountain and the molehill. When so much is
given to make the President look bad to America and the world, is there any
reason that a foreigner has to fear America. It is extremely
unlikely that we will ever know the truth about Benghazi or even any other
political thing. No one is asking “why did we have a consulate in
Benghazi where there are so many people who hate Americans”?
@1conservative"I believe that if ALL the information related to the
Benghazi mess comes to light - the President will be impeached."Mishandling a situation, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.@Mountanman"Can you name three Democrat members of congress
that did NOT vote for the Iraq war? "126 Democrats in the House
(out of 209) voted against it. Barney Frank, Dennis Kucinich, and Barbara Lee
were three of them.
@ Happy Valley, Still debating the Iraq war and using that to justify
Obama's lies? How sad. Can you name one democrat that wasn't clamoring
for revenge after 9-11? Can you name three Democrat members of congress that did
NOT vote for the Iraq war? And by the way, you need to tell that "no one
died" to the families of those killed in Benghazi. You know, that attack
caused by a video that no one saw and that now we can't get any
accountability or answers from your hero in the white house. "What
difference does it make"?= cover-up
The Congressman is either a dupe for conspiring men, or.... While
he keeps fanning the flames, to apply the arguments of these co-conspirators,
then Bush personally is to blame for 9/11 (there is subtantial evidence that he
was warned and knew about bin Laden well before the attacks), and Reagan for the
Beirut bombing. How can President Obama and Secretary Clinton be personally
blamed because the intelligence apparatus didn't give them every detail
about what was going on in this Middle Eastern country, which was dangerous and
over which the U.S. not only had little control, but relied on Libyan security?
If so, then Bush bears blame for many things. The reality is, political leaders
depend on career staff. Staff drive the flow of information, and decisions
are made at multiple lower levels as to what to push up the chain. There are
other diplomatic and security issues at play. It is a complex web anda lot is
involved. I also have to wonder why the Ambassador decided to be there, knowing
that there were security concerns. There are a lot of questions, but Chaffetz
are asking the wrong ones. Political mischief, nothing more.
Mountanman said: No one is blaming Obama FOR the Benghazi attack but for his
actions afterward. Perhaps you ideology has blinded you to that?Lets look
at it bumper sticker style, so the tea party folks might understand. I'll even give you the "Obama Lied." (Although I don't
personally believe that.)When Bush Lied People died.When
People Died, Obama Lied.One caused folks to die.One was the
answer, After folks died.No matter what you believe Obama said, it
didn't cause the death of any of these people, on the other hand Lies told
before and during the Iraq war did cause untold numbers of deaths.My
ideology is consistent.
More grandstanding, more distractions from our congressman who has accomplished
nothing to date.
Jason's just doing his puppet dance of trying to keep a non-issue an issue,
so they can try and use it when Hillary runs against...who are the republicans
gunna run?Common Ranch that was a "republican" president
with so much blood on his hands that no one noticed a little more.Here's an Idea Jason... work on jobs, health care alternative,
immigration something besides semantics after an attack that has been covered
again and again by you and the merry band of conservative conspiracy clowns.Who's only goal is to try and try and try and try to get this evil
demoncrat out!Seem like they spent a lot of time doing the same
thing to Bill.
@ Ranch. When other embassies were bombed the President didn't lie about
it, cover is up and stonewall any investigations. No one is blaming Obama FOR
the Benghazi attack but for his actions afterward. Perhaps you ideology has
blinded you to that?
Virtually anytime someone gets killed, things could have been done to prevent
it. Whether an accident in the home or an attack on a Consulate.Under Bush, there were many such US Embassy and Consulate attacks resulting in
many deaths. Does this absolve Obama and Clinton? Of course not.Those were preventable also. I do not say this to beat up Bush, but to show
the inconsistencies and hypocrisy.These things have happened many
times. Why is this different? Why does this suddenly become the
"scandal"?Because Obama possibly knew the truth and
didn't disclose it?If the becomes the standard for our
presidents and our Congress, the halls in Washington would be empty.Was there "negligence and or incompetence"?You could say
so. Was is willful? Of course not.Nor was it under Bush.And nor will it be when it happens next.
This is a joke. Chaffetz voted to cut funding for security in
I find it hard to take the howls about the Benghazi "conspiracy" very
seriously when these same individuals forgave the much larger errors of other
(Republican) administrations without batting an eyelash. Yes, there were
undoubtedly mistakes made. Should things have been done differently?
Absolutely. Is this a big deal? Yes, but not nearly on the scale of the Beirut
bombing that occurred in Saint Reagan's administration, or the illegal
arms-for-hostages deals during Saint Reagan's administration, or the
willful blindness and selective examination of evidence regarding WMD in Iraq
during the G W Bush administration.If I were convinced that the
Republicans were always interested in an unbiased examination of the facts, with
a view toward adopting policies that address the errors, then I would be all for
a detailed investigation. In this political climate one can hardly hope for
such a thing. One can expect nothing more than a witch hunt, designed solely to
diminish the Obama presidency. Already we see the calls for impeachment over
this matter. Would these same individuals have called for Reagan's
impeachment over either the Beirut bombing or the Iran-contra deal? I think
Budget cuts have reduced security at many consulates. Security at Benghazi was
the responsibility of the local Police and the Libyan Military through an
agreement with the US. It was reported last weekend that the attackers told the
Police and Military they did not want to kill them, only Americans and the
security detail left. Not much security, but what was available.Let's also not forget the Ambassador was told to leave and return to the
Embassy in Tripoli. He would not.
Where were all your demands, Chappy, when several embassies were bombed during
the last Republican administration and over 50 people were killed?Hypocrisy much?
Don't forget the BIG picture on all of this Benghazi thing. Hillary
Clinton. The presumed next President by Democrats, who don't want the
whole picture to come out if it would show her to have been negligent and or
incompetetant. What may end up happening is that in order to save Hillary,
someone on the Obama administration will do an Admiral Poindexter and take all
the blame just to cover for the real culprits. Admiral Poindexter for those of
you who may not know, took all the blame for Iran Contra during the Reagan
glad we have a couple in the congress that actually do something.weapons were
going though Lybia to Syria. That is why barry won't let anyone talk. It
will come out thanks to guys like Jason.
From the articleCongress, he said, wants to know -why
the Benghazi post was not better protected- why the military did not
immediately respond -and why the administration initially blamed the
attack on a demonstration over an offensive film.Ok, lets come up
with possible bad case scenarios. Hypothetical1) not better
protected? Terribly bad judgement. A huge mistake causing American deaths. 2) No military response? Bad Call which could have saved
lives. Poor leadership. Terrible decision making.3) Blamed attack
on film? Knew the absolute truth but thought it would hurt election chances. Does anyone believe that the decisions were made in an effort to have
people die?Did Obama keep the military out so the consulate could be
taken?What sense does any of that make? I don't get it.I
see mistakes. I see things that could be improved. I see hindsight is
20/20.I also see things like this have happened many many times in
history. And will happen in the future.What I don't see is
some big scandal. Someone detail out the worse case scenario on
1,2,3? What is there other than deadly mistakes?Give me
specifics of impeachable offenses.
It seems like UT is becoming known as a wacko state based only on our
Imagine the hyperventilation and demands for the "truth" from the left
if were GWB's or Reagan's cover-ups, stonewalling and lies instead of
Obama's! Now we are told it is a witch hunt a non issue or "What
difference does it make now"? To the hypocritical left it always
"depends on what is, is."
The moment I heard Benghazi first...I immediately knew what was taking place. It
was total political game played on people's lives. O and Hillary wanted
their "peace" process in the ME to work (at least in the media). Sadly
part of their game was to lie, to order soldiers down and let them be
murdered...and lie, lie! In a critical election period the democrats showed that
the mandate was worth more than the truth!Kalindra, an ambassador is first
and foremost representing the president...this one let one of his bravest be
murdered-and lied about it! That cover up is the true conspiracy! And! Nobody is
charged not in Libya, not in the US, because this WH cover-up continues and
continues...WHY? Because they still hope Hillary would be the next one.David, let's not forget some of O's worst ones... IRS, AP and now
Phone Tapping 35 global leaders.
Once again we see Romney on the right side of issues, while Obama involved in
cover-up, misleading or lieing to the American people. Solyndra, Fast &
Furious, Obamacare, Benghazi...issue after issue we have a president that is
found on the wrong side. We have a president that discovers things
in the newspapers and doesn't know anything, denies responsibility, blames
everyone else, and is on the golf course by 9 a.m.America chose
wrong in 2012 and we keep paying for it over and over again.
So at some point Chavezz getting involved in another pointless conspiracy has to
stop being news. Here is an idea how about he get back to work on the budget and
a long term debt ceiling bill and stop playing games?
I believe that if ALL the information related to the Benghazi mess comes to
light - the President will be impeached.I also believe that Congress
has been largely ineffectual in trying to garner the truth about Benghazi and
every other scandal in the Obama administration.We already know the
Justice dept. will do anything/everything to cover for this administration.
Therefore, if anyone is EVER held accountable for anything in this
administration it will have to come from Congress. Ultimately, (and
probably)the supreme court will have to get involved.I think largely
based on intimidation from the Obama administration, and a compliant media,
Congress has pretty much "caved" on everything Obama does.