Quantcast
Opinion

In our opinion: A House select committee to investigate Benghazi is necessary

Comments

Return To Article
  • Utefan60 Salt Lake City, UT
    May 17, 2014 8:50 a.m.

    UtahBlueDevil "Perhaps it is just Chaffetz trying to sooth his feelings of regret about voting twice to cut funding for embassy security."

    I think it would be great to put him on the hot seat in front of cameras and ask him why he voted to cut funding. Also why isn't the DN asking Chaffetz why he voted to do this?

    Your comment is great. Thanks

  • FanOfTheSith Vernal, UT
    May 16, 2014 5:50 p.m.

    "I'm a politician which means I'm cheat and a liar and when I'm not kissing babies, I'm stealing their lollipops, but I also keep my options open."

    Keeping options open when it's convenient, according to the politicians. Even if it means ignoring the truth and acted like, "hey what is the big deal?" "Politics is dirty business." It is no longer about "We The People" but "what's in it for me per say, the politicians. It seems like the politicians are the "Untouchables" these days.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    May 14, 2014 5:53 p.m.

    The Benghazi investigation is a complete waste of time and resources.

    It's only redeeming feature is that is demonstrates just how irresponsible Congressional Republicans really are.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    May 13, 2014 11:08 a.m.

    To "Schnee" according to CNN Benghazi is possibly a coverup for an illegal gun running effort to send arms to Syria.

    As for Hillary, she declined military protection for the embassy, and she had the power and authority to send the people from Benghazi to a safe location. She was fully warned ahead of time that there was significant unrest and that US assets were being targeted. She chose to do nothing. If she is willing to let US diplomats die, isn't it possible that she will also drop the ball when a threat comes into your neighborhood?

    To "Say No to BO" you forgot all of the drums and warheads with chemical weapons that were found all over Iraq. Liberals don't like that because they wanted giant wearhouses full, not just truck loads of chemical weapons.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    May 13, 2014 10:15 a.m.

    @ECR
    In the waning days of GWB (July 2008) 500 metric tons of yellow cake were quietly removed from Iraq to Canada.
    Not much was reported about that. It might have even impacted the Obama presidential win.

  • Demiurge San Diego, CA
    May 13, 2014 9:21 a.m.

    A ridiculously right-wing newspaper supports yet another Benghazi committee? I'm shocked! Shocked I say. The Republican house hasn't done anything useful so far, so why would anyone expect them to now?

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    May 12, 2014 5:22 p.m.

    @Redshirt
    "Why is it that the liberals ignore the cover up. The issue is not that the embassy was attacked. The issue is why the cover up?"

    What do you even think they are/were covering up? It was called an act of terror within days and we had the misconceptions cleared up within a couple weeks of the attack.

    "Another issue you liberals should be asking yourself is do you really want Hillary in 2016?"

    Yes.

    "Well, she had that call as Secretary of State and she failed miserably. Do you think that giving her more power and authority is a good idea?"

    Since when does a Secretary of State handle military decisions?

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    May 12, 2014 7:41 a.m.

    Why is it that the liberals ignore the cover up. The issue is not that the embassy was attacked. The issue is why the cover up?

    What is it that the Obama administration is trying to cover up?

    Another issue you liberals should be asking yourself is do you really want Hillary in 2016? In 2012 she painted the image that she would a great leader to answer the 3AM call with an urgent matter. Well, she had that call as Secretary of State and she failed miserably. Do you think that giving her more power and authority is a good idea?

  • Utefan60 Salt Lake City, UT
    May 11, 2014 10:36 p.m.

    The GOP is at their negativity yet again. People are seeing through this. Educated people are seeing this ploy exactly for what it is. Yet another side play to divert the American public from their lack of effort, and lack of accomplishment.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    May 10, 2014 8:46 p.m.

    I'm ok with going ahead with these hearings, but really Deseret News there are other things which cry for investigation such as 9/11 (the ball dropping leading to that disaster has never been aired), the "talking points" of the Bush/Cheney administration which took us into a 3 trillion dollar war - all of them outright LIES, and the lead up to the 2007-2008 economic collapse (this has never been documented for the public).

    There are many others. You should call for investigations of these things. Aren't you just dying for these answers? Call for hearings!

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    May 10, 2014 12:15 p.m.

    LDS Liberal

    "25 consultants and embassies were attacked with Americans killed under GW Bush.

    25

    Yet, the GOP has gone nuts over the ONE mishap during Obama's Presidency.

    And you can see ANY partisan hypocrisy with this?"

    It's not hypocrisy it's just to show that Washington is a glorified pro-wrestling event where they only pretend to hate each other for the cameras, but really work together to bring in a totalitarian state.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    May 10, 2014 11:42 a.m.

    @Patriot.... seriously? "Since it is them who was caught lying and their guy (Barack) and gal (Hillary) that allowed it to happen it is much to do about nothing."

    Over 2,000 died on American soil during peace times, and this pales to 4 killed on foreign soil post a revolution that over threw a dictator.... and your obsessed with the 4 instead of the 2,000.

    Does anyone not see the irony here. "Conservatives" complain that no one has been brought to justice in two years since the ambassadors killing, and yet how long did it take the Bush administration to get Osama? How long did it take the Reagan administration take to get the people who bombed the marine barracks in Lebanon that killed over 300 marines?

    The same standards should be used regardless of party. I never have been a democrat. I only left the republican party mid way through Bush's presidency because of these hypocritical type statements and actions. What is wrong needs to be wrong regardless of who is president or their party.

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    May 10, 2014 10:39 a.m.

    Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    May 10, 2014 8:57 a.m.

    @patriot
    Cedar Hills, UT
    12:12 p.m. May 9, 2014

    Had the Benghazi scandal happened under George Bush the Democrats and liberals would be foaming at the mouth and screaming for investigations and impeachment.

    ======

    ?
    Seriously?

    25 consultants and embassies were attacked with Americans killed under GW Bush.

    25

    Yet, the GOP has gone nuts over the ONE mishap during Obama's Presidency.

    And you can see ANY partisan hypocrisy with this?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    May 10, 2014 8:28 a.m.

    Oh good!

    Yet another thing to distract the right from getting anything done.

    If we allow the GOP to control the House then we need to have our heads examined.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    May 10, 2014 7:04 a.m.

    Pragmatistferlife –

    “So that's what Stephen Covey means by starting with the end in mind.”

    No, not exactly.

    The end result Republicans have in mind is to slander Hillary Clinton and convince gullible Americans to believe that slander so she won’t be elected in 2016.

    Bogus hearings are just a step in the bogus investigation of a bogus scandal that, if Republicans wishes come true, will lead to that desired end, to the detriment of America and Americans.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 10, 2014 5:56 a.m.

    @pragmatistferlife "To think he would sit there and twiddle his thumbs, wringing his hands is..well nonsense."

    Maybe you can tell us, then. Where was the President, and what was he doing?

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    May 9, 2014 10:22 p.m.

    Fox news needs it bad to please there wealthy benefactors.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    May 9, 2014 7:09 p.m.

    "Would Americans accept his excuse that cards were more important than the lives of Americans?

    This is exactly what is wrong with the Republican view (I struggled to find an appropriate word that would pass, and settled on "wrong"). The idea that the President was in another room playing cards instead of dealing with the crisis is ludicrous (again the best I could do under the circumstances).

    I can see the scenario in Mike's mind is the general comes into the "card room" and says..Mr. President may I speak with you. We just learned the ambassador has been killed. The President (without looking up) waves his hand and says..just a minute sir I can't decide whether to raise or fold.

    This event transpired over many hours with massive time blocks of no information. To think he would sit there and twiddle his thumbs, wringing his hands is..well nonsense.

    Of course he could have chosen the time honored Republican favorite of passing time during national crisis by reading My Pet Goat.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    May 9, 2014 6:47 p.m.

    Put, the economy, healthcare, immigration, energy, rebuilding infrastructure... on hold...

    investigate Benghazi...

    The Republican donor base as well as Republican voters know Republicans have no solutions for the economy, healthcare or immigration, energy or rebuilding infrastructure...

    Why not keep the Republican Political machine busy investigating Benghazi?

    at least until the mid-terms...

    Right?

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 2:53 p.m.

    The real cover up is not even being talked about. The cover up of why there was an embassy in Benghazi or all the of other nations where the people hate us. The reason for such embassies and American military in those countries is to bring favor to and protect American business interests. American lives are used to buy foreign business good, labor and profits. The American taxpayer pays for all the service rendered to business in foreign nations.

  • dmcvey Los Angeles, CA
    May 9, 2014 2:42 p.m.

    JoeBlow, the left doesn't laugh at Benghazi. We laugh at the ridiculous way Fox News and coservative commentators use it as an attempt to distract from issues that are actually important. We should learn from Benghazi that our people in dangerous places need better protection and intelligence--but that's not what these trials are about. These trials are about fishing expeditions trying to get something on the Obama administration to use against whoever is the Democratic candidate in 2016.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    May 9, 2014 2:39 p.m.

    There is no doubt that things could have been done differently and not had a loss of life in Benghazi.

    Just like all the embassy/consulate attacks previously.

    So, the big "scandal" was what was said in the aftermath. From what has been investigated and reported previously, there is certainly ample evidence to suggest that it could have been related to the video. THere was also evidence, at that time to suggest it was a full blown terrorist attack.

    But lets put that aside for the sake of discussion.

    It would appear that the worst case scenario is that Obama KNEW it was a terrorist attack and ordered the talking points changed. And presumably, this was done to bolster his election chances.

    Even if this scenario is completely correct, I still don't see the big scandal.

    What I see is sleazy politics as usual. Played by both sides. Constantly

    So, the reason "the left" laughs at all the Benghazi talk, is because even the worst case scenario is not a big deal.

    And, certainly not an elections changer. Remember the right wing talking points?... People voted for Obama to get free stuff. Benghazi did not affect that.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 9, 2014 2:36 p.m.

    Where should the "Commander in Chief" be when the United States is under attack by terrorist? Should he be in another room playing cards? Should he be on a room with his generals?

    What if a general decided that he would rather play cards instead of doing his duty to protect and defend citizens of the United States? Would Americans accept his excuse that cards were more important than the lives of Americans?

    I reject any excuse that cards took precedence over lives. Obama knew the duties of the Presidency before taking office. He knew that when America was under attack that playing cards had lower priority than his obligation to act in his office as Commander in Chief.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 9, 2014 2:36 p.m.

    Where should the "Commander in Chief" be when the United States is under attack by terrorist? Should he be in another room playing cards? Should he be on a room with his generals?

    What if a general decided that he would rather play cards instead of doing his duty to protect and defend citizens of the United States? Would Americans accept his excuse that cards were more important than the lives of Americans?

    I reject any excuse that cards took precedence over lives. Obama knew the duties of the Presidency before taking office. He knew that when America was under attack that playing cards had lower priority than his obligation to act in his office as Commander in Chief.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 2:30 p.m.

    Never has so much time and money, by so few, been wasted on something so little of importance. Few if any facts are available or has been determined by the people who are supposedly searching for facts. Instead of facts, what we got for our taxpayer money was things like " Chaffetz said. “It doesn't look right. It doesn’t smell right,”.... “There is smoke there, and we're going to figure out what’s going on.”

    The people driving this Benghazi bus are crying over 4 Americans who died on a day that thousands of other Americans died at the hands of inept, uncaring, distracted, inadequately trained, dishonest and bad other Americans. My guess would be that more people died of tainted peanut butter sold by supposed Americans who refuse to follow the rules. More people die daily by phony medicine or "medical accidents" than Benghazi and never receive any attention.

    Listen carefully, you will see that their mode of operation is spread a lot of political opinion with their "I think, I believe, looks like, probably, etc." Much of what the guest says is enhanced by the moderator to put the political slant on it.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    May 9, 2014 1:33 p.m.

    Here are two of the most ridiculous ideas from the right on this whole thing.

    ",, let's ask the question of whether the Commander in Chief was in the "situation Room" as he should have been when Americans and American property were under "

    This is absolutely ridiculous to think that there is a "place" for the commander in chief when there is a crisis. What the advisors couldn't speak to him in the oval office, in his residence and oh yes during a card game..which probably isn't true?

    The second ridiculous idea is that this would have made any difference in the election at all if it had been called a terrorist attack without any other qualifications.

    Rommney was being beaten in all the credible polls from the outset and terrorism wasn't anywhere near the top deciders for the American public.

    Pure fantasy Republicans, but keep it up at least this is something you are good at.

  • dmcvey Los Angeles, CA
    May 9, 2014 1:26 p.m.

    No, actually, Republicans just refuse to accept the explanations. They hope to use this as an issue against Hillary Clinton in the next Presidential cycle. There is no scandal over this, Republicans just think they have some sort of red meat here.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 9, 2014 1:25 p.m.

    @E Sam "There aren't 'unanswered questions.'"

    Then perhaps you can tell us where the President was, and what orders he gave, during the entire timeline of the attack. Post it right here.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    May 9, 2014 1:07 p.m.

    "Because the Obama administration hasn’t provided answers." You're right, so lets convene the investigation.

    But can you at the Deseret News tell me why you never have called for an investigation of the run up to the Iraq invasion? It was pure deceit, in which you were an enabler. Easy, isn't it, when the opposition has fault, but when you are at fault - no questions are to be asked.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:56 p.m.

    ECR
    Nice try. Notice how you didn't even pick one of my questions to answer? Not one. You spent a short paragraph explaining how you really don't know yourself. And by the way, neither does the Senate. All you would have had to say is something like the record shows that Obama was in the Situation Room with so and so at these times and this was discussed by these people about what assets can be sent to help. Which of course didn't happen. And that's the point. Or maybe you can explain why it took the FBI 3 weeks to arrive on scene in Benghazi, when Congressman Chaffitz went there days after and was escorted by administration officials the whole time. How long would it take to say the so called record tells us what the mission of Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi. You don't know do you. Why did Obama and Clinton put out a PSA to all Islam apologizing for the video when it was known that it had nothing to do with Benghazi? If these any other things had real answers, there would be no need for further investigation.

  • SoCalChris Riverside, CA
    May 9, 2014 12:53 p.m.

    ECR,

    I said far less consequential. You make my point.

  • E Sam Provo, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:46 p.m.

    No. There aren't. There aren't 'unanswered questions.' No, there isn't. There isn't any need whatsoever for yet another Benghazi investigation. The House should waste its time voting down Obamacare again, instead of on this partisan election year witch hunt.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    May 9, 2014 12:39 p.m.

    "...even when it comes to things far less consequential. Valerie Plame comes to mind."

    Realy SoCalChris? High government officials, possibly as high as the vice president, knowingly expose the identity of a CIA operative, compromising ongoing operations and putting her life and the lives of foreign friends in jeopardy and you think that is inconsequential? And this was done as payback because her husband told the truth about part of the biggest lie of the twenty-first century (The existence of WMDs and the associated Yellow Cake Lie).

    Oh, we all knew who got thrown under the bus for those dirty deeds, but who was actually calling the shots. We never got close to the truth.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:31 p.m.

    To "Roland Kayser" the scandal was not the attack. The scandal was the lies and coverups that followed the attacks. After the attacks during the Bush administration how many times were we told that it was due to one thing only to find out later that the President and Secretary of State lied to the american public?

    To "JA13" unfortunately it didn't happen like that. We had intelligence and warning that there was going to be an attack. Then DURING the attack the President and Secretary of State did not activate nearby military units to either rescue the diplomats or defend their compound. After being negligent they changed the the talking points from Terrorist attack (they knew it was a terrorist act) to Protest.

    To "Furry1993" shouldn't you be more concerned with the Secretary of State, knowing that she had a smaller security budget, didn't get the diplomats out when they were first warned of danger? Other nations and the Red cross did, so why didn't the US?

  • SoCalChris Riverside, CA
    May 9, 2014 12:22 p.m.

    Well said DN. This is one subject where I just don't understand Obama apologists.

    We all know stuff happens -- to any president. But there are SO many questions that have never been answered about Benghazi.

    I can't rattle off how many or what kind of investigations there have been about Benghazi or how many attacks there were during the Bush adm. I just know that individuals who were pleading for protection before and during the attack are dead -- and I have no idea what measures were taken to protect them beforehand or to rescue them when the attack was underway. The only effort to the thwart attacks I am aware of came from individuals who took it upon themselves to do so, defying orders to stand down, and who died saving who knows how many lives. And it appears to me that the full focus of the White House from the get-go was political spin and deceiving the public.

    Sorry, I don't buy the idea that Dems don't love scandals even when it comes to things far less consequential. Valerie Plame comes to mind.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    May 9, 2014 12:13 p.m.

    SCFan - There is not enough room on the limited copy space the DN offers to fully answer all your questions. And, unfortunately, the DN will not allow my to post a URL. But you know, as do I, that you can easily find that report on the web if you really want to. And if not, your refusal to take that easy step will speak volumes about your motivation for justifying this "investigation".

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:12 p.m.

    Had the Benghazi scandal happened under George Bush the Democrats and liberals would be foaming at the mouth and screaming for investigations and impeachment. Since it is them who was caught lying and their guy (Barack) and gal (Hillary) that allowed it to happen it is much to do about nothing. Dead Americans? Who cares? Ask the parents and wives of those brave murdered Americas if they care. Liberals never change. Let hipocrisy reign!!! Recall all of the left wing 911 truth panels cooks who claimed Bush set up 911? The difference between 911 and Benghazi is Bush actually released his CIA brief to Congress for 911. Obama refuses to release his for Benghazi. Who is the real liar? Who is the one hiding the truth from the American people? Release your CIA brief Barack if you have nothing to hide....like Bush did. Obvioulsy the man lied with Benghazi like he lied with Obamacare like he lied with the IRS scandal like he lied with Fast n Furious. My gosh I think there may be a pattern here... Barack is a man without honor.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:05 p.m.

    If there's nothing to hide... and there's nothing new... I mean there's REALLY nothing new that would come out in this investigation... why not do it?

    Do it... and then the American public will KNOW there was nothing new... nothing covered up.

    Why fight it so much IF there's nothing to find??? Just do it! And prove there is nothing to hide!

    ====

    I thought the John Swallow investigation was a witch-hunt (at first). But obviously I was wrong.

    Maybe some of you died in the wool, don't investigate it, there's nothing to find, Democrats are wrong THIS time... I mean it's possible.

    And if there's nothing to find... getting the investigation over with less protesting and more cooperation and sharing information instead of making them pry it out of you... would be to YOUR benefit!

    ===

    The stonewalling is what makes you LOOK bad.

    Just cooperate with the investigation... and you if there was nothing to hide you can prove there was nothing to hide... and it will be over and the Republicans will look bad.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 9, 2014 12:04 p.m.

    Let's forget for a moment whether we are conservatives or liberals, let's forget for a moment whether Bush or Obama is the current Commander in Chief, instead let's ask the question of whether the Commander in Chief was in the "situation Room" as he should have been when Americans and American property were under attack by terrorists. Let's ask whether the Commander in Chief was in the room with military advisors or whether he was playing cards. Let's ask whether the Commander in Chief, who, as the highest civilian in the chain of command, was doing his duty or whether he was playing cards. Let's ask whether the "cause" of that terrorist attack was accurately reported or whether government officials deflected the "cause" of the attack to a video.

    If liberals respect truth they will stop deflecting and start demanding answers from the part-time employees who serve us.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:05 p.m.

    For far less time & money than will be spent on this investigation, the GOP could stage the 53rd, 54th and 55th votes to repeal Obamacare!

    And they'd achieve exactly the same result!

    Where are your priorities, Jason?

  • Ed Grady Idaho Falls, ID
    May 9, 2014 12:01 p.m.

    What other tidbit of wisdom can we expect from the D-News editorial staff? A call to further investigate the Lindbergh kidnapping maybe?

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    May 9, 2014 11:56 a.m.

    The first thing that needs to be investigated is why Chaffetz and his cronies reduced funding for embassy security, and is now blaiming the other party for the damage caused by his actions.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    May 9, 2014 11:38 a.m.

    ECR

    OK, so answer them. Please. Since you imply you know the answers to my questions, you must be able to tell us all what they are. Otherwise you are just doing what all Obama/Clinton supporters are doing in lockstep. Saying everything has been answered, when it really hasn't. Here's another one to add. What was Ambassador Stevens and three others doing in Benghazi in the first place? Very suspicious. No, until I hear or read the answers to these and many more questions, I will not just place faith in people like you saying all has been answered. You all sound like Richard Nixon when he declared in the State of the Union speech that "A year of Watergate is enough!!" Well, it wasn't, was it.

  • Spangs Salt Lake City, UT
    May 9, 2014 11:22 a.m.

    Unfortunately, after thousands of pages of documents and several bipartisan inquiries, there is no new information forthcoming, no new witnesses and there has been no new evidence/information discovered. It would then follow that yet another inquiry would be a waste of time. Logic, my friends. A rehashing of old material.

    The Benghazi tragedy was not a joke and the administration clearly had no idea what was going on in the days following this tragedy. But now, as we all transition from outrage over Obamacare into silent acceptance that it is actually helping people, we utilize this terrible event as inflammatory political theatre.

    The Deseret News should work on opining about real issues instead of just rehashing conservative talking points.

  • regis Salt Lake City, UT
    May 9, 2014 11:16 a.m.

    Benghazi has been a cover-up effort from the very beginning by the Obama administration. Obama and Hilary were embarrassed and they knew the truth was politically harmful. They had been derelict in their duty to provide protection to an ambassador in a dangerous location who had repeatedly pleaded for help and more security. And when the attack happened, they immediately went into spin-mode to falsely blame the whole mess on a video.

    The truth has not been told. People deserve to know the truth. And as for you Hilary, it makes a lot of difference at this point if only for the purpose of letting future office holders know that they need to act responsibly in their office or be held accountable for their misfeasance.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    May 9, 2014 11:10 a.m.

    No it's not. This is just fox fodder.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    May 9, 2014 10:51 a.m.

    It is simple. In spite of of Obama's assurance of a transparent administration, he and Clinton, etc. have been less than forthright regarding what happened in Benghazi and it appears that their reasons for obfuscation have political motives. Nixon was more transparent than Obama.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 10:36 a.m.

    Great... another Bush did 9/11 conspiracy believer....

    I think we did investigate 9/11... quite a bit. Don't you remember all the investigations and the findings? You can get the whole document on Amazon...

    ===
    If you think Republicans are giving Obama a hard time...

    Do you remember Democrats pledging to not let Bush get anything done his whole term when he STOLE the election (The Democrat plan was to tie the Bush administration up in investigations for the next 4 years so he can't do anything).

    Or the investigations Democrats called for when Bush dismissed 2 US Attorneys (when his Democrat predecessor dismissed EVERY US Attorney when he took office)?

    Google "Pelosi vows Bush probe, open to prosecutions"...

    Google "Efforts to impeach George W. Bush" Wikipedia...

    If you think Republicans are giving Obama a hard time now... You were totally asleep to what Democrats did during the Bush years...

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    May 9, 2014 10:35 a.m.

    jsf,

    Seven prior investigations is not enough? What is the eight going to do other than be a way for republicans in the house to try and score points before the midterm elections.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    May 9, 2014 10:16 a.m.

    I love it, L Montana gives a list of Bush's administration stonewalling of investigations of the 13 embassy attacks during his time in the presidency. Then half a dozen liberals press the idea there was no investigations and how hypocritical it is to investigate Obama's administration. It appears the democrats hypocrisy is in thinking there should be no investigation, not the republicans for asking for one.

    And in the last week we learn that Hillary's state department refused to add Boko Horam to the terrorist list. Only after she left was the group add to the terrorist list. The CIA told her the group needed to be added on.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    May 9, 2014 9:40 a.m.

    Investigate all you want. And go ahead and investigate 9/11 while you're at it. Nothing even hit building 7.

    Hint: It's not dems vs republicans that's just the show up front like wrestling.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 9:31 a.m.

    Mountanman,
    You are right. After all the Democrats vilifying the Bush Administration his whole 8 years for not being open enough... even the White House Press Corps (not Bush fans, and covered both administrations) admitted that the Bush Administration was far more open to the press than the Obama Administration has been.

    Google "White House Press Corps on Transparency Obama Worse Than Bush" for more details...

    Promises not kept... just an ongoing political pet peeve or mine.

    ===

    The list of promises this administration made is long.. and the results disappointing (even to many of my Left leaning friends who will be honest).

    But you are right... One of Obama's biggest promises was that his administration would be very open, "TRANSPARENT", and forthcoming with information... but they weren't with the ACA process (promised it would be broadcast on CSPAN, but instead locked the doors on the media and Republicans), and you see they are fighting to keep things from the media and the people EVERY STEP of the way.

    I know... blame Bush... if it works for you.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    May 9, 2014 9:00 a.m.

    Obama promised," The most open and transparent administration in history"! What we got is, How dare anyone ask me for accountability or transparency. Unless of course its someone else's scandal (Watergate), then by darn, we got to get to the bottom of this! Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat!

  • Ralph West Jordan Taylorsville, UT
    May 9, 2014 8:38 a.m.

    Witch Hunt + another Bengazi probe + Camera and Mic time = Chaffetz

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 8:33 a.m.

    "With all due respect, the fact is, we had four dead Americans! Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they'd go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again." – Clinton shouting over Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson......

    She said it's over.... and whether it was a spontaneous protest, or a planned 9/11 related thing... at this point doesn't matter... so DROP IT!

    "Nobody wants to sit where I am and think now about what 'coulda, shoulda, woulda' happened in order to avoid this." – Clinton during some of her initial remarks.

    "I would say that I personally was not focused on talking points, I was focused on keeping our people safe," Clinton to Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker, the top Republican on the Senate panel.

    ====

    But just keep blaming Bush and Cheney (never Obama and Biden)... THAT will solve everything.... Usual Democrat smoke screen...

  • ECR Burke, VA
    May 9, 2014 8:24 a.m.

    SCfan - A bipartisan Senate report that was issued on January 14 of this year answers the questions you have asked. The report is critical of the White House, the State Department and the Intelligence Community and gives advice on how best or better to answer issues in the future, including how to provide the public with as much declassified information as possible while still maintaining security of information where that is necessary. The report was put together in a bi-partisan spirit, not in a political witch hunt that is obviously timed to impact mid-term elections. So please ask yourself - "Why this new investigation is necessary?" And be honest with yourself.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    May 9, 2014 8:19 a.m.

    The headline "committee to investigate Benghazi" is incorrect.
    It should read "committee to investigate White House response".

    Republicans won't investigate how to prevent future Benghazis, but rest assured they will find out how a talking point is created.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    May 9, 2014 7:44 a.m.

    Hey all, I know you don't like Bush ect. But the here and now is this. Where was Obama that day and night? Where was Clinton that day and night? Why was there NO attempt to send help when this thing raged on for 14 hours. Did anyone ask for help to be sent and was overridden by Clinton/Obama? No one could have known how long or how extensive the 911 anniversary Al Queda planned attack was going to go on. No help sent. Why when asked did Clinton deny further protection of that embassy? Why when knowing that it was a terrorist planned attack only hours after it happened did the administration want to continue to lie to the American people that the reason it happened was a spontaneous combustion caused by some obscure internet film, and not a planned terrorist attack from a terrorist organized group that "coincidently" happened on 911. Why did Hillary say to the parents of one of the killed that they would throw the film maker in jail? Why did Obama go on the View and lie that it was caused by an internet video? So many questions that need answers.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    May 9, 2014 7:40 a.m.

    " surely the Benghazi "cover-up" deserves investigation. American lives were lost. "

    So that's what Stephen Covey means by starting with the end in mind.

    There was a cover up...so now let's have an investigation/again to find it.

  • Selznik Saint George, UT
    May 9, 2014 7:36 a.m.

    It's like all the pointless votes to repeal Obamacare. It will end like the last hearing on the ACA when Republicans grilled health insurance executives and couldn't get them to say what they wanted.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    May 9, 2014 6:53 a.m.

    Can you imagine what the GOP would be doing if 9-11 had happened under Obama insead of Bush?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 9, 2014 6:45 a.m.

    Thank you Deseret News for clearly showing why a House Select Committee is needed. If the Watergate "cover-up" deserved to be investigated, surely the Benghazi "cover-up" deserves investigation. American lives were lost. Those grieving families deserve an answer to their questions.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    May 9, 2014 6:40 a.m.

    In our opinion: A House select committee to investigate Benghazi is necessary to get answers to neglected questions

    =======

    Fine --
    Right AFTER we find out about imaginary Weapons of Mass Destruction that cost us 4,000 dead and $3 Trillion.

    Otherwise - The Deseret News is playing political Witch Hunt fueled by a re-election cycle.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    May 9, 2014 5:37 a.m.

    In the time frame from 2000 to 2008, 47 Americans died in attacks on diplomatic outposts throughout the world. It is not difficult to understand why the Republican Congress or the Deseret News does not find those deaths as troubling as the ones in Benghazi. It is quite troubling to the rest of us, however. Are those deaths less important than those in Benghazi? Where was and is the outrage over the lack of security to protect those public servants? If the Republicans truly do want to find the truth in this investigation, instead of just making a political smokescreen covering their lack of action on anything else, or assisting in their fundraising for the coming elections, then why have these deaths been left off their investigation? I think we all know the answer.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    May 9, 2014 5:21 a.m.

    "Indeed, Pelosi’s question ignores the extraordinarily great lengths to which the Obama administration has gone to keep Benghazi from being a topic of conversation. Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah"

    This could have easily been written about the extraordinary lengths Chaffetz is doing to try to keep the story alive, despite the fat that we have had hearings on this subject for the last two years, and we had an independent report on the incident. Perhaps it is just Chaffetz trying to sooth his feelings of regret about voting twice to cut funding for embassy security.

    If there is something there... I hope the truth does come out. But it needs to be done through independent means, not some partisan theatre timed with elections. This motivate the base stunt is getting old. If you really want the truth, bring forward and independent council to investigate - turn off the TV cameras, back away from the podium, so it can be taken seriously.

    But right now, it just feels like a way for Chaffetz to get air time. If he wants serious answer, lets do it is a serious manner without the grand standing.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    May 9, 2014 4:59 a.m.

    Ok, great. ANOTHER Benghazi investigation. Maybe this one will lay all the blame on Obama and Clinton. Which seems to be the only goal. If it doesn't, rest assured, a call for another investigation will be forthcoming.

    With all the clamoring about "4 dead Americans" the focus has been on placing blame rather than fixing the problem. What has been done to address the problem that allowed the deaths? How many investigations has Chaffetz called for on that?

    Pure partisanship.

    Did the white house want to stress riot as opposed to terrorist attack for political purposes? Probably so. Is that such a big deal? Certainly there was some evidence at the time to support it.

    How different is this than Bush pressuring Tom Ridge to raise the terror alert leading into the 2004 election. (“I wondered, ‘Is this about security or politics?’- Tom Ridge)

    Most politicians do some questionable things to get elected. I am not excusing anything. But, this is not unusual in politics.

    So, please, it is very easy to see straight through the faux outrage as just partisan politics.

  • LOU Montana Pueblo, CO
    May 9, 2014 3:04 a.m.

    Remember how Bush and Cheney handled their 13 Benghazi's.
    1. Accuse the Opposition of Slandering the President.
    2. Oppose the Investigation.
    3. Agree to Testify, But Not Under Oath.
    4. Ignore Congressional Subpoenas.
    5. Claim Executive Privilege.
    6. Threaten to Fire the Wrongdoers—and Then Don’t.
    7. Accuse the Opposition of "Criminalizing Politics."
    8. Attack the Victim...
    9. ...And Attack the Victims' Families.
    10. Use a Popular Military Hero as a Human Shield.
    11. Say the Administration Lost the Emails Due to Buggy Software.
    12. Delay the Findings for Years.
    13. Give Better Sound Bites.
    14. Declare That "Nobody Could Have Predicted" the Disaster.
    15. Make Fun of Your Mistakes

    The GOP has a very polished history of covering up the facts. It is documented and proven that the US diplomats are under greater risk of attack during GOP terms in office.
    Keep in mind that G. W. Bush had 13 Benghazi attacks with 64 related deaths and the GOP made little or no effort to investigate.

  • JA13 Draper, UT
    May 9, 2014 2:17 a.m.

    I don't understand. So the big deal is that people want to know if a conversation like the following took place? :

    Security Advisor: "There's been an attack at the Benghazi embassy. We don't know what happened, yet."

    Clinton: "Okay, let's just say it was part of the outrage about the Islamic video for now because it might make our administration look weak on security and hurt our re-election chances, but let's get an investigation going so we can improve our security and protect our diplomats."

    Security Advisor: "Okay."

    Is this the big "Gotchya!" that Chaffetz and others are going for? HELLO! THERE ARE MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES TO FOCUS ON! I'm so sick of hearing about this.

  • TrueAmerican56 Corpus Christi, TX
    May 9, 2014 2:11 a.m.

    So you think we need to spend even more time, more money, and worthless testimony to find out no more then what is known now? Might as well do the same thing with 9/11, Oklahoma City, Pearl Harbor, and on and on. Sometimes things happen beyond anyone's control, wrong place at the wrong time, not enough communication between agencies, bureaucracy, and on and on, the best thing that can be done is try to prevent it from happening again, and that amount of information on Benghazi is known.

  • ajfmrf Groton, CT
    May 9, 2014 1:25 a.m.

    Our government reps just can not get past things in a timely manner.You can also bet they have only themselves in mind when they vote on any bills,or issues that come up.Even though you all make a large amount of money compared to the average person in this country.You get paid a great deal of money when your retirement and health benefits are taken into account.But you can't give to the needy and deserving.You all are more likely to vote yes if you get something out of the vote(for a yes vote)You all should be ashamed of yourself for not doing the right thing.Instead you vote by party lines and stick it to the people that put you in office.Shame,on you,shame.

  • Vincefoster Eureka, CA
    May 9, 2014 12:46 a.m.

    I agree.

    For too many years, those guilty of improper or criminal activity have been allowed to avoid justice with meaningless quips like "It's time to put that behind us now".

    I disagree.

    People who are guilty and allowed to go unpunished are just going to commit worsening offenses but will learn to cover their tracks better.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 9, 2014 12:20 a.m.

    During the administration of George Bush Jr. there were 12 attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities resulting in 81 deaths. No Republican demanded and investigation. Fox News never called them a scandal, neither did any other right leaning news source. Double standard?