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?
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
Can you imagine what the GOP would be doing if 9-11 had happened under Obama
insead of Bush?
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.
" 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.
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.
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 - 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.
"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...
Witch Hunt + another Bengazi probe + Camera and Mic time = Chaffetz
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
No it's not. This is just fox fodder.
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.
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.
ECROK, 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.
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.
What other tidbit of wisdom can we expect from the D-News editorial staff? A
call to further investigate the Lindbergh kidnapping maybe?
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
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.
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.
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
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".
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.
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?
"...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.
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,I said far less consequential. You make my point.
ECRNice 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.
"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.
@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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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?
"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.
Fox news needs it bad to please there wealthy benefactors.
@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?
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.
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.
@patriotCedar Hills, UT12:12 p.m. May 9, 2014Had 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.25Yet,
the GOP has gone nuts over the ONE mishap during Obama's Presidency.And you can see ANY partisan hypocrisy with this?
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
@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.
LDS Liberal"25 consultants and embassies were attacked with
Americans killed under GW Bush.25Yet, 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.
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!
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
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
@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?
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?
@ECRIn 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.
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.
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.
"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.
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