Senator vows to delay Obama's nominees over lack of answers on Benghazi attack

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Dont Tread Iron County, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 3:40 p.m.

    In a government with a two party system it is the job of the out-of-power party to question everything, hold up everything, and second-guess everything that the party-in-power is doing, especially when it comes to national security, the death of American citizens, and the nomination of powerful non-elected officials. This is part of the checks and balances we brag about so often. It is no surprise to me that the Republicans have had to resort to using the tactics they use when there is absolutely no respect from leftists for those with conservative thought. We have seen absolutely no fiscal responsibility from the White House in four years, so of course the Republicans are going to use things the Presidency has to have, such as debt extensions, to try and force some responsibility. There has been no disclosure over Benghazi, and the democrats have been able to sweep it under the rug, so of course the Republicans are going to use the nomination of important officials to get some answers. The Democrats would do the same thing if the roles were reversed.

  • Whatever Springville, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 12:01 p.m.

    Once again the Faux news automatons show their true colors. 12 embassy attacks and 53 deaths under Bush and not one word from the astroturf tea party because their AM radio masters never told them that they could be upset about it, just when it happens under Obama. Pathetic.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 11:28 a.m.


    This stoped being about the ragic loss of life a long ago, it is disgraceful that graham has turned this into nothing more then political circus.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 11:10 a.m.

    In the meantime, our own Jason Chafetz bragged about cutting funding for embassy security. Many of his GOP colleagues were equally proud of their fiscally "responsible" decision.

    Now they have to distract the gullible from noticing that embarrassing fact.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 11, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    No Tolstoy you have it backwards. Its all about the left protecting Obama and not holding him accountable for his malfeasance. How dare the mean, nasty Republicans ask him (or Hillary) questions? How dare they!

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 10:18 a.m.

    I think it's good that you have finally started o admit your true intentions. Your only interest is in destroying President Obama no matter the cost and now how much you exploit others tragic deaths.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    The military has a strong and trained force. Their personnel aren't given the same protection civilians, due to the military requirements. However, military officers don't provide the same protection for their civilian counterparts working for the Department of Defense. Men and women in the military are given respirators or gas masks and atropine to defend themselves against chemical weapon attacks on our military personnel. However, these officers have said that civilians working in a chemical weapon agent limited area don't need the same type of protection and that it is not part of their principal duty to use a gas mask and have on their person the nerve agent antidote kit. The military has plenty of good and trustworthy people in their forces, but they are not all perfect in their performance of their duties.

    When Ms. Clinton highlights so many places that had problems that day she doesn't mention that this was the only place with CIA direct ground involvement. She minces words and intent. She states that they received so many e-mails that one stating Benghazi as a imminent danger to our personnel wasn't important to react to. People are valuable asset.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    This may be a Democrat issue but the military doesn't have political sides, even though the Secretary of Defense is more than political in his appointment and mandate to decimate the military in his short term. He has been a bureaucrat and a political appointee for many generations. I now even question his time as the head of the CIA since the CIA had direct involvement in this Benghazi incident and with the CIA-director sort of second fiddle. This was due to his own problems and this SECDEF able to sway with the President on both the CIA and DoD involvement, or lack thereof. You would think there would have been more involvement, not less from the CIA. Watching the Secretaries of Defense and State testify, hedging and diversionary tactics were played on their parts. Ms. Clinton has plenty of ability in dealing with a husband that always tells the truth and knows what "is" is. She may have taken full responsibility for this incident but now we have the longboatman in charge. May the swift people will be able to tell when the truth is being spoken. Military Generals are the closest to political in appointments.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 8:33 a.m.

    stopping BO IS accomplishing something - it is the most important work they can do.

    you are correct, MM. the highly partisan dems and their lap-dog media are more concerned about protecting hillary for 2016 than they were about our people in Bengazi

  • Susan Roylance
    Feb. 11, 2013 8:24 a.m.

    One of the main purposes of our government is to protect the citizens of the United
    States of American. While every life is valuable, those who are willing to put their life on the line in dangerous locations should have every reason to believe that the government will use resources to protect them. At the very least, we should know that the government cares about their safety. I hope the investigation into the tragedy in Libya will wake up the CIA and Defense Department leaders to the seriousness of their duty to be "on call" in times of need -- when lives are in danger.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 11, 2013 5:34 a.m.

    It is very interesting to me the lack of interest the Democrats have in this Benghazi (add parenthetically fast and furious and white house intelligent leaks) debacle. I remember when the Watergate scandal broke, they were VERY interested and there were hearings for months, even though no one died! It was on the front page of every newspaper in America and the front story of every news broadcast, even though no one died. A president resigned in disgrace and it was promoted as the "crime of the century", even though no one died! Now we have another scandal that brings hypocritical yawns from partisan Democrats. One has to believe the only differences is this time THEIR guys are involved and of course, people died! Will anything happen to those in the government who were at least very incompetent if not criminal in their involvement? No, because when its Democrats with their hands dirty, its not "important"!

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 11, 2013 12:05 a.m.

    WASHINGTON — A leading Republican senator said Sunday he would hold up Senate confirmation of...' - Article

    I don't need to read anymore.

    Gone are the days the GOP accomplished anything.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Feb. 10, 2013 10:53 p.m.

    Please, senator, can't you just hold your breath instead? I'm not sure where the answers all got put that, surely, you sought after finding out about the warnings prior to the September 11 attacks but I'm sure they're out there. In due course you will get answers about the Benghazi attack as well but, like then, you shouldn't hold up the business of the nation for it. Or do you have different motives?