A look at why the Benghazi issue keeps coming back

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • DSB Cedar Hills, UT
    May 20, 2013 3:02 p.m.

    AP reports that Rice described the attack as a "horrific incident where some mob was hijacked, ultimately, by a handful of extremists."

    That's a pretty generous description of Rice's talking points, with lots of wiggle room for Rice and the administration to continue claiming they were calling it terrorism.

    Let's try out her actual comments from the Sunday talk shows: "But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo."

    Not only lies, but blatant lies and known lies. They took all potential talking points, removed those that were true, emphasized as "fact" those that were already known to be untrue, and asserted them as their best information to date. It requires either the willing suspension of disbelief, or suggests we have the most incompetent intelligence community in the world. The WH press should start referring to Jay Carney as Benghazi Bob.

    Truly dispicable, and stunning to me that so many still hold fast that the administration never lied to our country. I guess blindness is not easily cured.

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    May 19, 2013 10:07 a.m.

    it keeps coming back because americans are tired of being lied to.

  • The Judge Kaysville, UT
    May 19, 2013 7:41 a.m.

    Wow. What a hack job by the AP. Listen to the testimony of the people on the ground--it's chilling stuff. And the testimony directly contradicts what the editorialists at the AP write in this story. Funny how the AP continues to be the propaganda arm of the Obama team, even after its reporter's phone records were hijacked.

  • US Army retired ,
    May 18, 2013 11:05 p.m.

    I heard that General Carter Ham, Africom Commander was prevented on orders from the Sec of Defense from sending assistance. I know General Ham retired a year earlier than the normal rotation for change of command. General Ham said publically that the military was never directed to provide assistance, not that they didn't try to provide assistance. Why hasn't congress called retired General Ham to testify is something that I don't understand. Their is definitely a huge cover up by the administration still going on without justice for those who died, instead its just politics. Scooter Libby went to prison for supposedly "outing" the known CIA operative and no one died, so who is going to prison for this where we lost 4 brave Americans?

    May 18, 2013 7:31 p.m.

    As usual, the Democrats and Liberals are playing the "artful dodger". By accusing the Republicans of engaging in a "political sideshow", they are ignoring the fact that they instigated it in the first place.

    How? By leaving in doubt whether or not they were engaged in a strategy to enhance Obama's chances for re-election by ignoring the facts surrounding Benghazi. If they had been forthright from the beginning, releasing the pertinent facts instead of their own politically motivated "video" sideshow, things would be different for them now.

    But--as in that Oliver Twist episode--they tried picking the electorate's pockets, and when the attempt was noticed, are now pursuing the Republicans relentlessly, calling foul!

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    May 18, 2013 4:33 p.m.

    All this stuff might not make President Obama the worst President ever, but I sure hope that any rational person can see and admit that Obama and his cronies are nothing more than pipe hitting politicians who are out for themselves before anyone else. Perhaps the glamor, glitz, hope, change, transformational, smartest man ever President, ect. that has been said of Obama will now be seen for what it really is. Belief without substance.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    May 18, 2013 2:33 p.m.

    Just answer the questions! Who told Susan Rice to lie about the attack on 5 different Sunday talk shows telling us it was that darned video that no one saw? Who told the military to "stand down" when Ambassador Stevens begged for help? Why did the Department of State demote one of the whistle blowers for telling his eye witness account of the events of the attacks? What are you hiding, Hillary and Barrack? Just come clean if as you both say this is nothing but a political side show! Just answer the questions!

  • Hemlock Salt Lake City, UT
    May 18, 2013 1:26 p.m.

    The most effective administration response would have been full and immediate disclosure. It should not be partisan, one could easily imagine Democrat and Republican on either side. With the WH going dark and Jay Carney using double speak to explain "stylistic" changes and 12 iterations, they are begging to keep this in the public eye. It's about more than the tragic event in Benghazi, it has serious implications for Hillary Clinton's bid for the presidency.