Chaffetz calls for truth about, accountability for Benghazi attacks

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 21, 2014 8:58 a.m.

    Forget Benghazi, weapons to Mexican cartels, or the IRS scandal.

    How about the Cristy traffic jam?

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Jan. 19, 2014 12:31 p.m.


    I'm not sure why you are questioning me on this personally, because there is no comment I've made that would make it appear that I approve of government waste and abuses by either side. There are plenty of R's I'd like to see out of Washington as well. I try to stand by principles, not people, in politics.

    However, the accusation at hand was that the funding for security had been cut, leading to insufficient security at Benghazi. This is a false statement, as there were reasons behind the cuts. The Deputy Asst. Secretary for Diplomatic Security said, ""Sir, if it's a volatile situation, we will move assets to cover that."

    Untruthful excuses like funding cuts distract from the most basic questions. Since it was always a terror attack, why did they lie in the first place? Where was Obama and what was he doing during an attack on a U.S embassy (an act of war)?

    So please, don't lecture me about partisanship when you give Obama (the Commander-in-Chief) a pass on sleeping through an act of war that was being committed against the United States.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 19, 2014 8:26 a.m.


    Absolutely there is unfathomable waste at all levels of government. And it happens under R and D leadership.

    I contend that most of it can be tracked back to corporations and unions who pay off our politicians and then reap the rewards.

    If we all view things consistently, we would all rail against both parties and kick them all out.

    Many support the Dems no matter what they do. Many blast any and everything the dems do.
    And both statements are true of the GOP.

    Do you find fault with both parties or only the Dems?

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 12:27 p.m.

    KJB1: The truth about the State Department budget:

    Charlene Lamb, Deputy Asst. Secretary for Diplomatic Security, under oath:

    "Asked if there was any budget consideration that led her not to increase the security force, she said: 'No.'

    She added: "This was an unprecedented attack in size." Asked again about budget issues, Lamb said: "Sir, if it's a volatile situation, we will move assets to cover that."

    The money was turned down because the State Department budget had expanded in recent years. Some of the expenses:

    $16 million for Kindles ($6,600 each)
    $7.9 billion for Obama's Global Health Initiative
    $1 billion for global climate change
    $2.2 billion to strengthen democratic institutions in Pakistan.
    $4.5 million for art in embassies

    We will never know how the election would have turned out if the lie about the video had been exposed and that Obama's claims of defeating Al Qaeda were false. We will never know if any of those 4 could have been saved if support had been sent in. It makes a difference whether the Commander in Chief goes to bed and attends his fundraiser the next day or convenes his cabinet to try and save Americans under fire.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Jan. 18, 2014 11:48 a.m.

    Mr. Chaffetz took the security money away and is now mad at others because there wasn't enough security. This is called "irony."

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 11:40 a.m.


    Thank you for taking the time to read my comment.

    You overlooked the fact that I wrote... IF he had been a Republican congressman...

    One of the most telling indictments of that time is that no Republican spent a moment...let alone daily... asking for truth and accountability from the Republican Administration 2001 to 2008.

    To suggest that Republican orchestrated attacks on the POTUS and his party by Republican news organizations and media is anything other than political posturing is disingenuous.

    Democrats do the same thing when they are not in the White House.

    Americans have developed a pattern of demonizing whomever is in the White House...

    Only to elect the latest...greatest and then repeat the same behavior.

    Regarding the anti-war crowd...

    I subscribe to the point of view of one who has been there done that...

    In The Limits of Power, Andrew Bacevich predicted President Obama would follow the same path blazed by President Bush...

    In Breach of Trust, Bacevich developed the premise that Americans failed their soldiers and their country...

    Bacevich is a retired Colonel US Army.

    His son...First Lieutenant US Army, made the ultimate sacrifice 13 May 2007 while serving in the Iraq War.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 11:17 a.m.

    The problem with government and political parties is their lack of integrity at all levels. It is not confined to one party or another but to society as a whole. The Air Force has experienced that in the past couple of weeks and is even in the military at all levels, unfortunately.

    Rationalization and validating on television and media programs in all forms is rampant in our society and most likely around the world.

    Baby steps turn into jogging with the lack of integrity, honesty, character and other societal measurements.

    People don't study issues or people they vote for and even the new surfacing elements in various parties have similar problems with their people and policies.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 18, 2014 11:13 a.m.

    "The left wants to ignore horrendous errors in judgment by top administration officials, simply to protect their heroes, or their feeders, in some cases."

    I will agree that there was certainly an "error in judgement". Horrendous? Perhaps.

    It has been investigated and errors and poor judgement are clear.

    I sincerely dont see a "scandal" to the extent that the right is talking about.
    Plain and simple

    No one thinks it should be ignored. But, it has been investigated. It has been reported. And it just doesn't rise to an impeachable issue.

    Or even close.

  • Ed Grady Idaho Falls, ID
    Jan. 18, 2014 10:56 a.m.

    I'm amazed at the shallowness of guys like Chavez,Chaffetz or whatever his name is, and republicans in general. A republican president started a war (Afghanistan) 13 years ago that is still raging on, invaded a country (Iraq) based upon not one lie, not two lies, but three lies. And Chavez, Chaffetz is worried about accountability for Benghazi? How about accountability for Afghanistan and Iraq?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 9:57 a.m.

    "They were asking routinely for fortification of the physical facility, and they wanted more personnel," he said. "The bottom line is … they didn't even get to keep (the personnel) they had"

    And this, after having been warned multiple times about credible threats?

    And all this, too, after the House repeatedly voted down State Department requests for more funding for security at U.S. embassies. And this, too, after Jason Chafetz bragged about having been one of those who cast those votes that prevented payment for adequate security.

    Well, Jason? Well, Rob Bishop? Well, Jim Matheson? Well, GOP?

  • Europe Topeno, Finland
    Jan. 18, 2014 9:56 a.m.

    Just a quick comment...
    What has happened to finnd and punish the quilty?
    They politicize that, too

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 9:02 a.m.

    Gee. Chaffetz , it was a YOUTUBE video just ask Hilary! The Taliban and Al quaeda outfit all of their soldiers with satellites and internet wireless computers just so they can watch Obama on msnbc, one of their own!

  • FelisConcolor North Salt Lake, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 9:00 a.m.

    There You Go Again

    Chaffetz wasn't an elected Representative during those years, so he had very little influence over national policy during that time.

    Incidentally, those wars didn't miraculously end when Barack Obama became president. More Americans have died in Afghanistan during Barack Obama's Administration than during Bush's. Funny how the anti-war crowd has been so silent about it now that a Democrat is in the White House.

    And President Obama liked George Bush's policies in Iraq so much he kept Bush's defense secretary on to make sure they were properly implemented.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Jan. 18, 2014 9:00 a.m.

    Christopher B.

    And Republicans in Congress were the ones who voted to cut security. Your point?

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 8:56 a.m.

    The left wants to ignore horrendous errors in judgment by top administration officials, simply to protect their heroes, or their feeders, in some cases.

    They simply do not understand that we live in a dangerous world, and ignoring attacks on our embassies, ambassadors, and citizens encourages more of the same, and indeed, attacks within our own borders.

    Worse, the deliberate invention of some incredible nonsense about "locals in Libya outraged by some obscure video" as a cover story should be a warning that on Benghazi, like nearly everything else, Obama and his cronies are simply not telling the truth.

    Someone suggested Chaffetz should just read the investigation report- but the investigation is incomplete because Obama and Clinton refused to provide critical information.
    Someone else said Chaffetz should investigate the New Jersey bridge deal- even though it is not a federal problem.

    Chaffetz is one of the few truly courageous and bold congressmen, and we are lucky to have him!

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 8:50 a.m.

    Hard to get the truth when the head of the government does not know the meaning of the wor!

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 18, 2014 8:11 a.m.


    This isn't about political points! You miss the point.

    Let's try having an honest government for the people.

    One where a president doesn't take hundreds of millions from us for vacations.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 18, 2014 7:37 a.m.

    OK, Lets think the worst case scenario. Some is fact and some is conjecture.

    1) The Ambassador knew the Embassy was not secure and repeatedly asked for more security.
    These calls were ignored and ultimately could have prevented the deaths.
    2) The attack was immediately known to be terrorist and the administration put forth a phoney "video" story because they were in the middle of a election and the truth would have been damaging
    3) Once the attack started, troops could have been deployed and saved them.

    What else of real relevance am I missing?

    What I believe (worth very little. Just like what some others believe)

    #1 above is true. It was mishandled and would have been handled differently in hindsight.
    Clinton would take the primary blame here. This is the key element that needs to be understood and learned from for the future.
    2) Probably lots of truth. However, there was probably, at least a little conflicting info and the admin put forth what they felt was the least politically damaging. And they were caught. But, I cannot see how it would have changed the election as many contend
    3) Possible but improbable.

    No one wanted anyone to die. I still see no scandal.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 18, 2014 6:29 a.m.

    If Chaffetz has proof that the Senate report is lies and a coverup, let him produce his evidence. He claims the military could have responded faster.... show us how it is so. Without facts, without publishing findings that back his side up, this is just more typical Chaffetz theater. He has a profound way of finding talking venues to spout his beliefs. But at some point, he needs to back his rhetoric up with something, less it just stay rhetoric.

    Or he could go into talk radio - where you never have to back up your statements with facts.

    I admire Chaffetz call for honesty. But he needs to back his claims up with something. If he has information that puts doubt into the findings of the Senate report - he needs to produce them. It can't be simply "it doesn't feel right". Lots of things in life "don't feel right", but are.

  • Mike in Texas Cedar City, Utah
    Jan. 18, 2014 6:16 a.m.

    Chaffetz is once again beating a dead horse. He seems very good at doing that. A number of investigatory commissions have reviewed this tragedy and have concluded, that while mistakes were made my the CIA and the State Department, as well as by the ambassador himself, and that the White House and Hillary Clinton could not directly implicated. But make no mistake, Republicans will beat this dead horse until 2016 if not longer.

    What Republicans did to Susan Rice, for partisan political reasons, was disgusting. I lost a lot of respect for Graham and McCain over their savaging of Ms. Rice.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 6:03 a.m.

    ‘Chaffetz calls for truth about, accountability for Benghazi attacks’

    should be:

    "Chaffetz continues to beat a dead horse in hopes of some political gain without actually doing anything."

  • danr San Bernardino, CA
    Jan. 18, 2014 4:47 a.m.

    There have been 5 separate investigations into Benghazi, and they have all said there was no cover up, the most recent one by a bipartisan Senate committee. When will the republicans grow up and let it go? This is a non-story, and it would be to the Des News' credit to stop perpetuating false info and innuendo.

    There were 52 attacks on US embassies during the Bush administration. Where were all you "patriots" then? Bush was clearly asleep at the wheel, yet he never had to bear such ridiculous, non-stop scrutiny.

    I wish that conservatives could spend 1/2 as much energy on governing as they do on witch hunts and trying to demean Obama. Imagine how much better our country would be.

  • across the sea Topeno, Finland
    Jan. 18, 2014 2:54 a.m.

    "republicans" "tea party" "dead issue"

    Shame on people who comment on these pages and are ignorant on issues. Or do not how to read/analyze facts. The question is about:
    1. Murder of 4 Americans in the line of Duty, including a personal representative of the President - and was it prevntabe?
    2. What has taken place to PUNISH the individuals?
    None of these have been answered - and this makes the case very living!

    In my 40 decades of analyzing US and global politics/situations I have come to a simple result, that it does not matter who is on power (GOPs or Demos) their actions are the same! The only thing that matters is the MANDATE. For the mandate it is O K to sacrifice (in this case an Ambassador ) just to win the elections. They all do anything to get elected.

    Rice lied, and was rewarded an even higher position - that is a scandal in it self.

    The bottom line is - Romney was right - and so was I the minute I heard the news! I knew what GAME they were playing. AND this is not party politics - this is history, plaid over and over again.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 12:57 a.m.

    I'm not sure what's left to gain from this. I'm still not voting for romney.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 11:48 p.m.

    This is a valid non-political request from a principled statesmen for truth and accountability.

    If Chaffetz had been a Republican Congressmen from 2001 to 2008 he would have asked for the same thing... daily...regarding the death of over 3000 Americans on American soil...

    Oh wait...he was a Republican during those years...


  • Ed Grady Idaho Falls, ID
    Jan. 17, 2014 11:22 p.m.

    I think Chaffetz is an American hero - a true patriot.

  • owlmaster2 Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 10:21 p.m.

    So don't Representatives have access to any of the investigations and the published results??

    Chaffetz continues to scream about dead issues to stir his base and they take the bait every time.

    Why doesn't Chaffetz go after Swallow or Christie. He could find out how Senator Lee seems to be able to run the Senate but can't handle his own finances... That is sarcasm for you Tea Party folks....

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 9:44 p.m.

    Even the most basic question hasn't been answered-why did Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Susan Rice come out and blame a video? They were never told it was a video-it was always a terrorist attack. They lied because they didn't want the truth to come out-what is the truth?

    grj-If you don't ever look back, how do you make an educated choice on who to vote for? You are hiring someone for the job of POTUS-is it really smart to not look that person's resume? Shouldn't that resume include the truth about what that person has done? They will continue to cover up and lie if someone else doesn't uncover it.

  • Jaar van kwaad Salem, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 8:32 p.m.

    This isn't about republican or democrat, and It's really troubling that people want to sweep the death of an ambassador and three of his staff under the rug. We should make every effort to get to the bottom of things. If not, these perpetrators and others like them, will become emboldened. I hope we will continue to seek the truth and not bury our heads in the sand to protect those individuals that hate our country.

  • grj Bountiful, ut
    Jan. 17, 2014 7:10 p.m.

    Republican hindsight is SO easy. Can we maybe get our elected "leaders" to do some forward-looking work rather than backward-looking finger-pointing.

  • Christopher B Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 6:43 p.m.

    "They were asking routinely for fortification of the physical facility, and they wanted more personnel," he said. "The bottom line is … they didn't even get to keep (the personnel) they had"

    And this, after having been warned multiple times about credible threats?

    Well barack?

    Well Hillary?