Benghazi: There is blood on Obama's and Hillary's hands. And it
isn't just a little bit.America, America, oh, how I weep for
I lived through the Watergate scandals when Nixon was forced to resign. That
seems tepid in comparison to this and other issues before the American
people.This scandal is much worse, in my opinion, because of the
public nature of the cover-up during a Presidential campaign, plus four dead
Americans. It's amazing that it took 20 months for some of these emails to
finally come forward. My question repeatedly is, "Now what?" Who will be
held accountable? Will anyone but FOX news ever cover this story? Does it
"really matter?" I say, Yes.
Our political leaders are messed up.Grazing fees, and gay marriage
are more important than protecting our embassies, or having a strong military.
Americans in Benghazi were killed and we did nothing!See why Putin
is laughing at us?
@ mcclark:Actually, most of us did the read the article. One thing
you are conveniently either forgetting or ignoring is the fact that the report
you are referencing was issued long before a smoking-gun, new-facts document was
recently discovered. This new finding changes all previous conclusions and
totally warrants the continuation of the current "drum beating" by
people interested in finding out the truth of potential political scandals. The fact that you would refer to such people (who have truth and
fact-finding motives) to be "hacks" doesn't say much positive about
the basis of your comment. It also exposes your obvious bias against Republicans
and therefore has cost you a significant credibility loss from open-minded and
By the beginning of that October the Administration had already corrected the
errors in statements made. Within a couple days of the attack Obama had already
called it an act of terror. If they're trying to cover things up then they
sure did an atrocious job of covering things up since we knew everything within
2 weeks. Not sure why you all are needing 1.5 years to figure things out. Oh
right, Hillary might run for President.
@ Ralph West Jordan:Please be smart enough to consider your sources.
You keep referencing only the Senate report while ignoring other reports. The
difference? The Senate has a Democrat majority and is led by an ultra left-wing,
obviously biased Democrat by the name of Harry Reid. All the subcommittees are
under his jurisprudence. As such, every report that originating in the Senate
has to have his stamp of approval. When you take that into
consideration, it becomes very suspect that you are reading a biased, one-sided
report... one that you should not put too much stock in without outside
collaboration. It was also made long before the latest new-facts document was
recently discovered, which totally refutes the administrations previous
assertions. Obviously, most Democrats will now try to obfuscate the issue with
new denials and attempts to invoke apathy from the public. It appears you fit
that mold well.Regarding previous embassy killings under Republican
administrations. None involved attempted coverups or even allegations of such.
This one obviously does. Therefore it is different and warrants the truth being
pursued and found. It even effected a presidential election outcome. Finding
truth is always advisable.
The liberals are amazing here. They are now saying what is the big deal. Lets
take a step back and look at it. We have a couple of things that they should
really think about.1. Why were troops not sent in? Did the
President know what was going on, and why didn't he authorize troops to
go?2. If Clinton wants to be President and be in charge of the
entire executve branch, is this an example of how she would run things? Do we
really want a President who ignores requests for more security AFTER a credible
threat was found?3. Do we really want people working in the
executive branch that are willing to not only lie to the US people, but is
willing to get people killed to cover up what they are doing?
Almost as bad as the Benghazi coverup itself is the post-event apathy for
finding out the truth shown by left-wing liberals. Sadly, their "what
difference does it make" attitude is very telling. @ GaryO:Once again your reaction is totally predictable. This issue is not a
dead horse whatsoever. You just want it to be. New evidence is just now
emerging. The Watergate investigation (involving no lives taken) went on much
longer than this. In both incidences, cynical denials were made. The
difference... this one is a Democrat scandal. And a very real one. It's true we can't see the future. But we can certainly react in a
reasonable way to present happenings. And we are just now finding evidence that
that did not happen in Benghazi. Is there an actual timeline when we should quit
pursuing the truth of lost-life political scandals? @ Furry1993:Your excuse of previously denied funding for the wrong response to this
tragedy is totally ridiculous. Not even Democrats in Washington are using that
excuse. The fact that available military support wasn't sent in when needed
had absolutely nothing to do with funding. You lost credibility with that
It seems many of the people commenting here did not bother to read the article.
The Republican led Armed Forces Committee found the charges made by Political
hacks like Issa and Chafetz are nonsense. But this does not stop them from
beating the drum. Facts do not matter to these people.
The scandals of this administration are numerous. The latest is supplying the
Al-Queda affilliated Libyans with arms through Qatar. We just found out about
this one yesterday. Who else are they selling arms to? In Fast and Furious
they sold guns to the Mexican Drug cartels. Maybe they are selling our missile
technology to China like Clinton did. Obama needs to quit running for office
and work on governing the country and getting along with Congress.
Let's compare. Iran Contra. Trying to do a good thing to get Americans
held hostage released. We might not like the trade with Iran of Tow missiles
but it worked. Hostages released back home safe. "In my heart I thought I
was doing the right thing."-Ronald Reagan.Obama- Bengahzi. No
attempt made to rescue those from the compound. Four people killed. "It was
because of a video on You Tube", or "It's past and there is nothing
we can do about it", or "It was just a protest."-pick your Obama
talking point.Bottom line, this administration has no problem
covering up the truth and making appear like it doesn't matter. The most
"transparent" administration in history lies out their teeth to cover
up, with the complicity of the National Media.\
Go Jason!...[...this is so dysfunctional -- I can only now start to
suspect that the Democrats are PAYING this guy to keep it up...]Besides going on FoxNews and bringing up Benghazi every 6 months or so, exactly what has Chavetz actually DONE for the State of Utah?
Why did the terrorists attack anyway? OK, we know it was not a video. We know
that the video was a lie invented by the White House. So, why did this group
attack? Well folks, were we were breaking the law and running guns
ILLEGALLY to Al Qaeda, to Turkey, to Syria? Probably. Bigger issues are in
play than the video. So, what got them so upset? Hmmm? Maybe the US upset the
apple cart somehow by either saying no more, or the US is not paying, or the US
wanted to force something else upon them. Who knows. That truth is deeper and
darker than the lie of the video.
Chaffetz is playing politics again. I will not find anything he does concerning
Benghazi credible until he explains and apologizes for the fact that HE and his
far right cronies denied needed funding which was requseted for embassy
securi9ty and protection. He's trying to shift part or all of the blame
for his malfeasance, and score political points at the same time. Sad.
Hi David - Thanks for reaching out.The fact remains that in 2003,
Iraq did not have the capability to attack us with WMD’s as the GW Bush
administration had led us to believe.And yes, faulty intelligence
may have been a key factor in that, along with GW’s burning desire to
“get” Saddam. But when you compare the faulty
intelligence that led us to the deaths of over 4 thousand Americans to the
faulty intelligence that led to the deaths of just four Americans, the one is a
THOUSAND times worse. And that’s without even considering the deaths of
over 100 thousand Iraqis, the thousands of brain traumatized American troops who
will need care for life, the over trillion dollars wasted, and the complete
destabilization of the Middle East to the disadvantage of America.In light of that, don’t you think Republicans are overdoing it by trying
to make a big deal out of Benghazi?
Jason has been shamefully politicizing this tragedy from day one.Let
it go, Jason!
GaryO, there were 4 Americans tragically and needlessly killed that day, four. I
can picture a quote from Hillary Clinton, "Oh what difference does it make
at this point." Making cheap attacks on republicans for a Democratic scandal
is something else. Is there anything that could come to light that would cause
you to doubt that the current president can "lower the oceans and heal the
planet" among other miracles? He has made many many mistakes. This is
probably the worst because of the incredulous nature of the fairy tales that
were told just after Benghazi.
I'm disgusted at the white house's tangled web of dishonesty about
this event. How callous to the families of these dead Americans serving their
country. I'm flat out angry and the media for playing "stupid"
after this unfolded and set up their defense around the white house. Just
disgusting! I was amazed during the 2 wks. after the event to hear unbelievable
after unbelievable statement coming from the white house. Yet the media slept
and made fun of Fox News or anyone that dared question the president. Truly the
media is as culpable as the white house. I quote Charles Krauthammer, "Tell
the truth. It's easier to memorize." Rassmussen poll just released
shows a 47% approval rating for the president - another piece of irony that Mitt
Romney should be smiling about. Still 47% of the country who will support him no
matter what. Again, unbelievable.
Since when was a cover-up of an administration's refusal to send aid to
personnel under enemy attack resulting in preventable deaths a non issue or dead
horse. Typical leftist apathy to shun truth when it threatens their agenda.
@svenThe only thing we are learning at this point is that some on
the far right have no regard for the memories of those tha were tragically
killed and will continue to rehash the already well wrong details with no
regards for the memories of the dead or thier loved ones. This stopped being
about getting the facts and learning from the tragedy a long time ago.
GaryO,You may be rewriting history regarding Iraq. UN inspectors
were unable to account for WMD that they knew Iraq had, but had not provided
evidence of their destruction or disarmament. Also, these UN inspectors were
repeatedly refused access to certain known WMD sites over a sustained period of
time. All of Iraq's WMDs were not destroyed with supporting evidence
provided during the Clinton years. This is why virtually every nation &
intelligence agency in the world supported increasingly intense sanctions &
ultimately (along with US congressional support, & numerous Democrats
supporting the vote) to go to war in Iraq.Regarding the Benghazi
attack, which took place on 9/11 (an import al-Qaeda anniversary), it is
increasingly laughable that a video made by a man in California influenced the
militants that killed US personnel in Benghazi. It was only the Obama White
House that was grasping towards that video as an explanation, in an attempt to
deflect the failed Obama Middle Eastern policies during a presidential election
campaign. It is clear in hindsight, but it was clear enough at that
time. Romney understood actual events better than Obama.
These outright lies from this Administration are a \ disgrace! Four Americans
died to protect Obama’s 2012 political aspirations! Here’s what we’re now learning about the Benghazi cover-up:* Benghazi was an attack, not a Protest to some mystery
“anti-Muslim” video that nobody heard about prior to being told
about it by Hillary Clinton and the Administration. Obama couldn’t let
this be defined as an attack because that would contradict his claim that
Al-Qaeda was dead.* Today Retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Robert
Lovell, Former U.S. AFRICOM Intel Director testified before the House Government
Oversight and Reform Committee. He testified that the rioting in Benghazi was
NOT related to this supposed “anti-Muslim” video. His Department
believed early on that these attacks were carried out by Al-Qaeda.*
The rioting at the American embassy in Cairo on 9/11 (the same day of the
Benghazi attack) was NOT related to this “anti-Muslim” video.* The Obama Administration sent out an apology for this video prior to
anything happening!* Obama NEVER sent in a rescue team!*
Obama was NEVER in the Situation Room on this day.
Yet another sad day of the far right dragging the tragic deaths out and parading
them around for cheap political Theater.
There must have been a microphone and camera present! "Chaffetz also used
his time during the hearing to blast the White House for trying to convince the
public the attack was just a reaction to an Internet video rather than a
terrorist attack." I just finished reading the complete Senate
report on the Bengazi incident! "The report found no evidence of the kind
of political cover up that Republicans have long alleged." The tragic
events at Bengazi are horrific enough, without members of Congress pursuing an
endless campaign of blame in an effort to further their and their parties
political agenda and taint the POTUS. It's gruesome at best!While looking up the Senate report I stumbled across several articles that
brought light to the fact that between 2002 and 2008, 13 lives were lost in
attacks on the U.S. Embassies and Consulates! Then again they were during a
Republican administration, making them not quite so tragic and horrific as
Bengazi! I am thinking it is time for my Representative to spend less time
looking for the lime light, less time worrying about Hillary's run for the
presidency and more time doing what he was sent to Washington to do.
If the Republicans continue pushing this non-issue, they'll rile up their
base, but lose the middle and the election. Just like last time.I
miss the party of Reagan when they stood for something positive.
With the left we can see that protecting this liberal democrat president and
administration and 2012 elections is more important than the lives four
innocent people.Which could have been easily saved.Shame
on the left.
Keep picking at this scab instead of coming up with new ideas or trying to
govern, Republicans. I'm looking forward Hillary Clinton winning the White
Right Wingers are beating this crippled horse to death. "We
should have tried’ to help Americans in Benghazi attack"Well, yes in hindsight. If we had been able to see the future, MAYBE we could
saved those three Americans.If we had been able to see the future,
we could have saved the lives of over 4000 American Servicemen in Iraq too.But we can't see the future.Was it reasonable to assume
that the disturbance at Benhazi was not associated with disturbances across the
Middle East, that came about directly because of that stupid anti-Muslim
movie?Yes, it was reasonable. Those events occurred
simultaneously.Was it reasonable to assume Iraq had WMD's ready
to use against us in 2003 after Iraq had gotten rid of them during the Clinton
administration. No, that wasn't so reasonable.
"McKeon said his committee's investigation found no evidence that the
State Department delayed the decision to deploy the few resources it had
available."The reason there were "few resources"
available is because Ambassador Stevens request for more security was denied by
Clinton.The spin never stops when it comes to protecting Hillary and
Obama. If this had been a Republican Administration people would have been
fired or jailed because of this.