The Right’s Made-up Benghazi Cover-up

The well-funded right-wing media has long demonstrated an ability to deflate or inflate scandals depending on their political impact. In the waning days of Campaign 2012, a stunning example of this politicized “journalism” has been the story of the Benghazi “cover-up,” writes William Boardman.

By William Boardman

Two prime suspects in the Benghazi attack last Sept. 11 have been captured (one is reportedly dead), dozens more have been arrested in Libya, and the suspect group is dispersed and hunted, with its Benghazi headquarters dismantled — but one wouldn’t know this listening to Republicans inside the media bubble of the so-called “Benghazi cover-up scandal.”

“This issue of Benghazi is really bubbling up,” Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, said on Fox News Oct. 28, echoing a talking point repeated on other networks and elsewhere by Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus and other GOP notables including Carly Fiorina, Rudy Giuliani and Newt Gingrich. Right-wing blogs have been alive with the new meme of a “Benghazi Blackout.”

The U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, burning on the night of Sept. 11, 2012. (Photo credit: Voice of America)

The essentials of the Benghazi attack on Sept. 11 have been known and unchanging since the day after, as timelines by the Wall Street Journal and Associated Press attest: about 20 jihadists in a local militia, taking advantage of growing anger over an Internet video, launched an organized attack on the consulate that killed two Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, and several Libyans in the course of about two hours (9:30-11:30 pm).

A quick reaction force from the CIA annex 2 kilometers away came to the consulate and took the American survivors back to the annex. While they and Libyan forces were preparing to evacuate the diplomatic personnel, there was a brief mortar attack (about 4 a.m.) on the annex, killing two American SEALS.

All this was clear, in broad outline, from the original reporting. Three State Department emails leaked on Oct. 24 told the same story.

McCain’s Talking Point

But Republicans and the right-wing media have repeatedly sought to sow doubts about the official story and turn it into a campaign issue. For instance, on CBS, Sen. McCain responded to a question about Hurricane Sandy by pivoting quickly into an answer about Benghazi:

“This tragedy turned into a debacle and massive cover-up or massive incompetence in Libya is having an effect on the voter because of their view of the commander in chief. And it is now the worst cover-up or incompetence that I have ever observed in my life.”

Asked to explain what he meant, McCain, while deploying his “cover-up or incompetence” construction twice more, failed to explain what he thought was possibly being covered up.

For Republicans, reaction to the Benghazi attack began in bad faith on Sept. 11, when Mitt Romney opportunistically misrepresented the American response in Egypt to local unrest there due to the 14-minute Islamophobic video that had been translated into Arabic and shown on Egyptian television. Partisan Republicans have tried to make a political issue of the Benghazi attack ever since.

One line of attack has been to portray the Obama administration’s statements about Benghazi as some kind of a cover-up that’s worse than Watergate. Sean Hannity launched the cover-up meme on Sept. 20 on Fox News, without explaining exactly what was being covered up or why, just that the supposed cover-up would somehow help President Obama’s re-election, presumably the way the Watergate cover-up helped Richard Nixon’s re-election in 1972.

No one has explained the Watergate meme coherently since it began, including McCain on CBS, who slipped the smear in with a sleazy touch of indirection: “You know, somebody the other day said to me this is as bad as Watergate. Well, nobody died in Watergate. But this is either a massive cover-up or incompetence that is not acceptable service to the American people.”

Another line of Republican attack has been to assert that the U.S. could have made an effective military response to the Benghazi attack while it was happening, but chose for some unexplained reason not to do so. There is no evidence that this is true.

The charge is not credible for several reasons, including:

–Libyan reinforcements arrived during the early fighting;

–The first fight lasted about two hours, too brief for the nearest American forces to get there;

–American reinforcements arrived from Tripoli around 1 a.m. and were at the consulate annex when it suffered a mortar attack between 2 and 4;

–The American reinforcements enabled the remaining American diplomatic personnel to leave Benghazi safely.

Military Realities

At a multi-topic news briefing on Oct. 25, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta responded to questions that included Benghazi. One questioner asked “why there was no military support earlier on the attack,” which suggests the questioner was ignorant of the length of the attack and the amount of military support that did respond during and after the two-hour attack on the consulate.

As it became clear that the questioner assumed there was time for a Delta Force or fighter planes based outside of Libya to get to Benghazi in time to make a difference, Panetta described the forces available in the region, and then explained:

“But the basic principle here — basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.   This — this happened within a few hours and it was really over before, you know, we had the opportunity to really know what was happening.”

In his CBS appearance Oct. 28, Sen. McCain indirectly supported the Pentagon explanation when he said, “obviously there was no military either capability or orders to intervene in a seven-hour fight.” [emphasis added]

Even though McCain says the fight was much longer than it actually was, he concludes there was no capability for any more military support than was provided. And he implies that there were no orders because such orders would have been pointless.

On Oct. 26, Fox News cited anonymous sources to support a claim “that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command.”

According to Fox, the request was made after midnight from the CIA annex in Benghazi and asked for a Spectre gunship that was based 480 miles away in Italy. To make the story seem credible, Fox stated falsely that “fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours.” The CIA, the Pentagon and the White  House all flatly denied the Fox story.

On Oct. 28, Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume complained that mainstream media was more or less ignoring the Benghazi story: “One of the problems we’re having here is, that it has fallen to this news organization, Fox News and a couple others, to do all the heavy lifting on this story.”

He didn’t say what wasn’t covered, but slipped into the Watergate meme of implied wrongdoing:  “Normally, the big news organizations would have this thing out there. And we would know a lot more than we do about, about what the president did, what he knew, when he knew it, and what when he made what order he made and on what basis.”

If, as so many Republicans have claimed, the administration’s handling is a cover-up more significant than Watergate, then what is being covered up? Based on the available evidence, it’s more credible to believe that if there’s any cover-up at all, it’s being orchestrated by the Romney campaign to distort and hide the early success so far of the President’s foreign policy in Libya.

William Boardman lives in Vermont, where he has produced political satire for public radio and served as a lay judge.

115 comments for “The Right’s Made-up Benghazi Cover-up

  1. dell temple
    November 5, 2012 at 10:59

    “Independent Investigative Journalism Since 1995”
    Get real – you really should change that sub-title, a more fitting one would be
    “VOTE for Our Dear Leader – BARACK H OBAMA”

    I have never heard of you, I doubt I will ever visit your site again, you’re no journalist – you’re a left-wing party hack, you’re nothing if not biased.

  2. dell temple
    November 5, 2012 at 10:46

    This so-called ‘journalist’ wouldn’t know a cover-up if it jumped up and bit him in the ass.
    So we have a moron of a president and secretary of state who refuse to beef-up security prior to the anniversary of 9-11, they also reduce security staff and refuse all requests by those on the ground in Lybia. Actually the terrorists had no greater ally that day than Hillary Clinton and the dunce in the White House. We were attacked, it was predicted, it was on 9-11, they (government) knew it in real time, they watched it, Obama refused to send them help, they died.

    Then what do they do? They dream up the stupid video defense to cover up their incompetence. They lie to the American people, they refuse to release any information, all that came out came from leaks within the DOS, DOD and CIA.

    And then, the idiot who writes this moronic article still wants us to believe it was over the video and Obama and Company did nothing wrong. ARE YOU INSANE?

    This piece of fiction is what the leftwing media is all about – lies and lies to cover up lies – disgusting. Bunch of commie SOBs!

  3. IaHawkinWi
    November 4, 2012 at 13:13

    This article is nothing more than an Obama Campaign piece. Typically self-certain, but typical obfuscation. This type of argument only works within a shroud of secrecy and lack of disclosure. The Benghazi controversy is only a made-up controversy in the minds of the provincial and highly partisan.

    November 4, 2012 at 12:04



    13 Saturday Oct 2012

    Posted by Alexandra Valiente in LIBYA

    Lizzie Phelan

    It was not the systematic persecution and lynching of black Libyans and migrant workers from other African countries by one of the thousands of militias that were armed by NATO and co, the persecution of people who were allied with the former government, the tens of thousands of political prisoners arbitrarily detained, the murder of Muammar Gaddafi or the current siege of Bani Walid, that alerted the world to how much chaos has been unleashed in Libya. But the killing of a white man, the US ambassador.

    But still that chaos will be portrayed as something that is a result of the uncivilized nature of Libyans/Arabs/Muslims/Africans rather than what it really is…a result of the NATO war that destroyed the former Libyan government and with it the fabric that held the country together in a wider context of decades of western interference in the wider region.


  5. A. Sheridan
    November 3, 2012 at 11:14

    It IS a cover-up stupid! A “LEFT WING” cover-up to shield the liar-in-chief from election damage. You, the complicit media, are enabling him, by NOT doing your damn job!

  6. gregd01
    November 2, 2012 at 15:44

    Obama lied. Ambassadors died.

    • flyer10624
      November 2, 2012 at 19:45

      Give him a chance. I heard the president is planning on addressing the issue and disclosing all the details on live with Kelly Ripa.

  7. jim from ohio
    November 2, 2012 at 08:48

    this happened on 9/11……..what happened to “We will never forget”
    I guess obama forgot.
    the fact is,he was asleep at the wheel (on 9/11!), and so consumed with his re election,and the possibility that he may not get the chance to finish destroying the country. This was in responce to a video?, that noone has ever seen!!!!Yeah right!

  8. Nlf
    November 2, 2012 at 02:47

    Foz news has the facts. Wake up you idiots. Dod someone plant the cables and calls fro Anbassador Stevens. Was the bloodily hadprints appear out of nowhere. Is the anbassadors compound still standing? There are sickening pictures circulating of him being drug around by thugs. Sure…it’s all made up….listen to the parents of those who helped save the abassador after being told to stand down. You can’t make this up. Kudos to Fox News for keeping thos front and center, Obama has LIED.

  9. Mace from Denison
    November 1, 2012 at 18:28

    Billy Boardman is a joke of a journalist!The evidence and timeline are in place.They are stalling the truth till after the election. No wonder military morale is at all time low & suicides at an all time high since the Vietnam War.The Bush Administration was bad but Obama’s is even worse. The dumbocrats platform is “PANDA and SLANDER”. When they try to pander your vote and you refuse because you can see thru the Democrat smokescreen, then they mercilessy slander you and your family with lies & deceit. By the way, the Redumblicans do the same thing, though not nearly as well. Thank God I am an independent voter who tries to glean as much info as I can about a candidate, so that can make MY OWN decision without being a sheep to either party.

  10. ron
    November 1, 2012 at 18:17

    if it had been bush do you really think it would be ignored like this?

    • F. G. Sanford
      November 1, 2012 at 23:01

      I guess you forgot about the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief, when Bush was told about a terrorist plot to attack USA using hijacked airliners, and his answer was, “OK, you covered your ass”. Then, skip to the bewildered look on his face as he sat in the Florida classroom paralyzed with disbelief. So…yes, that’s what anyone who’s honest about it would think, because that’s exactly what happened. It was completely ignored.

      • Hillary
        November 2, 2012 at 06:02

        “I guess you forgot about the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief, when Bush was told about a terrorist plot to attack USA using hijacked airliners,”

        Glad to see that you agree that it was “common knowledge” within “the loop”.

        This CIA agent certainly lays it out about staying away from NY on 9/11.

  11. Zee
    November 1, 2012 at 17:15

    It may very well be that an Admiral was also relieved for trying to help:
    Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette is being sent back to the USS John C. Stennis’ home port at Bremerton, Wash., in what the Navy called a temporary reassignment. The Navy said he is not formally relieved of his command of the Stennis strike group but will be replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker, who will assume command until the investigation is completed.

    It is highly unusual for the Navy to replace a carrier strike group commander during its deployment.

    The Navy did not reveal details of the allegations, citing only an accusation of “inappropriate leadership judgment” that arose during the strike group’s deployment to the Middle East. Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Navy’s chief spokesman, declined to discuss the investigation.

    Read more:…#ixzz2Aj5L764B

  12. BKspirit
    November 1, 2012 at 16:30

    are you friggin’ kidding me? get your head out of the sand and begin to use some journalistic expertise>>>>> REPORT the NEWS!

  13. hp
    November 1, 2012 at 16:15

    predator drone with a resolution of 1ft. flying over benghazi wounder if it and all watching it’s tv feed saw sean smith gamer get it? just woundering guess we need a little more information before we could have sent help.

  14. Frances in California
    November 1, 2012 at 15:42

    You highly paid and conscience-less right-wing trolls are desperately trying to get your silly-putty to stick to the wall long enough to SEEM like an October Surprise (SEEM is good enough for you and your hedge-fund mgr; truth really isn’t your thing). I hope Romney gets trounced so you have to give back some of your ill-gotten gain; also, I won’t live in the Fascist States of America that would have a liar like Romney as President.

    • dell temple
      November 5, 2012 at 10:53

      You’re a real POS, wanting to hold idiots accountable for their actions & in-actions makes us trolls, OK then what does that make you – you who takes that lying piece of trash Obama at his word, his word that he has broken over and over again. You are so full of ignorance it hurts me, to think there are more than a few Americans with the disturbed attitude like yours floating around the country, it makes me sick. BTW feel free to keep your sorry-ass in California if Obama loses or wins, it’s a good location for freaks.

  15. Jim Buba
    November 1, 2012 at 15:34

    And while your listening and watching this video, remember FOUR AMERICANS FORSAKEN and murdered by the inaction of Obama, Clinton and Panetta. There may be more to arrest, charge and remand to custody. For all I know, you may be one of them.

    Mr. Woods, Mr. Doherty, Ambassador Stevens and another American so little discussed I do not have his name at the tip of my memory are dead. They were killed by enemy fire in a place that was considered U.S. Property and thus represents an attack on U.S. soil.

    Obama, Clinton and Panetta in irons is a very good start to the healing process. Waterboarding is optional.

    • F. G. Sanford
      November 1, 2012 at 17:26

      We’re watchin Jimmy, Boo Hoo Hoo!

      Jimmy, Jimmy boo boo, cryin’ baby boo hoo,
      It was on our soil, we should take their oil,
      They kicked our puny asses, now we lost our honor,
      Let’s pretend we’re heroes, because we’re silly bozos.
      Thousands died from Bush-Whack, but we just showed our ass-crack,
      We need to vote for Romney, he’ll be our new mom-mee
      He’ll promise that we’re special, and blame it on Obom-ee
      Boo-hoo, boo-hoo, Jimmy is a bay-bee
      He thinks that we are heroes, but we’re a bunch of bozos
      Nah nah, nah nah Jimmy baby boo-hoo!
      Dummies in a war zone, wanna kill the bad guys,
      Big surprise, big surprise, the bad guys killed some good guys
      Boo boo babies lose sometimes, nah nah nah nah nah
      Better vote for Romney, he’ll be our new mom-mee,
      And beat up all those bad guys so we can be the heroes,
      Then we’ll have our honor, and we won’t be the bozos!
      Nah nanny nah nah…

  16. Wayne A
    November 1, 2012 at 14:24

    Why is it we have not heard anything from the thirty survivors? Sounds like an Obama coverup to me. Just another reason not to vote for this incompetent President who had no problem very quickly releasing to a filmmaker so called secret information about the Bin Laden killing but can’t figure out what happened in Benghazi after several weeks. Call it what you will, but I call it a full scale coverup. And don’t tell me he didn’t know what was going on within an hour of the attack. I will vote for Romney and hopefully get rid of the guy.

  17. toby
    November 1, 2012 at 13:58

    If they could tell you what was being covered up than it wouldn’t be a cover, it would be out!

  18. jerry fisher
    November 1, 2012 at 13:33

    You are a disgrace to the History of American journalism…Your decision to cover up and not report on the facts of the Benghazi issue is reprehensible. You have made a political decision to support Obama and his candidacy at the cost of your honor ! SHAME ON YOU. you have lost me as a viewer forever.

  19. steven
    November 1, 2012 at 12:22

    Mr. Boardman, It appears that you have misspoke by repeating the Obama’s talking points and not the facts as they are being released. As a veteran I am very disappointed with the current administrations lack of action for the request of assistance by Ambassador Stevens, such as the August 16 cable to the Secretary of State. I understand your support for Obama and how you wish this coverup was just politics but unfortunately our president and his staff are responsible for the deaths of four Americans.

    • debra
      November 1, 2012 at 12:51


    • Frances in California
      November 1, 2012 at 15:39

      You’re a veteran and you don’t know that the Pentagon has a stranglehold on the Executive Branch?

      • pete
        November 1, 2012 at 16:06

        If you actually believe the Pentagon has a stranglehold on the Executive Branch, why do you care who wins the election?

  20. Ralph Crown
    November 1, 2012 at 09:37

    And another thing. As I understand it, this whole “story” originated with Sean Hannity. You push these talking heads for facts, and they fall back on the claim that they’re “entertainers,” not journalists. Why does everyone keep forgetting that? Or ignoring it? How can anyone take them seriously?

    • F. G. Sanford
      November 1, 2012 at 13:49

      You’d be surprised…the one that came out about General Ham is from a guy who claims President Harry Truman signed a peace treaty with extraterrestrial space aliens. What motivates ALL these right-wingnuts is their thinly veiled racism. It was OK for thousands to get killed for Bush’s phony war, but when one rogue ambassador who should have stayed in Tripoli gets himself killed, they go bat-shit. And the reason is because they can’t stand seeing a black guy succeed.

      • broncokid
        November 1, 2012 at 15:24

        @Sanford; Bush isn’t my favorite prez but he was a lot better choice than the alternatives at the time. Pres. Bush went through Congress for War authorization and they signed on to go. As for the WMD most of Congress AND intelligence agencies worldwide thought Saddam had WMD. ANY Politician who has nothing to hide (sound familiar?) would speak up, lay the facts on the table and show the “right-wing attack dogs” are just blowing smoke. So one question; Why doesn’t this Prez. put the kibosh on the “speculation”?

        • F. G. Sanford
          November 1, 2012 at 16:46

          You right wing fruitcakes keep talking about “speculation” and “cover-up”. Just what is the speculation, and what are they covering up? You can go around in circles about who believed W’s WMD lies, but HE knew he was lying, and that makes him…a liar! Pray tell, just what is it that’s being covered up? one fact would win this argument for you, but all you have are baseless insinuations!

      • tonyd
        November 1, 2012 at 22:12

        Really FG Sanford? I would have to believe even the real Fred G would call you a “Big Dummy”

      • Tony
        November 2, 2012 at 02:43

        Tell us, what black guy are you talking about? You know, the one with all of the success.

  21. Ralph Crown
    November 1, 2012 at 09:28

    All I see here is a mob of gullible people getting suckered into another endless war. Now I suppose we have to extend the “war on terror” to more of Africa, which coincidentally has a lot of unexploited natural resources. Try getting away from the propaganda on both sides, do some research, and think for yourself.

  22. Steve
    November 1, 2012 at 08:42

    If this were a Republican president, you’d be asking “what did you know and when did you know it?” “We deserve answers” Be honest. Since it’s a Democrat, our President gets a pass. Thank God lives were saved because a heroic Navy Seal disobeyed the “stand down” order and unfortunately made the ultimate sacrifice. Who gave the stand down order? Why blame a video if details were still incomplete? Why were previous request for security not only denied, but they were told to stop submitting requests for help? Why do we have quick response teams if we will never use them? Why is President Obama using the line “no one will be left behind” in regards to the hurricane but not Benghazi? Why was the President and his administration still referring to the video weeks after the attack? This is only one of many issues the President has eluded the American public on. Most non transparent President in history!

  23. JC
    November 1, 2012 at 04:11

    If you lefties want another 4 years of failures re-elect him. For someone that never server even as a boy scout and be placed as commander in chief is a disgrace. that accounts for his inability to make sound judgments in matters such as this. even if he is re-elected he will most likely be impeached to this cover up. So have you day, but dont come home crying when the economy completely collapses

    • Frances in California
      November 1, 2012 at 15:37

      If you righties want everyone else to be deprived of healthcare, housing and jobs, GIVE YOURS UP FIRST!

      • pete
        November 1, 2012 at 16:20

        newsflash Frances, California is going bankrupt, your state pension fund is going bust. Companies are fleeing California in droves. Unemployment is continuing to rise. The result is more and more people being deprived of jobs, and with no jobs comes no house. No jobs also means no taxes to pay for that wonderful healthcare. California has been the leading state in terms of implementing left-wing ideology. The net result is an abysmal failure. How many counties have declared bankruptcy already? It would be nice to have healthcare for all, jobs for all, houses for all, but it’s just not feasible. Eventually, you have to draw a line and say “you have to do something to earn these”. What you left-wing idealists need to realize is that while everybody has the right to have it all, it still has to be worked for and earned!

      • tonyd
        November 1, 2012 at 22:08

        Frances in Cali,
        one-this post has no relationship to the story. two-How do the “righties” deprive healthcare, housing, or jobs? three-feel free to give your money to whatever you chose, but you don’t infringe on my rights to pay my own bills by spending my money.

  24. bobgold
    October 31, 2012 at 23:31

    Boardman: You asked for it and now it’s been delivered— the smoking gun!
    Tonight Katherine Herridge revealed she now has in hand a classified memo directly from Ambassador Stevens to the State dept which details his fear that they will be attacked by the groups that did in fact attack them and murder him. He was asking for help and said that they were sitting ducks against any attack that he feared would be forthcoming. When was the date of this memo?
    AUGUST 15th!
    Then on Sept 12th and for the next 3 weeks Hillary and Obama attributed this attack to a video; when they were told on Aug 15 that al qaida was a real and present danger.
    THEY KNEW! THEY LIED! AND NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO SIT ON THE FOOTBALL AND RUN OUT THE CLOCK! And NO ONE is covering this but Fox. Apparently we now have a state sponsored media who is complicit in this cover up. And YES! It IS a cover up! We all deserve better! Especially Ambassador Stevens!

    • F. G. Sanford
      November 1, 2012 at 00:33

      Let’s hope she goes to jail for mishandling classified information. Then, maybe you right-wingnut hypocrites will start realizing that a two-edged sword cuts both ways.

  25. Gregg
    October 31, 2012 at 23:00

    No mention of the drone flying over Bengazhi. Which provided a live fed to the situation room. hummm “Stand down” when Americans are in harms way ? Really !! There are too many issues that don’t add up.

  26. cjb
    October 31, 2012 at 22:55

    What a load of crap. We all hear Obama tell us about the YouTube video that didn’t exist. He told the UN, they made a commercial apologizing for the thing and now we know it was all lies. 4 men are dead and they have the audacity to say that was made up?

    What Obama inherited from Bush:

    AAA credit rating
    7.1 % official unemployment rate
    $1.85 gas prices
    10 trillion dollar debt
    2 wars
    26 week unemployment benefits
    a budget
    304,761,895 population
    13,524,982 actual unemployed people
    People on food stamps —————-31.79 million
    Debt per CITIZEN $33,600
    Debt per TAXPAYER $94,360

    Numbers Don’t Lie.
    ———————————————————Jan 2009——-Sept 2011
    Price/gallon gas————————————–$1.83 ————$3.69
    Crude oil (barrel)————————————-$38.74———–$115.34
    Corn, No.2 yellow————————————$3.56————-$14.33
    Raw Sugar cane,lb———————————-$13.37———–$35.39
    Unemployment rate, non-farm——————–7.6%————–9.1%
    Unemployment rate, blacks———————–12.6%————16.7%
    Number of unemployed—————————-10,616,000——14,500,000
    Number of fed. Employees————————2,779,000——–2,840,000
    Real median household income—————–$50,112———–$49,777
    Number of food stamp recipients —————31,983,716——-43,300,878
    Unemployment benefit recipients—————-7,526,598——–9,393,838
    Number of long-term unemployed—————2,600,000——–6,900,000
    Poverty rate, individuals—————————-13.2%————15.1%
    People in poverty in U.S.—————————39,800,000——46,200,000
    Economic Freedom World Ranking——————5——————9
    Failed banks——————————————-140—————–170
    Dollar vs Jap yen exchange rate—————–89.76—————76.15
    National debt, in trillions—————————$10.627————$15.052
    In Obama’s first 2.5 years, we accumulated national debt at a rate more than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation’s history. Over 27 times as fast! Metaphorically, speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane 27 times faster . . . it would be doing 1,755 MPH! This is a disaster!
    (1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. of Labor; (7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury


    • Eddie
      October 31, 2012 at 23:37

      Nice cherry-picking of numbers for your rant, cjb. Just checking the gas prices alone (see: shows that they fell from an ALL TIME HIGH under your boy “W” ($4,12/GA back in mid-2008) to the lowest in the last 8 yrs in Dec 2009, undoubtedly because of the Great Recession that W and (more importantly, since W was pretty much a feckless dry-drunk) the Neo-cons ushered in with their economic policies of the last 30 yrs. Remember how everyone was talking about DEFLATION due to the bad economic conditions?

      Next time you try to use numbers, use REPRESENTATIVE ones — unless you’re intentionally trying to deceive??

      • F. G. Sanford
        November 1, 2012 at 00:06

        Eddie, you’re right. “W” put it on the tab, and stuck The President with the check. He created the biggest fiscal debacle in history, and managed to slink away to Crawford, TX. It would actually serve Romney right to have to try stepping into the shoes that are way too big for him. They’re covered with bullshit from that ranch in Crawford.

        • debra
          November 1, 2012 at 12:50

          FG Barney Frank and friends started the problem by dforcing bankers to lower leanding standards because everyone should own a home whether they can afford it or not. Reid and Pelosie in charge.

          • Frances in California
            November 1, 2012 at 15:35

            “Forcing bankers to lower lending standards”? Do you EAT with that brain?

      • pete
        November 1, 2012 at 16:03

        Just to shed a bit of truth on your Bush hating, the economic mess the US is in was the result of policies put in place by Clinton. By allowing far too many people who weren’t financially capable of carrying a mortgage to actually have one, a financial time bomb was created. It exploded under Bush, and Obama inherited the mess.

    • bobzz
      November 2, 2012 at 01:04

      As Mark Twain wrote: there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Straight statistics lack historical context, but they are simplistic. The full force of Bush’s mess was not evident until well into Obama’s presidency. Bill Clinton signed the repeal of Glass-Stegall with Rubin and Greenspan urging him on and with major republican support. No one coerced Republican bankers to make bad loans, bundle deriviatives, etc. But they did. The Republicans bailed out the banks. When the democrats wrote a weak Dodd-Frank reform bill, the republicans even fought that tooth and nail, making another disaster very possible, and they will dismantle the consumer protection agency, if elected. The Obama stimulus saved millions of jobs, and the economy is slowly getting its footing. Obama tried to get a bill passed that the small business association and even the chamber of commerce supported, but no, the republicans would not have it. The stimulus, homeland security apparatus, food stamp growth, unemployment benefits—none of this would have been necessary if the Republican bankers had not stolen trillions from main street. Bush tax cuts lost $3 trillion. And by the way where were all those jobs he promised from those tax cuts, and he was president during comparatively good times. Bush wars cost another $2 trillion. Then you have another trillion wasted on the feckless drug war. He was an incompetent commander and chief. Al qaida was trapped on Tora Bora, and he sent too few troops in, so they got away. They should have been finished off in a matter of months—not just bin Laden, but all of them. Now, there are things I do not like about Obama, but he is surely right to say you can’t turn this mess around as quickly as people want. And Eddie is right about this mess having a thirty five year history. You all just may get Mitt elected, but if you are middle class and young enough to see his policies play out, you will long for the return of Warren G. Harding.

  27. Thomas Paine
    October 31, 2012 at 22:42

    If Benghazi is being “politicized” by republicans, and the Obama administration is NOT covering this up; WHY has the Obama administration changed their story so many times? Why did Joe Biden–during the VP debate–say, “we didn’t know they needed security,” which we know is a LIE! If this story is all smoke and mirrors by “right-wimedia, WHY doesn’t Obama just clear this all up, and tell the American people what really happened? IF they didn’t have something to hide, there would be transparency; they wouldn’t be refusing to offer an explanation! It’s been SIX WEEKS, and Obama is still selling the story “we don’t have all the facts?” If you believe that, you’re a fool!

  28. stupidicus
    October 31, 2012 at 22:15

    nice run down, which appears to have sent the rightwingers into the usual and expected tizzy.

    So far it appears to me from all I’ve read here and there on the matter, that the usual rightwinger suspects over at Faux Views and their various tentacles have tried to introduce a sufficient enough amount of uncertainty in the rather limited minds of their minions, which usually results in a tweaking of their brain stems, that in turn leads to their CONfusion and anything but CONfliction, since we know that infanticidal marxist muslim born in kenya who’s the terrorists best friend, and who wants to take their guns away and give them to his terrorists pals, has to be guilty of something.

    Given the record of the Faux News liars on this matter so far, why would BHO issue any further statements they can stoke the fires or stroke the brain stems of those too stupid to know when they are being played — and wouldn’t care even if they were, given who their intended victim is. BHO’s playing it smart imo, by waiting for the investigations and their work product, just to minimize the further politicization of this issue by the grave dancers here and elsewhere. Most of them don’t care about the victims, but rather making BHO a victim of their BS. Romney made that clear from the beginning, and Faux Views has been beating the same drum since.

    • Armywifeforlife
      October 31, 2012 at 23:13

      Stupidicus is a perfect example of what I spoke about. A liberal who runs on pure emotion void of logical thinking. He simply repeats everything he hears from Bill Maher (I’m guessing) and other persons of such thinking. Ignore….not worth it.

    • Robicus
      November 1, 2012 at 13:45

      Wow, you’re a fucking idiot as well as a liar. Just thought you should know since you probably even lie to yourself and don’t realize what a douche you are. Well you’re a complete douche, and not a faux one. Quite real.

      • Ralph Crown
        November 1, 2012 at 14:31

        The adults are talking. Now go wash your mouth out with soap.

    • Eric Goldberg
      November 3, 2012 at 10:23

      Fox News should be applauded for bringing manufacturing back to this country because they’ve just done a terrific job of manufacturing the Benghazi story for its angry audience.

      • A. Sheridan
        November 3, 2012 at 11:19

        To Eric Goldberg. You’re damn right Fox News should be applauded, along with the investigative reporters who are doing the heavy lifting for this WORTHLESS lying administration. Go ahead and leave your head buried in the sand and your a** hanging out there. It looks good on you!

  29. R. N. Oesterling
    October 31, 2012 at 20:11

    The President could put this whole thing to rest by providing information about what really happened during the Sept 11th Bengazhi attack and what orders were given to either assist or not assist the Amassador and 3 others. The news media has an obligation to investigate the information provided.

    Up to now neither the President nor the news media are performing as expected on this subject by the American people. This results is more speculation about what happened and what orders were given on Sept 11th. Trickle out of emails and disclosures does not get it for most of us.

    The Obama administration has underestimated the importance of how Bengazhi was handled on Sept 11th and on Nov 6th they will be ordered to “stand down” for abandoning the U.S. Ambassador and 3 others in Bengazhi.

    • F. G. Sanford
      October 31, 2012 at 20:22

      I’m still waiting for a reliable source. Also, just what is it that could be put to rest? You are making non-specific allegations of “guilt”, but refuse to identify the “crime”. This is the tactic used by Adolf Hitler’s “People’s Court” and Paul Josef Goebbels’ propaganda machine. If you think Benghazi was mishandled, please provide JUST ONE FACT! Again, I dare you.

      • F. G. Sanford
        October 31, 2012 at 21:19

        Gee whiz, I just hope this guy falls for the trap, because I can’t wait to tell you all about the “source” from which this story first came.

      • Carla Fiattie
        October 31, 2012 at 22:46

        @ F.G. Sanford ….Here is the FACT for me sir, One of the reasons this has grabbed the public attention is the father and family of slain SEAL, Ty Woods wants and deserves answers. Originally they had chosen NOT to go public, but found out they were Lied by this President Obama and Co. and they felt wasa dishonor to Tyrone Woods. Mr Woods has no political agenda, he wants answers about his son. Why not just answer? By lying and dishonoring these heroes has made America angry, not just the “Right Wingers” I fell so sorry for America right now and for future generations when it seems morals and values as as close the the cliff as our economy.

        • F. G. Sanford
          October 31, 2012 at 23:29

          You right-wingnuts always come up with the same pathetic lines about “honor” and “heroism”. George W. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction and got 4,000 heroes killed. Now, one SEAL is where all your phony indignation and grief is directed? Getting killed in the line of duty is what makes these people heroes. It comes with the job, and part of the deal is that mommy and daddy don’t always get the answers they want. That, my hypocritical friend, is what makes them heroes in the first place. Trying to discredit the chain of command to which they were loyal only tarnishes their heroism, which is precisely what you don’t understand about military service.

          • debra
            November 1, 2012 at 12:47

            FG Sanford,,,the whole WORLD thought sadamm had WMDs

          • RB
            November 1, 2012 at 15:18

            @debra. No they absolutely did not think Saddam had WMD. Many asked for evidence and were told by Cheney/Bush/Powell to ‘trust us’. Reports actually contracted the administration story and Powell questioned Cheney prior to his UN speech. Cheney said something like ‘trust us we have the evidence’. The lack of this and realization he was used goes a long way for me explaining Powells political transition and lack of loyalty to his previous bosses. Obama’s mistake was not pursuing this in an investigation to see if there was or was not a crime vs. a ‘mistake’. Long and short of it was that many at the time questioned the WMD claim… and were ignored. There was absolutely no evidence and there was utter capitulation by Saddam to the UN and if you think otherwise you are wrong.

          • Gene Buxton
            November 1, 2012 at 18:21

            That one SEAL as you put it is very improtant to the family that is left behind. Phony indignation and grief? A in the words of out CIC that is not OPTIMAL wording!
            Mommy & daddy (as you put it) may not always get all the answers but they do deserve to be told the truth. Watch Mr Wood’s interviews. He is not political in trying to find out what happened to his son.Could it have been prevented? Maybe not but most Americans wuld like the truth to be told. If the rescue was not possibl then why.
            Blame back to Bush? What about blame to Kennedy/Johnson for Vietnam or Clinton for USS Cole.
            Honor and Heroism are not pathetic lines.

      • S
        November 1, 2012 at 21:29

        Personal bias is only emotion getting in the way of objective fact. Your posts (daring others) show extreme emotion and are therefore without objectivity. This Independent would have you look at facts, sir. For one, this letter was JUST found “…We requested daily, twenty-four hour police protection at the front and rear of the U.S. mission as well as a roving patrol. In addition we requested the services of a police explosive detection dog. We were given assurances from the highest authorities in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that all due support would be provided for Ambassador Stevens’ visit to Benghazi. However, we are saddened to report that we have only received an occasional police presence at our main gate. Many hours pass when we have no police support at all.” This was written BEFORE the attack. Also in these documents were implications that Libyan security were in on the attack–and THIS TOO was sent to our government. Response…crickets…NEGLIGENT. Other facts include the FACT that our president referred to Benghazi along with other “acts” in his Rose Garden speech in a general way. I have English students who could diagram that sentence and then explain the significance of using a plural noun as the subject versus a singular. The plural makes vague any SPECIFIC reference to terrorism. Then he (our very president) and others in his administration pedaled a videotape was the instigating factor (again objective fact–evidence). We now know this was false. Mishandled? Yes. Facts? Many, sir. Remove your blinders of subjectivity. Look beyond bias. (Better yet, see copies of the ACTUAL primary sources for yourself–they are certainly reliable.)

        • bobzz
          November 2, 2012 at 00:24

          Per Debra: “FG Sanford,,,the whole WORLD thought sadamm had WMDs.” This is simply not so. The Bush Administration, or intelligence, sent Hans Blix and his inspection team where they suspect Sadaam was hiding WMD, and they found nary a one. Blix complained that Americans were impeding the inspections. I don’t know about you, but when the inspectors revealed that our ‘best intel’ was flat wrong, I did not believe they had WMDs—particularly when Bush called off further inspections. And incidentally, the vast majority of the whole world was decidedly against the US going into Iraq.

    • Frances in California
      November 1, 2012 at 15:33

      No, Mr. Oesterling: the Pentagon is not going to allow the President to say anything. Don’t you know who actually runs this country?

    • Pedro
      November 2, 2012 at 00:01

      And what, admit that he reacts to FOX news? Who would be calling the shots? No right winger worth his or her salt would stop everything and give a press conference because Rachel Maddownadcused him or her of some vague scandal.

  30. R. N. Oesterling
    October 31, 2012 at 18:14

    Gen. Ham was relieved of his command as Head of U.S. Africa Command for wanting to go to the aid of those trapped in Benghazi, just one week after Panetta ordered him to “Stand Down”on Sept. 11th. On Nov 6th the entire Obama administration will be ordered to “stand down” for abandoning the U.S. Ambassador and 3 others in Bengazhi.

    • F. G. Sanford
      October 31, 2012 at 18:45

      I’d love to see a confirmation of this story from a reliable source. Please note, I submitted an earlier comment on this very matter, but there are NO forthcoming indications that it is true. Apparently, the fact that his duties have been assumed by his deputy while he is away (standard operating procedure) has been used by the Right Wing Lie Factory to lend credence to their phony “cover-up” story. I dare you, provide a reliable source.

      • pete
        November 1, 2012 at 15:12

        Please define “reliable source”, as you have also posited there exists a “Right Wing Lie Factory”. This makes it extremely difficult to provide any factual information to the conversation with you involved. Clearly, you have an extreme left wing bias, and anything that doesn’t match your beliefs can be dismissed as being from this so-called “Lie Factory” of which you speak. But if there is a coverup, and the left-leaning media stations are looking the other way, how is it possible to provide you with a “reliable source”? I would suggest to you that Fox News is a reliable source, albeit a source that has a right wing bias. Please note that a bias either right or left does not invalidate them as being reliable. There does not exist today a news media organization that doesn’t have a bias. This is reflected in which stories get additional attention, and which stories are allowed to fade. It is also reflected in the editorials and opinions. I wouldn’t consider Fox News to be producing outright lies, any more than I would consider CNN or ABC to be manufacturing lies aimed to hurt right-wing politicians. The problem with a news organization producing actual lies is that it results in them getting sued for large sums of money, because inevitably a lie will have an adverse impact on someone.

        • F. G. Sanford
          November 1, 2012 at 21:25

          Pete, grow up. The trick they constantly use is to insinuate, without providing ANY specifics. When I said reliable source, I was referring to R.N.’s comment-that story was originally released by a guy who also claims Harry Truman signed a peace treaty with “space aliens”, and that “missing persons” have actually been harvested as a food source by said “aliens”. This garbage gets repeated and re-tweeted in what I would definitely call a “lie factory”. Funny, “W” told a big lie that got thousands of Americans killed and perhaps a million innocent Iraqi civilians killed…and nobody got sued for any money at all. Are you delusional, or just gullible? And do you really think that by trying that “even-handed” analysis of the media nonsense that you can cover up total hypocrisy? That’s the tactic Josef Goebbels used.

  31. F. G. Sanford
    October 31, 2012 at 17:37

    I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the “Mormon Mafia CIA plot” theory that the Benghazi incident was orchestrated to “Carterize” The President. My theory is that Stevens shouldn’t have been there in the first place. But the most plausible theory is…”shit happens”. When will people wake up to the Brit Hume hypocrisy? If there are only six corporate media outlets and they are all spewing the same puke as Fox News, then there is no such thing as “liberal” media. Brit and the Volkischer Beobachter news team should be ashamed of themselves, and so should the Republicans making their typical open-ended, non-specific fact-free insinuations.

    • Jim Smith
      November 1, 2012 at 16:18

      You don’t get it. It isn’t that they aren’t covering the same thing as Fox that is suspicious (or the same “puke” as you have put it); what’s suspicious to me is the fact that the liberal media aren’t rejecting anything that Fox says in these reports. That’s what I mean by “no dark matter” to counterweigh Fox’s report.

      In such an environment, Fox becomes the only news source by default – thanks to the collective mindset of the “mainstream” media.

  32. Jim Smith
    October 31, 2012 at 17:14


    Someone, somewhere has finally come along and offered a second opinion about Benghazi, and I don’t know anything about this web site or who you are. And that is precisely the reason why I find the topic troubling. Nothing from ABC, NBC, CBS or CNN: Nada, zippo, nyet. There is no dark matter to balance the news from Fox: Where is Maddow? Where is Matthews? Oh, that’s right, I forgot – they’re still poking fun at Sarah Palin as if any of that matters…

    That’s why it doesn’t add up. Smells like the docks all over friggin’ DC because something is fishy.

  33. Bill Pickle
    October 31, 2012 at 16:25

    This movie will write itself. If its lies, its completely unbelievable. If true, completely Unfathomable.

    Truth or Lies, its MSM job to find out. At least prove once and for all Jennifer Griffin, Katherine Herridge, and their ilk, are lying Right wing propogandist shills. This would be “THE” story take “Faux News” down with.

    I bet the 30 people, Tyrone Woods helped rescue, probably have some fantastic stories of terror and heroism to tell? {crickets chirping} Have they been locked down or sequestered for the past 48 days?

    MSM Get some Facts, any Facts, Please! Your silence SCREAMS “Politics is more important than Truth”.

  34. jet
    October 31, 2012 at 16:11

    three numbers 911 tell you that this was a planned terrorist attack on the USA – should have been dealt with immediately by our commander in chief and information should have come from him not all the others because it looks like he is not the “commander in chief” that wants to protect the USA -but wants to protect the terrorist

  35. Michael
    October 31, 2012 at 15:52

    Utter rediculous to assume that there was no coverup and that right wingers are trying to raise this a few days before election. The evidence is clear that the President and higher ups knew something. Why has the administration made OBVIOUS attempts to not mention Benghazi or blame it squarely on jihadists (which the US covertly funds and supports to cause unrest in Middle Eastern countries)? The cat is out of the bag, the Obama administration is not working in the interests of the American people, rather they are working for and with an agenda which aims to preserve their power and wealth. To live sheepishly under the notion that the right wingers are authoring a Benghazi coverup to take votes away from Obama is an ignorant and uneducated assumption.

  36. PatCee
    October 31, 2012 at 15:50

    Only one thing to say about an article so devoid of reason and full of misinformation. I’m now voting for Mitt Romney. Obama stand down!

  37. C. W. Hays
    October 31, 2012 at 14:35

    Please explain why Gen. Ham was relieved of his command as Head of U.S. Africa Command, just one week after Panetta ordered him to “Stand Down”on Sept. 11th. U.S. Ambassadors have rank equal to that of a Four Star General. You do not abandon them !!

    • Armywifeforlife
      October 31, 2012 at 22:42

      I read today that Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette was also relieved of duty for similiar reasons as General Ham. Knew General Ham, he is a great leader and an honorable man. Something smells here and we deserve the truth. I wish people would open thier eyes. Liberals run on pure emotional so much that it clouts thier logical thinking. They aren’t interested in the truth unless it upholds thier unfailable view of Obama.

      • Gene Buxton
        November 1, 2012 at 17:25

        For Panetta to say that we could not commit troops into a situation that we did not fully know the ground situation is a load of “hogwash”.
        Ask anyone who has been in a losing firefight, needed a medavac under fire or other situation and know that some chopper pilot or reaction force would be on the way.

  38. Greg Kennemer
    October 31, 2012 at 14:30

    What is President Obama’s definition of tranparency? Why no press conference to explain things to us? What does he not want us to know until after the election? I’m voting for Romney, Obama had a legitimite chance to change things for the better and blew it. He doesn’t derserve another 4 years of trust.

    • Frances in California
      November 1, 2012 at 15:31

      Greg, Obama only gets to do what the Criminal Oligarchy “Lets” him do, along with the Pentagon – which has his nuts in a lock box. It would be the same for Romney; I guess you’d rather have a liar than a guy who doesn’t speak unless he can tell the truth.

  39. Dodge13
    October 31, 2012 at 14:26

    Wow… right wing media… no evidence of cover up… i guess if you believe one, the other is just as easy… last time I checked, the media is over the top for obunghole and communist crew and not one of them have covered the Libya scandals (3 and counting). So, either this author is really doing some wicked crack or he’s just another communist wannabe. As it appears right now, the cover up is an attempt to hide the fact that the administration has been smuggling guns to al qaida through Libya, Turkey and into Syria. Millions of dollars of high test weapons are being funneled to al qaida by this administration, and only this administration. They opted into the Libya campaign, they own the Libya campaign. They also own the smuggling and aiding and supporting our enemies that has resulted. That’s pure treason, of which I’ve never observed the likes of before. And, I would also suggest, that all those that are complicit with the cover up are guilty as well. So, journalist, are you ready to be tried for treason? Because that’s where this is headed… and we are going to make sure it gets there!

    • Slink Dink
      November 1, 2012 at 16:59

      Pretty serious charges(treason) there Dodger. What and where is your evidence to back these up? Do you even know what a communist is? I have my doubts based on your immature name calling.

  40. Lorinda Stone
    October 31, 2012 at 13:55

    Why are you guys blocking comments. Maybe sleeping with the enemy. Anyone with a brain knows that these guys were killed by inaction by their boss, our President. Why, I don’t know, but it happened. Those if you who think these actions are above the law and agree with not helping during attack and ignoring a true need for security for months wait until your son it daughter is killed by ignorance. Impeach!!!!

    • Kate
      November 1, 2012 at 14:39

      The loss of life in Benghazi is tragic to say the least. Let’s remember that the SEALS were ex Navy SEALS and our president wasn’t their boss. They were hired under private contract.

      • Gene Buxton
        November 1, 2012 at 17:32

        There is no such thing as former Seal. Take a survey of active duty Seals and find out how many would have gone into the firefight on a moments notice.
        This was an attack on US soil (Embassy) just the same as it were on your hometown.
        Someone should have reacted not make excuses.If “whoever” did not react then they should already be fired and be subjected to interrogation to find out why they did not do their duty.

  41. Scioux
    October 31, 2012 at 13:39

    The Wash Post time-line that is cited states this : “protesters scaled the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and attacked the U.S. compound in Benghazi.” This is referenced in the third paragraph in support of the assertion that jihadists in Benghazi,”taking advantage of growing anger over an Internet video,” launched an organized attack…. First, we now know that the Washington Post portion of this is not accurate, as there were no “protesters” in Benghazi. Second, Mr. Boardman asserts that the jihadists who were doing the attacking were “taking advantage of growing anger.” There is absolutely no basis for this in the cited article, and he cannot possibly know the state of mind of the “jihadists.” It is simply made up. So much for his integrity. I will not bother passing this way again.

  42. rob hemsing
    October 31, 2012 at 12:40

    well i have lots of questions
    1: why did they talk about a protest at all, they had no intelligence that said there was a protest gone awry over a video, why did he talk about the video weeks later in front of the U.N., true he did squeak in a vague statement against terrorism at one point but all the apologies about videos when we were the ones attacked is just befuddling.
    2: why wasn’t there an c130 overhead for the rest of the night, or until all americans were out?
    3: was that agent really told to stand down? the cia denies that it refused to send reinforcements, that doesnt mean they didnt tell Woods to stand down.
    4: why wasnt there more security there after the brits and everyone else got out of town?
    5: we are finding out now that they had a lot of intel about what the situation was, why didnt they come forward and tell us what they did know instead of making up a protest?
    6: who made the decisions that were made, was the president aware of the situation?
    7: if i am in combat and need help will my government move heaven and earth to come get me?
    8: did we request the use of airspace from the libyia? what did they say?

    This isn’t political, these are honest questions that the president needs to answer. I understand it is election season and these questions aren’t convenient right now but we have troops all over the world fighting for us that need to know we are behind them. There may be a great explanation for my questions…i dont know because only BIASED fox news is reporting. All other news agencies are protecting the president. Media biased is always annoying, but when it comes to this situation, it turns my stomach.

    • FDB
      November 2, 2012 at 00:41

      We are finally getting some response from CBS and ABC. Great questions.

    • MargieJohnston
      November 3, 2012 at 07:40

      I agree with you. We need answers! Four Americans were murdered! I am discussed that it is not on every front page and every news station. If Obama had come out at the start and said HE made mistakes rather than trying to cover up, this would not be an issue, but he didn’t. Our National Security is at risk with a President that cannot be trusted. The Middle East is more unstable now then when he took office. It is sad that people cannot look past their political ideology to explore the truth, but part of that is the media not doing their job and reporting on the murder of four Americans.

  43. Steve Holder
    October 31, 2012 at 12:35

    Why were the CIA agents at the annex one mile from the compound under fire told to stand down two times, until they finally disobeyed orders and rescued consulate staff? You did not explain this in your article.

  44. Ralph Crown
    October 31, 2012 at 12:18

    All I can tell you, Mr. Hemsing, is that if Fox News says there’s a coverup, I want to see a smoking gun. So far nobody can even explain what’s being covered up. All I see is frantic, desperate Obama bashing. By the way, I’m a moderate, not right or left.

    • Jack_B
      November 1, 2012 at 12:16

      Moderate is just another way of saying you don’t care about the truth. I want to know what Obama knew, when did he know it, and what did he do about it. Where was our “Commander and Chief” when Americans were calling for help during a seven hour battle. Was he resting up for his next campaign trip when the “Red Phone” rang in the afternoon.

      • Ralph Crown
        November 1, 2012 at 14:09

        “Moderate is just another way of saying you don’t care about the truth.”

        Both parties have gotten so extreme that they don’t care about truth, only what can be spun to their advantage. They’re only interested in getting power and keeping power. Hence this smokescreen that the right is puffing up with all their might. Meanwhile there are real issues that need attention.

      • geririck
        November 4, 2012 at 13:13

        I am sure, Mr. Crown, that if one of these Murdered AMERICANS was you son you would consider this a “Real Issue”

    • pete
      November 1, 2012 at 14:50

      Mr. Crown, please try following the details of the story. It was an organized attack on the embassy. The “angry mob because of an internet video” theory has been proven wrong by emails sent from the embassy in Benghazi itself. They sent a report indicating they were being monitored just hours before the attack. The compound was under sustained attack for over four hours! The two ex-SEALS requested help three times, but no support was sent. However, a drone was dispatched to provide a live video feed to the situation room in the White House! So there were staff in the White House watching this ongoing attack for over four hours, but repeated requests for help were ignored or denied. THIS is the coverup! Why were the requests for help ignored or denied? Why did the administration announce that it was a spontaneous attack triggered by a video? These are lies! They were apprised of the lack of security months in advance. They were warned that Al-Qaida was operating in Benghazi. They were alerted to the fact that the safehouse was being monitored hours before the attack began! Four lives were lost! The last two held out for four hours hoping for a rescue!

      • Ralph Crown
        November 1, 2012 at 18:14

        So far all I see is guesswork based, not on evidence, but on a desperate attempt to smear this administration with anything that will stick. There’s a lot of “warning signs ignored” and “intelligence failures,” but you could say those things about any terrorist attack, including 9/11. That’s what they do. It’s like Whack-a-Mole, they generate buzz about an attack, they get us watching several places, and then they hit in a place we weren’t watching.

        Yes, Americans were killed. Blaming the president, though, is about as counterproductive as you can get.

        Still waiting for someone to explain why anyone should take Hannity seriously. For all I know, he made up this whole thing.

      • Pedro
        November 1, 2012 at 23:56

        Think. Did Obama want Americans to die? If, and this is a big if, Obama told folks to stand down he had reasons. Maybe he made a bad choice but the right seems tomimplynhe wanted bad things to happen. The right is conflating possibly bad decisions with sinister motives on purpose. This is a fabricated scandal. If Romney wins it will be studies for years.

    • FDB
      November 2, 2012 at 00:38

      Wait until this weekend. All hell is about to break loose. ABC and NBC even picked up on it today.

    • Keith
      November 2, 2012 at 02:28

      I identify myself as neither being left or right and do care about the truth. So you’re saying you want the same access to information that the president of the United States gets? The doesn’t seem very likely. The president has to make tough choices maybe not everyday but alot. Sometimes people get it wrong sometimes people get it right. We are all human and flawed. A little insulting to believe we are entitled to full disclosure on anything and everything that comes across the guys desk. This is a tragedy no doubt but a cover up? I’m not seeing it

  45. rob hemsing
    October 31, 2012 at 10:45

    you are very biased, i wish i could find reporting these days that at least tried to be fair. this story has been repressed, as an iraq vet i am very upset, not at the president but at the media. it is the job of the media to wring the truth out of our politicians, they have not done that and for that reason dishonor the americans who died in libya…shame, on them and on you. you accept denials of failure as if they prove failures didn’t happen. you wouldn’t have accepted those denials if bush made them. by the way i voted against bush…twice.

    • debra
      November 1, 2012 at 12:41

      If we can have all the details of the Bin Laden raid in twenty four hours, even national security secrets surrounding it, we should hold them to the same standard in Benghazi.

      • dan
        November 2, 2012 at 03:50

        Yes, Mr. Boardman does write excellent political satire. The anti-muslim video was crap and fairly unknown. To blame this on, WAIT~ a SEPT 11 attack is just so much additional sawdust trying to obfuscate a lie and coverup.

      • NB
        November 2, 2012 at 15:42


        We have all the details of the Bin Laden raid because WE PLANNED AND CARRIED OUT THE RAID!!!! OF COURSE we have all the details you genius!

    • Membery
      November 1, 2012 at 17:27

      You’ve been had. responsibility has been accepted. An investigation is under way. There is no cover up. There is only a news story about a coverup that doesn’t exist. No one else is reporting on it because there is nothing more to report on yet. Quit being so obtuse.

      • S
        November 1, 2012 at 20:56

        No, sir. To think you have to WAIT until AFTER an election for an INVESTIGATION means you have “been had.” We look at physical evidence to see if an actual cover up took place. Personal bias is only emotion getting in the way of objective fact. I am neither Democrat nor Republican, but even I can see 1+1 doesn’t equal 3. For one, this letter was JUST found “…We requested daily, twenty-four hour police protection at the front and rear of the U.S. mission as well as a roving patrol. In addition we requested the services of a police explosive detection dog. We were given assurances from the highest authorities in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that all due support would be provided for Ambassador Stevens’ visit to Benghazi. However, we are saddened to report that we have only received an occasional police presence at our main gate. Many hours pass when we have no police support at all.” This was written BEFORE the attack. Also in these documents were implications that Libyan security were in on the attack–and THIS TOO was sent to our government. Response…crickets…NEGLIGENT. Now media are reporting. Now there IS more to report.

        • Pedro
          November 1, 2012 at 23:52

          So what? What’s the scandal? That someone in our thousands of overseas installations was denied a request and now we know with hindsight that they could have used it? Do you want Obama going on apology your on FOX news for making a mistake? Ridiculous.

          • Patrick
            November 5, 2012 at 10:39

            He can go to the middle east and apologize for America.But we don’t deserve an apology when he lets american forces beg for help and sits on his hands.No don’t go on fox news but how about to the widow of Ambassador Stevens or Charles Woods homes.Why hasn’t he given an answer for why he did not send the added security!Now that ir ridiculous!

      • Curious
        November 2, 2012 at 00:25

        I don’t think I have been had. Seems four people were killed and our President can’t come up with a reasonable explanation as to exactly what happened. Of course I could always go to MNSBC for truthful reporting. Opp’s I forgot they just cover celebs now!

        • FDB
          November 2, 2012 at 00:37

          Except for Mathews. He is running on the Dem ticket. Cant you tell?

      • FDB
        November 2, 2012 at 00:36

        Then who told the CIA there to HOLD DOWN?

      • Patrick
        November 5, 2012 at 10:34

        Obtuse is refusing to see the obvious!Here I will use your own guys words so you might get it. basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation. So they decided to send 6 lightly armoured lightly armed intellegenc officers not security officers only 2 were security to an attack.Instead of sending marines from one of the two battle groups that operate in the area or to send fighter jets which are stationed in aviano and could be in lybian airspace in less then 20 minutes.And then to lie about the facts that they knew 2 hours after the attack began I .e the group took reponsibility for it.Not to mention the complete and utter failure the administration had when not giving the security the Ambassador had asked for weeks earlier.And you feel there is no news story here.That is the defintion of obtuse!!!!

Comments are closed.