When did President Obama refer to the Benghazi attack as an “act of terror”? According to Candy Crowley and White House spin artists, it was in his Rose Garden speech on September 12. But as I wrote last month, the reference was ambiguous at best. It was never clear whether Obama was referring to the Benghazi attack, the 9/11 attacks, the unrest across the Muslim world, or just terrorism in general.
However, at Foreign Policy, Josh Rogin dug up a transcript of Obama referring to the Benghazi attack more directly as an “act of terror” on Sept. 13 — at a campaign event in Colorado:
President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney sparred over whether Obama called the Sept. 11 murder of four Americans in Benghazi a “terrorist” attack. In fact, Obama did refer to the attack as “an act of terror,” but he did not do so directly in the Rose Garden the next day.
Romney said during Tuesday night’s debate that it took 14 days for Obama to acknowledge that the attack was a terrorist attack, while Obama and CNN’s Candy Crowley agreed that Obama said so Sept. 12 in remarks in the Rose Garden. In those remarks, journalists noticed, he did not explicitly refer to the Benghazi attack as an “act of terror,” though he did use those words. …
But on Sept. 13, at a campaign event in Colorado, Obama again used the phrase “act of terror” and this time tied it directly to the Benghazi attack.
“So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished.
The bottom line? CNN’s Candy Crowley seriously erred in “correcting” Romney on that point, since Obama’s comment in the Rose Garden speech was debatable from the context. However, if the president now wants to clarify that he was referring to the Benghazi attack as an “act of terror” on September 12, let’s take him at his word.
Of course, clearing that up raises more questions than answers.
For one, why, if the president immediately knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack, did he fly to Las Vegas for a fundraiser the very next day? Why didn’t he inform UN Ambassador Susan Rice before she went on the Sunday shows and blamed the attack on the anti-Islam film? Why didn’t he tell his own spokesperson, who insisted days later that “We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack…And while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of, or to U.S. policy”? Why did the president himself go on “The View” nearly two weeks later, and — when asked point-blank whether Benghazi was a terrorist attack — say that “well, we’re still doing an investigation” and “it wasn’t just a mob action”?
More importantly, if President Obama believed it was a terrorist attack from Day One, why didn’t he share this with the American public? Why would he make a vague one-line reference to it in a single campaign stump speech in Ohio, but not give a full address to the American people, outlining what he knew?
What I want to know is (a) who are the schmucks in the RNC who agreed to have four partisan leftists as debate moderators and (b) how we can get rid of them.
You're absolutely correct on (a). On (b), simply demand appropriate 'moderators' or opt out. Having leftist partisans as moderators should make it clear to the electorate why debates are not possible. More aggressiveness on Libya is needed. It certainly has been a lying administration that makes Nixon and Mr. Clinton look much better. Nixon's lies led to his virtual impeachment, a mere step away, and resignation. Impeachment efforts should be started even before the election. It should impact Obama and his henchmen (and women) negatively.
Constant references to the video by Obama and his administration for the first week after the Benghazi attack, and on numerous occasions even later, cancel out any claim that the Administrating acknowledged that it was a terrorist attack for at least first week, even though that was the only possible explanation of the Benghazi attack from the get-go.
I'm amused by the "glass barrier" even among conservatives protecting your Messiah Prez. Thus far it's only the RNC boss, Priebus, who's said, bluntly and accurately, that the Big O lied. One would think that after years of gratuitously trashing President Bush, the word "liar" would slip off more smoothly, especially when warranted, what? Go on, folks, take a deep breath and try it. n nO, and imagine if you will anyone else getting away with hiding behind the skirts of his Secretary of State and squeeling "say it louder, Candy!" in front of the whole nation.
There is a very simple and devastating question that Romney can (and should) ask the President at the next debate on this subject: Mr. President, did you lie to the American people and to the U.N. or are you merely incompetent? n nIt's one or the other, folks. He has gone on record now as saying that he called the Benghazi attack a terror attack on 9/12 (and Josh Rogan claims at a campaign stop in Colorado on 9/13). But then he goes on "The View" and on (Leno?) and again at the U.N. and talks about the attack as resulting from some heretofore unknown YouTube video. So which is it, Obama? Were you trying to mislead the world with your "horrible video" comments that you knew to be untrue or are you really just THAT stupid or lazy that you cannot comprehend your own intel briefs? n nOne last question, Mr. President: when are you going to apologize to the maker of that Mohammed video whom you have now put in the crosshairs of every Islamist?
" I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished." — Obama n nI think that this statement is specific enough in context to conclude that Obama knew that it was a terrorist attack in Benghazi during or shortly after the event. So if he knew on Sept 12 [yes, on the 12th too] and on Sept 13 that it was "an act of terror," then why did Susan Rice and Jay Carney pretend a few days later that it was really a spontaneous reaction to the Muhammad video???
Obama's answer, that he called the Benghazi attack "terror", reminded me of Richard Nixon's claim that he had called the Watergate cover-up "wrong". In one of the oval office tapes, he used the word, but he was referring to the procedure for his operatives to get the money they thought they needed to pay off Howard Hunt so he would not snitch
Obama's answer, that he called the Benghazi attack "terror", reminded me of Richard Nixon's claim that he had called the Watergate cover-up "wrong". In one of the oval office tapes, he used the word, but he was referring to the procedure for his operatives to get the money they thought they needed to pay off Howard Hunt so he would not snitch; not that the cover-up itself was wrong!
The Administration position was never that the attack wasn't terrorism (though they certainly deemphasized that aspect of it), but that it was opportunistic and not preplanned. It was Romney's debate-prep fail that he conflated Obama's failure to prepare for or respond to the Bengazi attack with a failure to call it terrorism. -I- knew before the debate that Obama had called it terrorism, and it was and is my impression that he had issued a finding to that effect in order to activate the relevant law. Why didn't Romney know this? n nThe Colorado quote is, iirc, pretty much exactly the words in the Rose Garden that Goodman still obstinately denies clearly identified the attack as terrorism — it's just a slightly abridged version. She's one of many partisans that follwed Romney into the weeds in an attempt to defend the indefensible rather than concentrate on a winning position. But, then, Romney was her guy from way back. She needs to take ownership of having helped choose a loser.