Obama gets lucky on Benghazi conspiracy
Yael T. AbouhalkahThe Benghazi controversy won’t go away, courtesy of Fox News but also because some Americans - including me - want more definitive answers on what happened there.
But unless you’re watching Fox News or reading a lot of conservative-based websites, you aren’t hearing much about the possibility that President Barack Obama’s administration either a) lied about what happened at Benghazi or b) really messed up in protecting the compound in the first place.
Here are two facts that Republicans and Democrats on both sides of this matter should agree on:
- Hurricane Sandy has pushed Benghazi not just off the front page but clear to the back of the newspapers and of newscasts.
Obama got lucky - receiving a tremendous public relations gift with the superstorm and its aftermath, in which his administration has done a good job responding to a national emergency.
Notice, too, that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney isn’t using the Benghazi mess much to attack Obama. He knows it’s not on the minds of many Americans down the stretch run. So if the actual candidate isn’t pumping up a notion of a conspiracy in Benghazi, the story lacks the kind of “legs” that would get it more attention with the media.
- The Benghazi controversy may have Republicans up in arms, but they have to admit that - based on how past presidential administrations of both parties have bungled international affairs - it likely would not have mattered whose watch the attack occurred on.
In other words, I’m sure a Republican president would be assuring the American people (just as Obama is doing) that he had done everything he could to protect our embassies and their people abroad. I’m sure a Republican president would not be forthcoming in taking much of the blame when things went wrong overseas.
In fact, the American people saw exactly what I’m talking about a decade ago, when George W. Bush rallied the world to attack Iraq and a trillion-dollar war resulted. As we later found out, Bush and his hawkish advisers were factually wrong and had little idea what they were doing by taking on the Iraq (and later) Afghanistan wars.
The media - all of it - will continue to pull at the threads of the Benghazi affair long after Tuesday’s election results are final.
They may find nothing of any great substance there, despite all the “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” reporting right now of Fox News.
Or the media may find that the Obama administration, perhaps the president himself, lied to the American people about Benghazi. If Obama is re-elected Tuesday, that would be a bombshell.
If Mitt Romney becomes president, and Obama badly handled Benghazi, that fact will besmirch Obama’s reputation for years to come.
Anita Carr
6 months, 2 weeks agoIf you’re watching FOX News, you’d be better off reading fairy tales to get your up-to-date political news. I didn’t even bother reading the rest of this story. It lost all credibility when it suggested I watch FOX News.
Steven Fetter
66223
6 months, 2 weeks agoIf Bush bowed to the Saudi oil dictator, ran guns to Mexican drug lords, bombed oil producing Libya (but not resource poor Syria), or declined security for the Ambassador subsequently killed on 9/11, there would be non stop, 24-7 discussion on the networks.
Cindi Sheehan merited lead coverage as she “reflected discontentment with failed Bush policies”. Patricia Smith, mother of slain department employee Sean Smith blaming President Obama; stuff happens.
The coverage is what it is. Biased. I can deal with it. As a highly trained journalist, can you?
Mark Hastert
6 months, 2 weeks agoThe Fox stories don’t jibe with the story written by a McClatchy reporter and published in the Star on Saturday.
JR Beillenhouser
6 months, 2 weeks agoThanks for being so concerned with the victims of Benghazi, Yael. Pretty pathetic that this is the first article by the lib members of the board. And when it does finally come it is in the context on how Fox news is biased and how it is for Obama.
Pathetic.
Oh and you might want to look at this.
http://www.journalism.org/analysisreport/winningmediacampaign2012
Pew Research found MSNBC to be more biased than Fox news. Surprise.
Reginald Thornton
6 months, 2 weeks agoUnintentionally of course, Yael explains very well why Republicans are wrong to focus on Banghzi ineptitude and coverup. Only Republicans care about it. Yael and his buddies care only about its political implications and therefore try to discredit the source (Fox).
They keep claiming Bin Laden is dead and Al Quaida is on the wrong, because they have no response to the actual allegations against mismanaging Benghazi before, during and after. It is the grownup version of sticking fingers in their ears and making loud noises both to avoid hearing the charges and to prevent others from hearing them too.
This administration reflexively touted details of Bin Laden’s death despite their loose lips putting Seal Team 6 and a Pakistani doctor/snitch in harm’s way. Does anyone mature and paying attention seriously think they would be silent during a two-month internal investigation if it did not paint a horrible picture of them?
Bin Laden is dead, and so is Amabassador Stevens. Al Quaida is on the run, to Benghazi for now. And “leading from behind” in Libya didn’t take long to prove disastrous.
Brandon Lewis
6 months, 2 weeks agoFox News? Seriously!?
William R. Nelson
6 months, 2 weeks agoThe title of your post, Mr. Abouhalkah, speaks volumes and dovetails with this:
Reginald Thornton
6 months, 2 weeks agoYael inadvertently makes three more revelations. First, if “Obama got lucky” by hurricane Sandy moving Benghzi coverage further out of view, then he acknowledges it would have a damaging substance if given sunlight. Second, even thinking that “Obama got lucky” with hurricane Sandy is disgusting beyond the pale considering that over 100 people suffered the greatest misfortune in the process. So, third, that about sums up Obama’s presidency, in that we must suffer for his agenda to succeed.
Reginald Thornton
6 months, 2 weeks agoFox reporting (yes, Fox!) that CBS has quietly released missing footage of their 60-Minutes interview with Obama- after his Rose Garden address- in which he still doesn’t call the attack terrorism.
Looks like Romney was right, Candy Crowley was wrong, and Obama….. well.
Also, a timely example why MSM is no place to look for a story. But, hey, tell us more about Romney’s audited tax returns, and how he travels with his pet dog.
George Hunsucker
Northland
6 months, 2 weeks ago“The Benghazi controversy may have Republicans up in arms, but they have to admit that - based on how past presidential administrations of both parties have bungled international affairs - it likely would not have mattered whose watch the attack occurred on.” Right on YT…
Name the American ambassador killed under a Republican administration? This was totally expected given the big 0’s perchant for bowing and total ineptitude in foreign affairs… Oh well, we only have 2 more months of this BS to put up with….
Matt Henry
6 months, 2 weeks agoI can’t believe what I am reading. Well, yes I can. Unfortunately.
This is not smoke anymore. There is actual fire. There is hard evidence that the White House knew very good and well what was happening during this attack and that for two weeks afterward they went out with a fake narrative about it, trying to deflect criticism before an election. Considering this, there are only two options; Obama is incompetent and doesn’t know what his subordinates are doing, or he is corrupt. This is pretty much undeniable at this point. Nixon didn’t know about the Watergate break-in until later; it was the cover-up that got him, and at this point a cover-up starting somewhere in the executive branch is undeniable.
Remember the Scooter Libby / Valerie Plame non-scandal? Remember how it turns out Libby and Cheney and Rove and Bush’s office never had anything to do with any leak, it was Dick Armitage out of Colin Powell’s office? Remember how we were subjected to weeks and months about this because the target of the investigation were major players in a Republican administration? And that isn’t HALF the scandal that Benghazi is.
How can ideology so blind YTA to the truth? I know this is an “opinion” piece, but don’t his journalistic roots have any depth at all? Is he so married to his “progressivism” that he is willing to overlook such blatant corruption in the executive branch?
George Hunsucker
Northland
6 months, 2 weeks agoDon’t criticize the big 0, or, as big joe said, “they gonna put you all in chains”…
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/wow-what-a-freak-show-heckler-totally-hijacks-obama-rally-gets-dragged-out-by-police-video/
George Hunsucker
Northland
6 months, 2 weeks agothe choice for voters, especially women who have been hurt by the big 0’s policies…
http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/11/04/small-business-owner-ill-invest-in-100-new-jobs-if-romney-wins/
Or, if you want 4 more years of this crap, vote for jimmy II
Anonymous
6 months, 2 weeks agoYael - Missouri should be embarrassed by having the KC Star in the state.
George Hunsucker
Northland
6 months, 2 weeks agoToo bad Powell did not have the courage to “let him go” for non-performance….
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/nov/04/wilder-chooses-not-endorse-president-ar-2335331/
Reginald Thornton
6 months, 2 weeks agoThe “conclusions” don’t surprise me at all. But it is shocking that hours after several of us pointed it out, Yael hasn’t yet apologized for marginalizing the 100+ lost lives in Sandy as being Obama’s good luck. Maybe that’s why the conclusions he arrives at don’t surprise me.
Christine Taylor-Butler
6 months, 1 week agoI’m curious as to how the opponents label this as solely Obama’s failure when the House Republicans cut the budget for embassy security. And we lost a lot more Embassy personnel and suffered more attacks under George Bush. Must be why the latter is silent.
All deaths should be mourned, not used as political footballs. The truth is - it’s a dangerous area and we need to beef up security so our men and women can do their jobs and return home safely to their families. Neither party has done a good job of protecting our people overseas. So there’s plenty of blame to go around.
Reginald Thornton
6 months, 1 week agoOh, Christine, I can answer your question which you say you are curious about. In fact, Republicans PROPOSED cutting State’s budget by $300 million. It was NEVER cut. You are parroting (intentionally or not) the talking point Obama’s folks put out to spin their utter failure as not being their fault. I think it only works on the simple-minded that don’t do their own research. Has that been your experience with it?
Susan Marx
6 months, 1 week agohttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/11/06/whos-to-blame-for-benghazi-a-laymans-guide/
Reginald Thornton
6 months, 1 week agoDid you even read that article, Susan? It blames Ambassador Stevens for staying in town to do his job. It blames the February 17 Brigade for not honoring a protection agreement. It blames reduced funding THAT WAS PROPOSED BUT NEVER HAPPENED. It blames the local CIA force for responding slowly without ever mentioning they were told to stand down. It blames Hillary, Petraeus, but one name is missing. The one guy whose priorities are reflected throughout the organization’s effectiveness. White. Wash. Think for yourself.