Barack Obama | Hillary Clinton | Libya | News

President Obama Denounces Benghazi 'Side Show' Put on by 'Politically Motivated' Republicans: VIDEOS


At a press conference today, President Obama today denounced the "side show" being put on by Republicans over the attacks in Benghazi.

Said Obama:

Who executes some sort of cover-up or effort to tamp things down, for three days? So the whole thing defies logic and the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly has a lot to do with political motivations. We’ve had folks who have challenged Hillary Clinton’s integrity, Susan Rice’s integrity, Mike Mullen and Tom Pickering’s integrity. It’s a given that mine gets challenged by these same folks. they’ve used it for fundraising and frankly, you know, if anybody out there wants to actually focus on how we make sure something like this does not happen again? I am happy to get their advice and information and council.

House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) appeared on FOX News to claim that Obama covered up a terrorist attack by describing the incident as an "act of terror".

“The president sent a letter to the President of Libya where he didn’t call it a terrorist attack even when at the time the President of Libya was calling it pre-planned Sept. 11 terrorist attack. The words that are being used carefully — like you just said, ‘act of terror’ — an ‘act of terror’ is different than a ‘terrorist attack.’ The truth is, this was a terrorist attack, this had Al Qaeda at it.”

And Karl Rove's Crossroads PAC released what is being described as the first attack ad in the 2016 presidential race, which goes after Hillary Clinton.

The 90-second paid spot - manufactured by the Karl Rove-founded "super PAC" - was posted Friday online and ran Sunday morning on CBS during a broadcast of "Face the Nation." Previewing the ongoing saga that's likely to haunt Clinton's White House ambitions for the next three years, the ad implicates the former secretary of state - Democrats' top-billed contender to succeed President Obama - in the wildly varying accounts of how administration officials reacted last fall in the wake of the strike.

Watch all three clips, AFTER THE JUMP...

Darrell Issa:

Crossroads video attacking Clinton:

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. It seems more an act of war than a "terrorist" attack. People forget we have been at war with radical Islamic enemies for over ten years. The consulate was attacked by our enemies, hence "act of war".

    This wasn't an attack meant to strike fear in the general American population, which is what a "terrorist act" would have been designed to do.

    Posted by: Dastius Krazitauc | May 13, 2013 6:55:41 PM

  2. ARGH this pisses me off...

    Tens of thousands died for a false premise in Iraq, abetting Cheney's oil and Halliburton prospects.

    Paul Ryan was behind decreased funding for embassy/consulate security.

    Democrats need to point this out EVERYDAY to the Rethugs, who need to fix the cracks in the glass house about to shatter around them.

    Posted by: Leo | May 13, 2013 6:58:31 PM

  3. Im sooo TIRED of hearing about Benghaziiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!!!! ..maybe the GOP can find another "controversy"???

    Posted by: disgusted american | May 13, 2013 7:03:24 PM

  4. Semantics of 'act of terror' vs. 'terrorist attack'? On live television?

    I don't know whether to laugh or scream.
    We've officially reached a new low.

    Who the **** does this child think he's fooling? **** you Issa.

    Posted by: Leo | May 13, 2013 7:09:25 PM

  5. This story really needs to die, but it make the GOP look ever crazier. So it's awful that 4 people died. How many have died in our wars over the past 10 years? This "investigation" is why people hate Congress, with good reason.

    Posted by: Paul R | May 13, 2013 7:13:44 PM

  6. Let the Republicans keep flogging this dead horse, it will only help retain their ongoing irrelevance to the lives of most ordinary voters.

    Posted by: leprechaunvict | May 13, 2013 7:15:28 PM

  7. @disgusted american: if you really want something to be disgusted about, check out the recent New York Times editorial on the subject regarding the Republicans current interest about Benghazi: "It is a level of interest they did not show during George W. Bush's administration when there were 64 attacks on American diplomatic targets or in the years they spent cutting back diplomatic security budgets."

    Posted by: Bill | May 13, 2013 7:16:08 PM

  8. Was Boston an act of terror? Obama will avoid using the word at all costs. The second term always poses problems for incumbent presidents. The Republicans, although we question their methods, have single handedly rendered this president impotent. Now they're going after Hillary with unfounded attacks. It's regrettable how she sold out to Obama. She should have been the President in 2008.

    Posted by: GB | May 13, 2013 7:24:08 PM

  9. Never give any politician or political party your full support, ever.

    No matter who is in any office, politicians are always more focused on power than telling you the truth.

    So I suggest that just maybe, there is some fire coming from all of the smoke that surrounds this administration.

    The last thing this, or any any administration wants is folks from their own party questioning them. And when they see folks blindly supporting them no matter what - they take them for granted.

    It's OK to question those you support....

    Posted by: DVDINORL | May 13, 2013 7:27:45 PM

  10. How do Republicans dig themselves out of a hole? They jump in and start shoveling. haha.

    Posted by: PAUL B. | May 13, 2013 7:28:25 PM

  11. GB --

    How exactly is Obama avoiding the word?
    How is Obama impotent?
    How did Hillary "sell out" to Obama?

    Please refrain from empty platitudes and non sequiturs. Thanks.

    Posted by: Leo | May 13, 2013 7:28:50 PM

  12. @GB
    'single handedly' ???

    How about thru organized entrenched party filibustering, media assisted obstructionism? Faux News, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Chris Wallace, ALEC, Heritage included.

    Posted by: JONES | May 13, 2013 7:32:50 PM

  13. What exactly is the "cover-up" here?

    That they made a mistake on the culprit/purpose identification that they later admitted too?

    It's a tragedy, but the reaction's puzzling compared to essentially the nothingness following the countless atrocities of the Bush years.

    If someone did try to say something then, they'd be called "un-American".

    Posted by: Chris | May 13, 2013 7:41:09 PM

  14. Birth certificate / Benghazi
    Do you really think 'validity' plays a part in the mindset of these hacks?

    They really are terrified of Hillary for 2016.

    We call out our own all the time.
    LGBT, Dems, GOProud, Log Cabin. Nobody is immune.

    Posted by: JONES | May 13, 2013 7:55:42 PM

  15. I just watched Chris Matthews' Hardball where he was arguing with a Republican representative. They agreed that Susan Rice went on six Sunday talkshows and lied. Lied. That was Matthews' term. Matthews big contention was "well, WHO made her do that!!? You don't know!"

    It's a shame both parties have their political hacks willing to go stupid over anything.

    Susan Rice worked for Hillary who worked for Obama. But if it means saving their asses, just chop off her head. SHe's just a black woman. I'm sure she'll take the fall, when she was probably (and you f-cking know it) was just saying what she was TOLD to say.

    Posted by: MIke | May 13, 2013 8:25:36 PM

  16. Terror is reserved for Al Queda. Obama can't get legislation passed. Gun control as a glaring failure. The Republicans will make sure Benghazi follows Hillary to 2016. Leo, I'm not a Republican. The Obama years will fade in history as do all administrations. As will you.

    Posted by: GB | May 13, 2013 9:04:19 PM

  17. Terror is reserved for Al Queda. Obama can't get legislation passed. Gun control as a glaring failure. The Republicans will make sure Benghazi follows Hillary to 2016. Leo, I'm not a Republican. The Obama years will fade in history as do all administrations. As will you.

    Posted by: GB | May 13, 2013 9:04:19 PM

  18. Obama administration sucks at getting legislation passed, cabinets filled, judges approved. Part of that blame is Harry Reid. Part is the gerrymandered House.
    Part is on him. I don't always agree with his views (Gay marriage is a states rights issue, chief of staff William Daley) and I disagree with him out loud in the media where I can.

    And yet for all that Obama is ten times the president Bush was.

    If Hillary doesn't run in 2016 I want her to be on the SCOTUS.

    Posted by: JONES | May 13, 2013 9:18:58 PM

  19. Obama should spend more time being direct about what is going on, like he more or less did here. He just should have added that Darryl Issa and his crew oughta STFU and spend some time doing something useful.

    Posted by: emjayay | May 13, 2013 9:57:22 PM

  20. Well. Well. Well. Seems a LOT of people are being made aware of King Barack Hussein Obama's foibles and weakness, no matter how hard he tries to distract, finger-point and blame others. First, this whole pesky Benghazi thingy just won't quite go away, will it (STRANGE ain't it how it appears that he tried to "tamp it down" until after the election...)? THEN this ugly bit about the King's minions having the IRS target the King's supposed enemies, OUCH! And now, whew, his administration being linked to unprecedented spying on the Associated Press, right after "Mr Transparent" has a closed-door meeting with CERTAIN journalists, but not others? GOSH, "Mr Transparent" wouldn't try to manipulate the press, now would he? Wouldn't you just LOATHE being Jay Carney right now? Having to get up there time and time again to concoct some half brained fib? Don't you just KNOW he's dying to quit that lying reptile-in-chief?

    Posted by: UCRYBABIES | May 14, 2013 6:27:13 AM

  21. When a white was president nothing could get people to make impeachable offenses to stick and they got away with it. Now that a black is president repugs are using any and everything to make sure the 2nd term is a failure at the cost of a nation. When all is said and done and a white regains the white house watch how fast cooperation returns.

    Posted by: DC Arnold | May 14, 2013 9:41:47 AM

  22. Was it handled badly in Benghazi? Yes, of course. Is the government lying about what really happened, why and who effed up? Yes, absolutely. Did similar things happen in 'conservative' Republican administrations? Yes, of course. Does POTUS and Ms. Clinton deserve a pass? NO, THEY DO NOT.

    Posted by: ratbastard | May 14, 2013 10:33:48 AM

  23. @dcarnold,

    That's retarded and B.S. Why do some people absolutely refuse to ever criticize POTUS , presumably because he's a black [1/2 black, raised by the white side of his family] man and a 'progressive'?

    GW was crucified by the media, 'progressives' and late night comedy shows. Yes, he was a sh*tty POTUS and deserved it. Clinton was impeached by congress, Nixon was forced to resign, LBJ had to quit after 1 term. Obama is far from what he claimed he would be, too, and has done and continues to do many highly questionable things. But he can do no wrong among black Americans and 'queers'.

    Posted by: ratbastard | May 14, 2013 10:39:40 AM

Post a comment


« «Michele Bachmann Tweets That She's Still 'Proud' of the Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment She Pushed in Minnesota« «