Parsing Obama's Benghazi Lie: He Blamed The Video Not Terror

Many pixels are being tortured today on one of the most egregious exchanges in last night’s debate. The subject is the rather shameless and shameful lie told by Barack Obama on his deceitful conduct over these many days after the killing of our ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens. While CNN moderator Candy Crowley’s conduct was both egregious and shameful by acting as a willing accomplice to the lie, that is as surprising as discovering the sun rising in the east. She is, after all, the same person who deemed the Romney-Ryan ticket a “death wish.”


First, the controversy. When challenged on response to the sacking of our embassy and his reluctance to call it terrorism, this was Obama’s response.

The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror. And I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime. And then a few days later, I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force Base and grieving with the families.

What did Obama actually say in the Rose Garden.

First, he directly attributed the attack on the Benghazi to the ludicrous Mohammed video story, part of the now discredited Dezinformatsia campaign conceived by the White House to cover their complicity in this tragedy. You can watch his rambling, inane, and disjointed explanation in the video, but according to the transcript:


The United States condemns, in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We’re working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world.

And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people. Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.

We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None.


Directly he attributes the attack to the denigration of religion and senseless violence. Does he mention terror? Yes. Again, from the transcript.

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourn with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those, both civilian and military, who represent us around the globe.

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

But as theologians say in regards to Biblical exegesis, “text without context is a pretext.” And the left’s used of the sole mention of “acts of terror” in defense of Obama’s statement is just that, a pretext.


Saying this statement applies to Benghazi in any way is incomprehensible in light of what Obama was saying preceding it. Using the left’s logic, Obama could claim that he said Benghazi was a significant as 9/11/2001 (I don’t think we can ever refer to just 9/11 again after this year) because he does mention 9/11.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos