Benghazigate: Obama Administration Cover-up to Rival Watergate?

Benghazigate: Obama Administration Cover-up to Rival Watergate? October 16, 2012

More than a month after terrorists attacked the US embassy in Lybia on Sept. 11 and assassinated the US ambassador and three others, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton now takes full responsibility for the security failures that permitted the attack.  But the questions remain as to why a YouTube video was blamed for an obvious terror attack.

To date no one  that I have found has taken blame for the Obama Administration — and the President himself — calling the attacks random and blaming them on a YouTube video for more than a week after the attack occurred. Even his speech to the United Nations — an event that would seem to demand judicious screening of content — blamed the attack on an American exercising his freedom of speech. Evidence now clearly shows no connection with the video and that the attack was a coordinated and planned terrorist attack on the anniversary of Sept. 11.

But will Obama’s well-documented hubris permit him to admit he was wrong? And how could he and his team have gotten it so terribly wrong? The incident has left many wondering where, in fact, does the Obama administration get its information?

These would all be excellent questions for tonight’s presidential debate. Hugh Hewitt makes the case for why Benghazigate could justify using all the questions tonight to expose what is looking like a cover-up. I’m not holding my breath considering the time that the Fast and Furious cover-up has gotten thus far.

Did Clinton jump ship or get tossed under the bus?

Knowing the bad blood between the Obamas and Clintons, I view Hillary’s admission with a suspicious eye. Some say she took a dive for Obama, but I just don’t see here going there. Not for him. I’m looking for Bill to emerge soon to downplay her admission and shift the blame with creative hints to Obama.

Could she be undermining the President by taking the mantle of blame first so as to appear the more courageous leader? Just a thought. Or is she taking the fall for the lesser of two evils (and taking the only lifeboat off a sinking ship?) and leaving the fallout of a cover-up to someone higher up the chain? Let’s face it, it will be hard now for the President to take full responsibility when someone else already has done so.

Dare we compare?

In the aftermath of the Iraqi liberation, then President Bush took much grief for intelligence failings that inflated the presence of weapons of mass destruction. It would only seem fair now that our current President be held responsible for intelligence failings in his administration. In this instance, either President Obama knew the attack was a terrorist attack and pretended it was not for several weeks, or he didn’t know a terror attack had occurred on the anniversary of September 11 and truly believed that a YouTube video caused the incident.

One option screams cover-up, the other incompetence.

Truth matters.

As a Christ-follower (and, yes, I know some of you find it incongruous that my faith applies to all of life — just as Vice-President Biden claims his does), I want the truth. It is the truth that brings freedom. Cover-up and lies — by either party or any person — only yields more confusion. It’s the lies that end up doing the most damage. We need look no further than Watergate to verify that claim. Nixon would likely not have had to resign if he had leveled with the American people as Reagan did, though somewhat belatedly, with Iran-Contra.

Leadership matters.

All leaders make mistakes. In any organization, mistakes are bound to happen when people are involved because we are all fallen, sinful beings. Think of when Moses took full blame for the sins of the Israelites, crying out for God to destroy him instead of the fallen people. The Biblical pattern of leadership is not denial and blame-shifting, but confession and forgiveness. It will now be difficult for Obama to take responsibility since Clinton has already acted, by most accounts, as a more principled leader in his place.

Here’s the bottom line: terrorists attacked a US consulate and assassinated one of our ambassadors on Sept. 11. President Obama claims he did not know that’s what it was for at least a week after it happened.

I can see why so many people might find that fact difficult to believe of the leader of the free world in the middle of the information age.

The politically smart and Biblical thing for Obama to do would be to make a statement tonight laying out what he knew and when he knew it. It would disarm Romney’s attacks and re-humanize the President to the American people. Then sit down with Chris Wallace and do a thorough Q & A. I’m not a fan, so I’m not thrilled about suggesting it, but it would be the smart thing to do.

As the waters rise and waves lap at the doors of Benghazigate, I’m not holding my breath. Then again, maybe someone should.

Browse Our Archives