Green Room

Confirmed: Obama made no calls, took no action during Benghazi attack

posted at 3:07 pm on February 15, 2013 by

Last week, Lindsey Graham’s unrelenting line of questioning compelled Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to confirm under oath that not a single military asset was deployed to help rescue besieged US personnel in the course of a terrorist raid in Benghazi, Libya.  The September 11, 2012 attack lasted nearly eight hours, during which four Americans died, including our sitting ambassador.  Multiple requests for increased security in the weeks and months leading up to the massacre were denied.  Urgent warnings that the Benghazi consulate couldn’t withstand a sustained attack were ignored.  (The compound didn’t even meet minimum security standards for American diplomatic outposts anywhere in the world).  An eleventh-hour cable accurately predicting an imminent attack resulted in…nothing.  Explicit calls for help during the prolonged raid went unheeded amidst a flurry of “stand down” orders.  One of many lingering questions regarding this outrageous episode is what our Commander-in-Chief was doing throughout the ordeal, during which America’s real-time response was evidently paralyzed by chaotic indecision.  Yesterday, the White House finally shed some light on this question by releasing a letter describing what President Obama was not doing as American diplomats’ lives hung in the balance:

President Obama didn’t make any phone calls the night of the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House said in a letter to Congress released Thursday. “During the entire attack, the president of the United States never picked up the phone to put the weight of his office in the mix,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, who had held up Mr. Obama’s defense secretary nominee to force the information to be released. Mr. Graham said that if Mr. Obama had picked up the phone, at least two of the Americans killed in the attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi might still be alive because he might have been able to push U.S. aid to get to the scene faster. The White House has said Mr. Obama was kept up to date on the attack by his staff, though after being alerted to the attack in a pre-scheduled afternoon meeting he never spoke again with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin E. Dempsey or then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And there’s this, which (a) re-confirms what we’ve known for some time, and (b) begs the question of why the administration approved false talking points for public consumption:

Mr. Panetta told Congress last week that he knew immediately the attacks were a terrorist assault, though the White House downplayed that notion in the first five days after the attack.

Who conceived of the false talking points and why were they employed at all, let alone for days?  Why were requests for security upgrades repeatedly turned down, especially since our intelligence knew of at least ten active jihadi groups operating in Benghazi at the time?  If the Commander-in-Chief wasn’t in contact with his top people throughout the raid, and if he wasn’t ordering the full might of the United States military into motion to protect the lives of our diplomats (which he’s claimed is his “number one” priority), what was he doing over those eight hours?  Our only clue is a campaign rally in Las Vegas the next day, which the president attended as scheduled — having blown off another daily intelligence briefing, which was a habitual occurrence.  That these questions have not been sufficiently answered — or even asked, in some cases — is less a product of masterful White House stonewalling as it is a profoundly vexing indictment of our media.

But hey, “what difference does it make?

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

One of the problems the country faces is that 51% of the voting populace would rather watch “Dancing with the Stars” than an hour long special on Benghazi.

BigAlSouth on February 16, 2013 at 5:14 AM

Dereliction of duty.

rbj on February 15, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Yes, but in the eyes of the progressive it’s just deniability of occurence. Crime and politics to them, the truth is always liquid.
The worse it sounded, the quicker the boy king went to bed. Backing away with his hands in the air thinking, “Ooh Stephens, sucks to be you. I gotta leave for Vegas early tomorrow. Nite, nite.”
Now I see that as dereliction of duty, but no. He’s the shepherd to the sheeple. Nite, nite everyone.

onomo on February 16, 2013 at 7:12 AM

The only thing more disgusting and disgraceful than Obama’s complete dereliction of duty in the Benghazi attacks is the MSM’s refusal to report on it.

If a Republican president had behaved this incompetently in office, there would be non-stop stories on it, and continual calls for his impeachment.

AZCoyote on February 16, 2013 at 7:50 AM

It wasn’t chaotic indifference, it was an election coming up. If he had made a decision and it turned out badly, it could have been a tipping point for his reelection which could turn out badly for him. The 4 Americans who were killed were sacrificed on the alter of the election. This wasn’t inaction on the regime’s part, it was malfeasance of office.

Kissmygrits on February 16, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Anybody want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn?

bgibbs1000 on February 16, 2013 at 10:20 AM

The problem is more than just a see-no-evil media who is in the tank for Obama. It is Political Correctness that has a slight majority of Americans in total denial that this minority president is not only a total incompetent but a lying, calculating, psychopathic huckster as well.

You reap what you sew. For decades left-leaning educators have inculcated in the simple-minded and naive that no black is really responsible for anything they do because of the legacy of slavery brought about by evil whites (conveniently forgetting that many of the slave raiders were themselves black and almost all the slave traders were Arabic. Also forgetting that Lincoln and the Republican Party-were the ONLY ones to want to free the slaves. Southern DEMOCRATS were the slave owners and northern DEMOCRATS would rather let the south go than fight the war-giving the south a victory by default.)

On the surface it looks impressive. A black president and a black attorney general. Multimillionaire black athletes, singers and movie stars. A plethora of black city mayors. The truth is more savage. Crammed into ghettos with little hope of getting out of welfare dependency-and with drug addiction and alcoholism endemic and a fatherless rate of nearly 80%- an average black’s chances of success have actually DECLINED in the past 20 years. Family structure with a ‘padre de familia’ (as Hispanics say) is the cohesive cement the blacks lack. In fact it could be argued that welfare dependency is the new slavery.And what exactly is going to happen when the $7 billion a day Federal debt accumulation chicken comes home to roost and the Federal teat for welfare payments totally dries up? Mass riots? A race war?

MaiDee on February 16, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Any real leader in this situation would be all over it like white on rice. Anything less is clear dereliction of duty.

Funny how neither Obama nor Hillary answered the 0300 call.

NavyMustang on February 16, 2013 at 1:08 PM

this minority president is not only a total incompetent but a lying, calculating, psychopathic huckster as well.
MaiDee on February 16, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Great description!! I’ve been trying my best to label this fool……I’ll use that if you don’t mind.

avagreen on February 16, 2013 at 1:57 PM

Any real leader ….

The answer is obvious.

avagreen on February 16, 2013 at 1:57 PM

avagreen be my guest!!!!!

MaiDee on February 16, 2013 at 2:40 PM

The Proppressives keep on assaulting innocent gun owners with the Alinskyite slander that they have “Blood on their hands” for tragedies unconnected to their actions.

Wouldn’t that phrase be more aptly applied to the Dear Liar and his Dereliction of duty with this and his other scandals?

Can it not be said that Obama has Blood on his hands?

Galt2009 on February 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Galt2009 on February 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM

.
.
………….(O.O)

Ya think?

avagreen on February 16, 2013 at 4:31 PM

Despicable. Loathsome.

Makes me angry and sad at the same time.

ButterflyDragon on February 15, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Agree. But also confused. Maybe I am naive, dense, uninformed. OK fine, flame me if you must.
But WHY?!?! Why did they refuse to defend, refuse to act, refuse to respond?

kooly on February 16, 2013 at 5:12 PM

If a Republican president had behaved this incompetently in office, there would be non-stop stories on it, and continual calls for his impeachment.

AZCoyote on February 16, 2013 at 7:50 AM

You are 100% spot on.

dogsoldier on February 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM

Agree. But also confused. Maybe I am naive, dense, uninformed. OK fine, flame me if you must.
But WHY?!?! Why did they refuse to defend, refuse to act, refuse to respond?

kooly on February 16, 2013 at 5:12 PM

Fear uncertainty doubt incompetence stupidity denial. Did I mention incompetence?

dogsoldier on February 16, 2013 at 5:40 PM

I had a luncheon meeting today with some low information (yet all college-educated older) folks who claimed that it was right to involve ourselves with ousting Qaddafi from Libya since we had no troops on the ground. When I pointed out that we had spend scads of money on firepower in a mission that had nothing to do with our national security and that we unleashed even more AlQaeda-affiliated jihadists, they looked at me as if I were making up those aspects.

When I followed up with the abject criminality of allowing the Benghazi murders of our ambassador by this administration, these fellow-dining idiots had no idea what I was talking about.

The discussion began with laments about how “terrible” it was that Hagel was being thwarted from assuming the SecDef position.

I don’t think that I will be engaging much in political discussions with these people in the future. They are hopeless.

onlineanalyst on February 16, 2013 at 6:39 PM

dogsoldier on February 16, 2013 at 5:40 PM

Total immorality.

avagreen on February 16, 2013 at 6:40 PM

onlineanalyst on February 16, 2013 at 6:39 PM

*facepalm*

avagreen on February 16, 2013 at 6:42 PM

If course he is. The constitution doesn’t define what a natural born citizen is. Besides the libtards insist it’s a living breathing document. So, the definition can mean anything we want it to. Right?

Red Creek on February 17, 2013 at 7:01 AM

It sure would have been nice to know this before the election… but that’s too much to ask from the pliant lefty media.

http://www.imperfectamerica.com

imperfectamerica on February 17, 2013 at 8:04 AM

Obama made no calls, took no action during Benghazi attack

Well, let’s not forget. Obama did speak on the phone with Netanyahu for
an hour that night. There was that pesky story at the time that the White House had turned down a request by the prime minister to meet with Obama while he was visiting the U.S. (to attend the U.N. General Assembly)…which needed to be responded to.

So there was immediate concern shown on the night of Sept. 11,
….for the Jewish vote.

lynncgb on February 17, 2013 at 9:27 AM

We have a deranged man in the WH. Much like the King George that went insane (for a while) in 1788, but King George regained HIS sanity.

avagreen on February 17, 2013 at 10:35 AM

onlineanalyst on February 16, 2013 at 6:39 PM

There was a story earlier today about how the Libyan government just arrested several Christian missionaries, on the grounds that their Christianity makes them a threat to Libya’s “national security,” since Libya is “100% Muslim,” according to its new government.

Billions of dollars of our money (not to mention risking the lives of our pilots) went to support putting this government into power. I wonder if your luncheon colleagues would think that was a “smart” use of our power?

AZCoyote on February 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2