Why Benghazi is a Blow to Obama and Clinton

Posted by on May 10, 2013 at 8:05 am

Both parties are wrong about Benghazi. Existing evidence does not point to a far-reaching cover-up on the scale of Watergate, as Republicans want you to believe. But it is not, as the White House claims, nothing.

The administration’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on U.S. installations in eastern Libya was inaccurate, irresponsible and shrouded by campaign-style spin. It belied President Obama’s oft-broken promise to run a transparent government.

If nothing else, Benghazi is a blow to the credibility of the president and his potential successor, then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. This could be big.

Credibility is Obama’s strong suit, a key reason why his personal approval ratings continue to buoy soft job approval scores.  He can’t afford to lose that trust.

Credibility is Clinton’s vulnerability, dating to the unjustified financial accusations that triggered the Whitewater investigation. Doubts persisted about her veracity and authenticity throughout the 2008 presidential campaign.

Full story.

2 Responses to “Why Benghazi is a Blow to Obama and Clinton”

  1. It's those damn kids! on 10/10/13 at 4:38 pm

    Well, it really is a cover up of the realities Obama lies continually about to extend his false narrative about Al Queda, the economy, and the billions he has given away to cronies.

    To that point, it is far worse and evidenced by the body countymore deadly than Watergate.

  2. It's those damn kids! on 10/10/13 at 4:43 pm

    This blurb really ticks me off. The WH lied absolutely to the public and is trying successfully to cover their tracks. Not to mention the far reaching subversion against ethical ranks in the administration and protecting US citizens in the country’s service abroad (please see picture of dead ambassador).

    It is BS minimization and weak thinking like this leading to Romney’s inabilit to stand up and approach it during the election.

    Weak sauce.