You can bet that former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential nominee-in-waiting Hillary Clinton is wishing the same thing, except more so.
But that isn’t likely to happen thanks to damning information that has now come to light. And while our friends on the left here in Georgia and elsewhere love to try and spin Benghazi as a Fox News fantasy, the public has the New York Times to thank for the latest revelations about how minimizing the damage to Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign — not national security — was the top priority in the White House in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2012 tragedy that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead at the hands of Libyan terrorists.
The attack on the embassy there came against a backdrop of Team Obama’s repeated assertions that the war on terror was over and that we had won.
The attacks in Libya ran counter to that, so Obama and those around him quickly came up with an alternative version: that the supposedly spontaneous demonstrations and the attacks that followed were inspired by an amateurish, obscure Internet video, even though the evidence and common sense ran counter to that.
The Times reported late last month that Obama’s deputy national security advisor, Benjamin J. Rhodes, emailed U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on Sept. 14, 2012, just before she made a round of high-profile appearances on Sunday morning news-talk shows that day.
Rhodes urged Rice to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy” and that she should “reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.”
It’s the “smoking gun” that proves the administration misled the American public about the Benghazi incident right from the very start. It cynically considered that ensuring the re-election of Obama was more important than telling the public the truth.
The Times story has reawakened interest in the Benghazi affair and prompted House Speaker John Boehner to appoint a select committee — one composed of congressmen of each party — to finally investigate the events of the period in question — something he should have done long ago, but better late than never.
His selection of no-nonsense Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) also deserves praise. Perhaps Americans will finally get answers about what happened in Benghazi — about why the ambassador was there, and with almost no protection; about why U.S. forces in the Mediterranean failed to lift so much as a finger to try and rescue him and the others that night; and perhaps most important, what Obama’s whereabouts were on the night in question, what he was told of the attack, and when.
This is a scandal, and it is one of Obama’s own making — not one cooked up by Republicans or by Fox News. Obama and his team could have come clean with the public on the attacks when they happened. Instead, they stonewalled, prevaricated and concocted far-fetched versions of what they wish had happened.
But truth has a way of ultimately coming out — and we would encourage Rep. Gowdy’s select committee to spare no effort to ensure that’s what finally happens in this case.