At a campaign rally in Florida yesterday, President Obama made the following statement:
"There is no more serious issue in a presidential campaign than trust."
Unfortunately for Obama, today's news highlighted a couple of stories that raise questions about whether Obama can be trusted. After his Administration spent about two weeks suggesting that the September 11, 2012 attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans arose out of a protest over a video that insulted Islam, Reuters reported today that it obtained e-mails sent from the US Embassy in Tripoli while the attack in Benghazi was underway stating "that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was 'under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well." One terrorist group even claimed responsibility within a couple of hours of the attack, but withdrew that claim later. Among the recipients of the e-mails during the attack were the State Department and the White House.
Typical of the explanations for the protests in the Muslim world, including the attack in Benghazi, that started on September 11, 2012 (the eleventh anniversary of the worst terrorist attacks in history on US soil) was this statement at a press briefing by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on September 14:
"We also need to understand that this is a fairly volatile situation and it is in response not to United States policy, not to obviously the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video, a film that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting. That in no way justifies any violent reaction to it, but this is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy. This is in response to a video that is offensive to Muslims." (emphasis added)
Even UN Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on all Sunday morning talk shows on September 16 stating that the best information the Administration had suggested that the Benghazi attacks followed protests over the anti-Islam video. Only after a counter-terrorism official testified at a Congressional hearing about two weeks later stating that the Benghazi attack was an act of terrorism against the US mission did Jay Carney and other Administration officials admit that the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was an act of terrorism that was not preceded by an anti-video protest.
Also today it was revealed that the President gave an off-the-record interview to the Des Moines Register, the largest circulation newspaper in Iowa, that outlined Obama's plans for a second term. The content of what the President said about his plans does not seem to be very different from what has previously been generally known, but the newspaper's editor complained about the White House request to keep the interview from the public. After Governor Romney has been criticizing President Obama for not disclosing his plans for a second term, why would the President ask to keep such an interview off the record? That is the type of information that should be discussed in a Presidential campaign.
So on the day after Obama tells a campaign rally that "trust" is important in a Presidential campaign, the news media reports two examples of how the Obama Administration tries to hide information from the public.
Is this a President we can trust?
Update: Since writing this post, the following new information has been published which emphasizes further the points made and the consequences of the President's questionable actions described above:
FactCheck.org article entitled "Benghazi Timeline" (Oct. 26, 2012): This article sets forth a detailed timeline of statements made by Obama Administration officials from the time of the Benghazi attack until October 24, 2012. Analysis of this timeline led the FactCheck organization to come to this conclusion:
"We cannot say whether the administration was intentionally misleading the public. We cannot prove intent.... But, at this point, we do know that Obama and others in the administration were quick to cite the anti-Muslim video as the underlying cause for the attack in Benghazi that killed four U.S. diplomats, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. And they were slow to acknowledge it was a premeditated terrorist attack, and they downplayed reports that it might have been."
Des Moines Register endorsed Mitt Romney for President (Oct. 27, 2012): For the first time since 1972, the Des Moines Register endorsed a Republican candidate for President after Obama insisted on giving an off-the-record interview to the editorial staff. But it was the newspaper's analysis of the two candidates' past performance and their future plans that led to the endorsement of Romney:
"The nation has struggled to recover from recession for the past 40 months. Still, the economy is growing at an unacceptably anemic rate of around 2 percent a year and could slip back into recession depending on what happens in the European Union and China.
The workforce is still 4.5 million jobs short of the nearly 9 million that were lost in the recession. Longer term, looming deficits driven by Social Security and Medicare pose the single greatest threats to the nation’s economic security.
The president’s best efforts to resuscitate the stumbling economy have fallen short. Nothing indicates it would change with a second term in the White House.....
Barack Obama rocketed to the presidency from relative obscurity with a theme of hope and change. A different reality has marked his presidency. His record on the economy the past four years does not suggest he would lead in the direction the nation must go in the next four years.
Voters should give Mitt Romney a chance to correct the nation’s fiscal course and to implode the partisan gridlock that has shackled Washington and the rest of America..." Sphere: Related Content
