A senior Army strategist believes the reaction to the evidence
that the 9/11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was an act
of terrorism shows that senior members of President Barack Obama's
administration are clearly trying to avoid political damage.
A government document has revealed that the White House was told
that a terrorist group claimed responsibility just two hours
after the U.S. Consulate was attacked. A State Department
email was sent to intelligence officials and to the White House
situation room, but White House spokesman Jay Carney says it does
not tell the full story. Likewise, Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton says the claim failed to provide definitive evidence.
Still, the document could fuel Republican efforts to show that
the White House knew it was a terrorist attack, while the U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations reportedly felt it looked more
like the attack stemmed from a protest.
Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis
(USA-Ret.), who now serves as senior fellow for national security
at the Family
Research Council (FRC), says what happened on September 11,
2012, was clearly a terrorist attack.
"The facts are that with the intelligence activities that we had
ongoing in Benghazi, we knew almost immediately that this was a
terrorist action," he states, "and yet they [the administration]
continued to obfuscate the truth here for probably political
But according to the Pentagon advisor, the administration's
damage control is beginning to unravel.
"People are becoming very suspicious of the credibility of the
administration and its primary spokespersons, whether it be the
president, or the vice president, or the secretary of state,
certainly the U.N. ambassador, and others," Maginnis asserts.
He adds that the Benghazi scandal's effect on the presidential
election may depend on how much the American electorate learns
about it from the mainstream media.
Media Research Center notes that the morning after the story
broke regarding the State Department email, the three network
morning shows "weren't leaping to follow up." According to MRC, ABC and CBS combined devoted
just over a minute to the story, while NBC completely ignored it.
In contrast, "controversial comments" by
a Republican Senate candidate in Indiana drew more than seven
and half minutes of coverage.
That, says MRC, is indicative how those morning shows strive to
"minimize pressure on Team Obama" -- and are more interested in
"pursuing a story that might be injurious" to GOP presidential
candidate Mitt Romney.