- The Washington Times - Monday, October 22, 2012


At the second presidential debate, President Obama claimed he had said in his Rose Garden talk the day after the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that the killing of the ambassador and three other Americans constituted a terrorist attack (“Candy Crowley gets it wrong: Obama never called Benghazi a ‘terror attack’ in Rose Garden speech,” Web, Oct. 16).

Challenger Mitt Romney was so startled by this assertion that he was thrown off and was unable to fully capitalize on Mr. Obama’s distortion — and finally moderator Candy Crowley bailed out Mr. Obama before he got himself even deeper into the hole he was digging.

I checked the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal for the two days after Mr. Obama’s Rose Garden talk. Yet, all the coverage had to do with the video — not a single article anywhere suggests that Mr. Obama claimed it was a terrorist attack. None of the editorials suggested any hint of a terrorist attack, as now claimed by the administration. This constitutes a major distortion and frankly, it is very disturbing. I urge all who are interested to take a look at those early reports — you can draw your own conclusions.


Vienna, Va.

Sign up for Daily Opinion Newsletter

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide