First, I want to show the motive for misleading the public about Benghazi. Obama was careful not to emulate Bush's stupidity with a Mission Accomplished banner. However, what he did say is, "al Qaeda is on the path to defeat and Osama bin Laden is dead." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/18/white-house-view-on-al-qaeda-unchanged/ While the second part is true, the first is demonstrably false. Benghazi contradicts that narrative. That's the motive for the lies.
With regard to the Rose Garden statement, I think the President’s statement is at best ambiguous. It’s true that he says, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. “ However, his comment on Benghazi specifically is, “Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith.“ Notice he does not say it was a terrorist attack. He goes on at length about the video saying, “While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.” Again, he skips an opportunity to call it terrorist violence. It’s just senseless.
Now we can move to Susan Rice. On September 16, 2012, the President of Libya, MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF, tells CBS Face the Nation, "The way these perpetrators acted and moved, I think we-- and they're choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no-- this leaves us with no doubt that this has preplanned, determined-- predetermined." Susan Rice responding to this assertion on the same program says, "(W)e do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned."
In Obama's speech to the UN on September 26, 2012, he admits about Benghazi that "America’s compound came under attack." He goes on to mention that "a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world." The sequence of the speech is designed to call attention to the video as a cause for "the turmoil of recent weeks." In the speech, Obama uses the word "terrorist" once, describing groups supported by Iran.
Those are the lies, or most charitably intentionally misleading statements.
At this point, Liberals want to change the subject to Bush and the twin towers. I do not want to go into the first 9/11. Clearly, there is enough egg on everybody's face on that one. Bill Clinton didn’t capture or kill Bin Laden when he had the chance. Bush was asleep at the switch for the attack itself. However, given the terrorist fondness for anniversaries, I don't understand how we could have been caught unprepared again. It's like Pearl Harbor being surprise attacked twice. The State Department withdrew security from what has to be one of the most dangerous countries with which the US has diplomatic relations. Some lower ranking people are disciplined, but while Hillary “takes responsibility,” she can’t even admit in testimony to Congress that the attack was premeditated. She calls it "guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans." That's denial if I ever heard it.
On a lighter note, the comedy group The Capital Steps were in Skokie, IL, this weekend. Their Obama impersonator said, "Is it possible to answer a question and make both sides happy? Yes and no." The mainly Democratic Skokie crowd laughed. Everybody seems to recognize that the President is a master of this type of ambiguity. The Rose Garden speech is a classic Obama move to have it both ways. In effect, he says both it was and it wasn't terrorism. Take your pick.