Politics behind Benghazi lies still matter

To the editor:

Make no mistake about it, this Benghazi investigation is all about politics, and the American people deserve to know the answers.

What were President Barack Obama’s political motivations in the wake of an attack on our Libyan diplomatic posts? The attacks took place weeks before his re-election. Was he motivated to get to the bottom of the attack, or did he want to stall the investigation until it didn’t matter to him anymore?

What were Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s political motivations? Why didn’t she appear on the Sunday talk shows (or anywhere else) to explain what happened? Why did she send U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice around to perpetuate a lie nobody would believe? Is it because she still wants to be president? Was that her political motivation?

Why did Ms. Rice tell a story nobody believed? Was it because the secretary of state’s position was about to open up and she wanted to play ball?

Mrs. Clinton, when she testified before Congress (because that was the only way she would speak about Benghazi) asked, “What difference does it make?” The answer is that it matters as much now as it did immediately after the attack. It just matters less to her and her former boss because the election is over.

I hope this investigation reveals whether the president, secretary of state and ambassador to the United Nations lied to the American people to advance their political careers. It’s a question worth asking, and a question to which we deserve an answer.

BRANDON G. TAYLOR

LAS VEGAS

Who’s in charge here?

To the editor:

I don’t think I’m comfortable with a president who seems to find out about major events (Benghazi, IRS, Department of Justice snooping of The Associated Press) from the news media “just like everyone else.”

What the heck is going on? Did Bo eat the president’s daily briefings? Should I give him a call when the next scandal breaks so he’ll have a heads up? I’ve heard of delegating authority, but this is ridiculous.

I think the most appropriate question for President Barack Obama would be: “Who is running the country?” To which President Obama would probably say: “We are trying to find that out, and I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation.”

LINDA CATERINE

HENDERSON

Ignored stories

To the editor:

I understand there are many scandals coming out of the Obama administration and that the liberal news media are actually reporting them. But whenever this much time is spent on stories such as these, I wonder, what are the major networks missing? Worse, what are they ignoring?

Sure, the IRS targeting of conservatives is criminal, stealing The Associated Press phone records is bad, and the fact that four Americans died in Benghazi is finally catching on, but more is going on.

President Barack Obama is getting ready to make massive cuts to our strategic nuclear weapons. The real cost of ObamaCare or giving amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, who would change the country’s voting demographics forever, would bankrupt the country. Federal law enforcement is focusing on Christians, gun owners, veterans and tea party activists while missing Muslim terrorists bent on killing Americans because they are afraid of being accused of “profiling.”

Why aren’t these issues being reported? As bad as things are, it could get a lot worse.

Of all the efforts to desecrate our freedom, a willingly corrupt free press is the most devastating. Without accurate and truthful information, the trusting American public can be easily deceived and led down the path to tyranny.

MICHAEL A. PACER

PASO ROBLES, CALIF.