October 17, 2012

Obama’s Libya Questioner: Post-Debate, President Privately Told Him That He Delayed Calling Benghazi a Terrorist Attack

It looks like Candy Crowley, her establishment press excuse-makers (for her and President Obama), and supporters of the President are going to have to resort to finding penumbras emanating from Obama’s September 12 Rose Garden appearance — y’know, the one during which the press and Democrats insist that the President really, really did call the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya a terrorist attack.

The reason they’re going to have to do this is because the person who asked Obama the Libya question is saying that the President himself told him that he delayed calling Benghazi a terrorist attack. Erik Wemple at the Washington Post apparently doesn’t grasp the damning significance of what the questioner, Kerry Ladka, relayed to him.

Wemple does acknowledge that the President never answered Ladka’s actual question, which was “Who was it that denied enhanced security (at Benghazi) and why?”

But catch what Ladka claims took place after the debate (links are in the original; bolds are mine):

Kerry Ladka stood before President Obama at last night’s town hall-style debate and asked the question that would touch off an onstage verbal brawl and, later, an intense national discussion.

… Was Ladka satisfied with how the president responded? Simply no. “I really didn’t think he totally answered the question satisfactorily as far as I was concerned,” Ladka tells the Erik Wemple Blog.

… President Obama, though, wasn’t done with Kerry Ladka. “After the debate, the president came over to me and spent about two minutes with me privately,” says the 61-year-old Ladka, who works at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola, N.Y. According to Ladka, Obama gave him ”more information about why he delayed calling the attack a terorist attack.” For background, Obama did apparently lump Benghazi into a reference to “acts of terror” in a Sept. 12 Rose Garden address. However, he spent about two weeks holding off on using the full “terrorist” designation. The rationale for the delay, Obama explained to Ladka, was to make sure that the “intelligence he was acting on was real intelligence and not disinformation,” recalls Ladka.

So, lefties in the media and elsewhere: What about Obama’s admission to his questioner that, in the questioner’s words, “he delayed calling the attack a terrorist attack,” don’t you understand?

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

Share

4 Comments

  1. BO’s “rationale” is crap. Everyone knew the intelligence was real and not disinformation long before two weeks after the attack. The real rationale was to cover up an inconvenient truth.

    Comment by zf — October 17, 2012 @ 2:34 pm

  2. Laura Ingraham gets to the heart of the matter:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuQY4zl_ank&feature=player_embedded

    Comment by dscott — October 17, 2012 @ 4:56 pm

  3. Guys, the question was, “Who was it that denied enhanced security (at Benghazi) and why?”

    It’s the kind of question any chief executive ought to be able to answer.

    Comment by valerie — October 18, 2012 @ 12:54 pm

  4. True, but I was responding to the rationale he gave Ladka about the delay in calling it a terrorist attack.

    As for the answer to the question, he ought to but he won’t answer it because was answer is a damming “I did.”

    Comment by zf — October 18, 2012 @ 10:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.