It Doesn’t Matter Where Obama was While Benghazi Happened, Says Obama Aide

obama benghazi golf

Only crazy conspiracy theorists think that the Commander-in-Chief’s presence and attention count when an American diplomatic facility is under siege.

According to Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer, Obama’s whereabouts during the attack don’t matter. Oddly enough Bush taking the time to finish reading a children’s book to a class of nervous children did.

WALLACE: with all due respect, you didn’t answer my question. what did the president do that night?

PFEIFFER: kept up to date with the events as they were happening.

WALLACE: he didn’t talk to the secretary of state except for the one time when the first attack was over. he didn’t talk to the secretary of defense, he didn’t talk to chiefs. the chairman of the joint who was he talking to?

PFEIFFER: his national security staff, his national security council.

WALLACE: was he in the situation room?

PFEIFFER: he was kept up to date throughout the day.

WALLACE: do you know know whether he was in the situation room?

PFEIFFER: i don’t know what room he was in that night. that’s a largely irrelevant fact.

WALLACE: well —

PFEIFFER: the premise of your question, somehow there was something that could have been done differently, okay, that would have changed the outcome here. the accountability roof board has looked at this, people have looked at this. it’s a horrible tragedy, and we have to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

WALLCE: here’s the point, though, the ambassador goes missing, the first ambassador in more than 30 years is killed. four americans, including the ambassador, are killed. dozens of americans are in jeopardy. the president at 4:00 in the afternoon says to the chairman of the joint chiefs to deploy forces. no forces are deployed. where is he while all this is going on?

PFEIFFER: this has been tested to by —

WALLACE: well, no. no one knows where he is, who was involved, the —

PFEIFFER: the suggestion of your question that somehow the president —

WALLACE: i just want to know the answer.

PFEIFFER: the assertions from republicans that the president didn’t take action is offensive. there’s no evidence to support it.

WALLACE: i’m simply asking a question. where was he? what did he do? how did he respond in who told him you can’t deploy forces and what was his president?

PFEIFFER: the president was in the white house that day, kept up to date by his national security team, spoke to the joint chiefs of staff earlier, secretary of state, and as events unfolded he was kept up to date.

Tellingly Pfeiffer does not provide a single name.

  • SoCalMike

    The Left lies like a snake and Republicans are too cowed and spineless to say it.

  • guest

    Regarding the initiation of action in Lybia…

    Senate Armed Services Committee – March 7, 2012 – Defense Secretary Leon Panetta declares to Senator Sessions that the military can take action authorized by the UN or NATO before it is authorized by the US Congress

    If it doesn’t matter where the president was, did that stand down order also come the UN or NATO? And if so, what are the implications?

    • AnOrdinaryMan

      WHO SAYS "it doesn't matter where the president was?" Obama took an oath last January 20th, and likewise on January 20, 2009, to preserve, protect, and defend the country and the Constitution; and on Sept. 11, 2012, when the chips were down in Benghazi, he didn't do that. He was AWOL and MIA. It likewise doesn't matter what NATO or the reprobate UN says; Obama has the power to order reinforcements to the US consulate, to protect American lives; he again failed in his duty. Enough said.
      I-M-P-E-A-C-H this T-R-A-I-T-O-R, and remove him from office. Dan Pfeiffer? Who cares what he says. Obama is always comparing himself to Abraham Lincoln–what a hoot! Lincoln spent nearly the entire Civil War in the war room–the 19th century "situation room"–in the War Dept. next to the WH; he was NEVER AWOL or MIA. And by the way, the word is L-I-B-Y-A.

      • guest

        He's a traitor, I agree. I suspect that subsequent to his oath of office as president (which he bumbled) that he swore an oath to the UN as Head of the UN Security Council, an office that he had no constitutional authority to take as it is a conflict of interest. He should have been impeached that very moment.

        I don't know what the UN Security Council oath is, but the oath which all commanding officers of UN deployments must take reads:
        "I solemnly affirm to exercise in all loyalty, discretion and conscience the functions entrusted to me as a member of the international service of the United Nations, to discharge those functions and regulate my conduct with the interest of the United Nations only in view, and not to seek or accept instructions in respect to the performance of my duties from any government or other authority external to the organization."

        Remember Obama defended US actions in Libya saying, “we’re not invading a country, we’re not acting alone – we’re acting under a mandate issued by the United Nations Security Council in an unprecedented fashion and with unprecedented speed.”

        It makes me sick to even think about, but I put nothing past this traitor and my fear is, and his actions indicate, he handed over our armed forces to UN/Nato command, in which case it is vitally important to find out who issued the stand down, and all the other scandals of the week are just distractions form the REAL issue, and we need to keep the pressure on them.

        • AnOrdinaryMan

          Are you saying that US rescue operations for Benghazi were under UN authority? If so, what is the standard of proof for treason? If it's negligence, then Obama is guilty; because he gave the UN/NATO authority over US forces, knowing that a stand-down order would be given, and there would be no rescue operation.

  • tagalog

    Watching Pfeiffer on Fox News Sunday and on This Week with George Stephanopolous was not in the least enlightening. "He was kept up to date" doesn't answer the question of what happened between the time Obama allegedly ordered the deployment (when did that fact surface? I thought he -or Clinton- DIDN'T order support, in fact issued stand-down orders) and the failure (or refusal) to provide such support?

    And where, indeed, was he, if he didn't know that his subordinates were violating his orders? Playing golf? Skeet shooting? Fund-raising? And why were his orders countermanded? Who had the stones to do that, and why?

  • Edward Cline

    Getting a straight or honest answer from Pfeiffer or Jay Carney or any of Ozero's mouthpieces is like getting a clear shot at some oscillating video game character. Just when you think you've nailed him, he jiggles away and gives you the raspberries. Pfeiffer had to double down on his ambiguities because telling the truth would cost him a "thrown under the Obama Transit Authority" bus experience.

  • Svalbard John

    If he, Jay Carney and those Administration apologists like them had any patriotism, they would immediately resign and tell exactly what they know instead of covering the behinds of others. Their conduct is disgraceful and should never be forgotten or forgiven.

  • catherineinpvb

    If it does not matter; then why is this simple 'fact' per the 'where' of Obama; sealed in a truth vacuum – where there IS, no 'there'; there' as long as it stays, sealed. That the 'missing pieces' are unavailable is totally relevant. It IS their ideology at work; and by that; the nefarious; treasonous efforts of their 'most faithful'. As for Obama making 'changes'; we have had more than enough of Obama, Inc. CHANGE. What needs to change; is the 'ideological' Faithful; who are currently in charge; abusing their Oaths; and the power entrusted. . .treasonously usurping power; with every lie.

    They are overwhelming our system; not only by their 'best' efforts'; but by their worst crimes as well. Albeit; one cannot; in truth; separate the two. As they so plan; of course. Can only hope; they have vastly underestimated their opposition; their enemy; in fact.

  • Anonymous

    The two former Navy Seals requested military assistance THREE times. On each occasion they were told to "stand down". Who gave the stand down order? Who refused these men military assistance in their dire time of need? A CIA spokesperson said it was not the CIA which gave the stand down order. So where was the origin of that order? Was it with the criminal punk in the White House — too concerned about getting his beauty sleep prior to his Las Vegas campaign trip? Now that would be a typical Obama "priority." Impeach this bastard!

  • AdinaK

    It doesn't matter where he was?? Well, where he was, with whom, and what was said are the MAIN questions, the nuggets, so to speak –

    And if the above line of reasoning is not addressed, then the Criminal-in-Chief may well get away with his crimes!

    Adina Kutnicki, Israel

    Adina Kutn

  • onecornpone

    The key to this debacle is WHO gave the "Stand Down" order to those special forces teams that were ready to launch. If our congressCLOWNS ever get around to asking that, everything will become quite clear.

    I guaran-damn-tee you, the Clown Prince gave that order. NO one but him would have made that choice.

  • Brucew56

    Subpoena Obumbler about Benghazi, the IRS and the DOJ! He is not exempt! Get the truth or begin impeachment proceedings! ENOUGH!

  • No abeed Obama

    Where was the Usuper Abeed Hussein Obama???? More than likely with his gay lover of the week.

  • Deerknocker

    He's right. It doesn't matter where Obama was. It would only matter if Obama was going to do something, but he didn't intend to do a thing to help those under attack. And besides, it wouldn't do for Obama to be seen at the wheel during a foreign policy disgrace.

    • Looking4Sanity

      That's my take on it.

  • Looking4Sanity

    "It Doesn’t Matter Where Obama was While Benghazi Happened"

    This is a clever, if misleading, argument. It is exactly the type of dissimulation that I've come to expect from this criminal enterprise we call an administration.

    While true on its face, it has nothing to do with the REAL issues surrounding the scandal…and that is the beauty of the lie.

    Where he was is largely irrelevant.

    WHAT he did and WHY he did it are the central issues here. By addressing the "Where" question, they take attention away from the questions that will actually damage them.

    The fact that we're discussing it at all proves that the media is complicit in the coverup.

  • A Heart for America

    Please, please don't let Bengazzi go away or get lost in the shuffle of other on going poltical investigations! Keep calling your congress people about this, keep it front page news. 4 American people lost their lives due to the inability of the United States "Commander in Chief" to do HIS job as "Commander in Chief"! And it was (President) Obama's number one, top priority to keep our American citizens safe and he FAILED!!! How many more scandals will it take for the American people to stand up, together, and ask that he be ousted from his position as "president"? His traiterous behavior is hurting us as Americans and our great nation…The United States

  • A Heart for America

    btw… no matter when or where (President) Obama compares himself to the late, great President Abraham Lincoln, he, (President) Obama will NEVER be able to fill Abraham Lincoln's shoes. They don't even walk on the same ground!!!