Obama Rose Garden Transcript; Candy Crowley Got it Wrong (VIDEO)

If you watched the debate Tuesday night, you no doubt sat up in your chair when the discussion turned to Libya and President Obama and Governor Romney found themselves in a bit of a shouting match regarding the president’s comments in the wake of the terrorist attack in Benghazi.  The moderator, Candy Crowley, interjected and “confirmed” the president’s remarks leaving Governor Romney speechless A) that she was taking such an active role in the debate; and B) that she was claiming the president referred to the Benghazi attack as “an act of terror.”

Below is an excerpt from that part of the debate.  And below that is the actual transcript from the Rose Garden speech.

—-

OBAMA: Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job. But she works for me. I’m the president and I’m always responsible, and that’s why nobody’s more interested in finding out exactly what happened than I do.

The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime.

And then a few days later, I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force Base and grieving with the families.

And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our U.N. Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as president, that’s not what I do as Commander in Chief.

CROWLEY: Governor, if you want to…

ROMNEY: Yes, I — I…

CROWLEY: … quickly to this please.

ROMNEY: I — I think interesting the president just said something which — which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.

OBAMA: That’s what I said.

ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror.

It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying?

OBAMA: Please proceed governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror…

OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy?

CROWLEY: He — he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.

 (Jump ahead to the 1:45 mark)

Here’s the portion of the speech in the Rose Garden where President Obama says he referred to the attack as an “act of terror.”“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.”

—

Well, he did mention terror.

Too bad it was at the end of the speech AND a general reference; NOT a specific one.

“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.”

That’s certainly not the same thing as saying this act of terror will not shake our resolve; or even acts of terror like these will never shake our resolve.

The short of it is this.  When the president gave that speech in the Rose Garden, he was being intentionally vague.  The passage in question is the epitome of saying something and absolutely nothing at the same time.

Think about it this way.  If facts came out that this was not an act of terrorism and the president began taking criticism for calling it one, how long do you think it would have taken the White House to put out a press release clarifying that the president was speaking in general terms rather than about the Benghazi attack specifically?  And would it not be an argument the mainstream media would run with?

The reality of this back-and-forth is a simple one.  Candy Crowley had no business involving herself on that level in this debate.  I’m pretty sure most Americans from all walks of life and party affiliations were dumbfounded and asking one another – is she allowed to do that?

I’m sure she’ll issue a press release saying she was only saying that the president did in fact say the words act(s) of terror in the speech; not that he was directly referring to the Benghazi event as an attack as terrorism.  And she’ll probably confirm that Governor Romney was correct about the 14 day terrorism-denial timeline.  But it will eb too late for the average viewer who doesn’t go looking for retractions.

And she’ll try to skirt the greater issue – that she overstepped her role as moderator by fact-checking in the first place.  Did she interrupt the president earlier in the debate to play fact-checker when he said Governor Romney referred to the Arizona immigration law as a model piece of legislation; or when Governor Romney said he was only referring to the eVerify portion of the statute?

Of course not.

But in the end, who really cares?  Lawyers, English teachers, politicians… and nobody likes them.

The fact that this administration paraded Susan Rice around on the Sunday political shows (FIVE of them) after that Rose Garden speech to disavow the terrorist language is all the evidence one needs to figure out where the president and his administration stood on that issue.  As he said in reference to Hillary Clinton at the debate, “she works for me” (him); and she said it was a spontaneous response to a YouTube video, not terrorism.

Why this administration was so unwilling to refer to the attack as terrorism is still a truth that only they can comprehend.  And until all the facts see the light of day, I suppose none of us will truly know who knew what and when.  But what I am certain about is that if this administration was allowed to have it’s way, we’d all still be hearing about how a US ambassador was killed in a protest resulting from a YouTube video.

—

Read the full Rose Garden speech for yourself.  Seeing the president first refer to it as anything but a terrorist attack only makes Crowley’s interjection all the more ridiculous.

A few points worth looking for.

• He refers to the terrorist attack as merely an “attack” repeatedly throughout the speech.
• He refers, in the third paragraph, to the terrorists as “killers” and the terrorist attack as an “outrageous and shocking attack” but never a terrorist attack.
•  In the next paragraph, he refers to them as “senseless violence” and “brutal acts.” (not acts of terror)
•  ”Attack” and “attackers” – not terrorism and terrorists.

Now for the transcript from the speech:

THE PRESIDENT:  Good morning.  Every day, all across the world, American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interests and values of our nation.  Often, they are away from their families.  Sometimes, they brave great danger.

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 OfficerSean Smith.  We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed.  And today, the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.

The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack.  We’re working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats.  I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world.  And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.

Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.  We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.  But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.  None.  The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.

Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya.  Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans.  Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they carried Ambassador Stevens’s body to the hospital, where we tragically learned that he had died.

It’s especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it is a city that he helped to save.  At the height of the Libyan revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi.  With characteristic skill, courage, and resolve, he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries, and helped them as they planned to build a new Libya.  When the Qaddafi regime came to an end, Chris was there to serve as our ambassador to the new Libya, and he worked tirelessly to support this young democracy, and I think both Secretary Clinton and I relied deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there.  He was a role model to all who worked with him and to the young diplomats who aspire to walk in his footsteps.

Along with his colleagues, Chris died in a country that is still striving to emerge from the recent experience of war. Today, the loss of these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on.  I have no doubt that their legacy will live on through the work that they did far from our shores and in the hearts of those who love them back home.

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks.  We mourned with the families who were lost on that day.  I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed.  And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it.  Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

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.  Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America.  We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act.  And make no mistake, justice will be done.

But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers.  These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity.  They should give every American great pride in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with dignity.

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

Thank you.  May God bless the memory of those we lost and may God bless the United States of America.