This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The basic facts are as true now as they were in 2012 (the consulate requested more security, none came, the ambassador was killed). Everything since then has just been bickering back and forth about how much Obama and/or Clinton knew.
The description of our Arab brothers aside... I think there's something to this.
https://www.propublica.org/article/private-emails-reveal-ex-clinton-aides-secret-spy-network
Except that the deputy chief of the CIA has testified that they mistakenly thought the video/protest was the cause, and a number of analysts worked on that assessment.
How tone-deaf most of these people are and how disingenuous the rest are. These are people who voted for W after the WMD/countless dead innocents fiasco. It is stranger than fiction.
Doesn't have to be Arabs. Sorry about your panties.
Wow, hey I was just trying to avoid the usual pc argument over terms so we could focus on the issue but you went and did it anyway. Thanks.
Yeah, all he had to do was look up the public WhoIs information for Hillary's server, it listed her home address.
You're a pretty staunch conservative so tell me, considering all the time and resources that have been put into this investigation, do you feel that it has provided any return on investment? Where do you want it to go from here? Impeachments? Jail time? Or is enough to hopefully smear the dems enough that they aren't able to hold onto the White House in 2016 (which I think is what most Americans believe these investigations are all about, even if many - most? - won't admit that)?
Look, basically anyone but a hardcore dem will tell you three things are known and obvious about Benghazi. One, and most important, it was a terrible senseless tragedy that cost four Americans their lives. Two, the administration blatantly lied about a video and for some sick reason tried to avoid the truth which anyone with a clue already knew. And finally some incompetent people in the state dept saw over 600 emails requesting additional security for these people and did nothing about it.
Think of all the money wasted by GOP witch hunts between this and the Planned Parenthood "scandal". Two things nobody but the Fox News-watching sheep. Honestly, if this was a GOP non-presidential candidate would this still be on-going? I'm sure mistakes were made, but this is far from the largest attack on the U.S. where there were cover ups and lies. 9/11 when Bush was told there was an attack coming? The hundreds of U.S. lives lost due to terrorism in Beirut during the Reagan years?
Oh give it a break. There's nothing new about Congressional committees being political. Politicians gonna politic. Iran Contra, October Surprise (hey, let's have a committee 12 years after the fact!), fast & furious, US Attorney firings... heck the Church committee reopened the JFK investigation what 13 years later?
Sure seems like all of the conspiracy making these days are from the other side, including you.Who put Bernie Sanders in as a candidate?jonessed said:
I imagine a lot of people were involved in that decision. You don't generate financial and political support to run for president on a whim.
The whole Team Hillary, right?
Why do you believe that?The whole Team Hillary, right?
Oh really?
Takes a special kind of human to look at people who just lost loved ones in a gruesome and senseless manner and lie to their faces. This is probably our next president. Lookin good for us!!
I just want to point out something about the bolded.
You guys keep repeating the same stuff. She told her daughter it was done by an al Qaeda like group; she didn't mention their motivation, so there's no contradiction there. When she spoke to the Egyptian official, she didn't at that time believe the video was responsible because another group had taken credit without alluding to the video. But hours later it turned out the group that had taken credit was not responsible while at the same exact time there were several other riots going on all because of the video. Therefore there was a consensus by several officiials that the video was responsible and this lasted for about another 10 days until it was determined otherwise (although at least one of the terrorists still says the video was the motivating factor). All of this is on record and well documented. There was no lie, no conspiracy. In each instance Hilllary told what she believed to be true at the time.
If anything these statements should be evidence that they were confused and wrong, but did not deliberately lie.
Thats what one of the terrorists said, not me.
Tim, it's really pathetic if you think that video was the reason for the PLANNED attack on 9/11. I know you won't read this but why does the Administration lie for many days after the attack if they knew that night it was a planned attack?
Ok that was Khattala who later said something else. He is now under indictment by the US government and the billing says nothing about the movie. It's not part of the US's case against him. AQ was born in 1995 and it has been waging war on the US since then. It doesn't need a crappy homemade movie to get it motivated to attack a US mission with a CIA annex.
Another thing I find particularly crazy about this particular conspiracy theory is the alleged benefit to the administration. To buy into that you have to think that: (1) portraying an attack as an outgrowth of a protest rather than a planned attack is such a massive distinction that it could sway an election against an incumbent and thus was worth the risk (if anything I'd guess the opposite is true, Americans tend to unite in support behind the current administration when we're victimized by a planned attack); and (2) when the administration hatched this master plan and got the CIA, State Department and DOD on board in a matter of hours, they were confident that no evidence to contradict them would come out for at least eight weeks (the time between the attack and the elections).
Seems to be reasonable thing that someone could say 4 days after the attack - certainly a lawyer could work with the bolded to eliminate any impeachable offenses - let's call it a white lie until they knew for sure. They just did not want to answer the questions without a little more knowledge? I would also venture to say that anyone from any administration that appears on a Sunday show goes thru a vetting process of their answers. So are we really surprised there was a call/email to get a story straight before going on TV?
ffldrew said:
What are "these protests"? That sounds like something different from an attack.
Of course they had to indulge in a little abuse, because they couldn't help themselves, but otherwise this pretty much nails it.
Hillary stated the night of the attack it was an Al-Qaeda like attack and the Libyan President knew at that time it was a planned attack but you Dems think it is ok for Rice to go on the Sunday news shows several days later that the attack was rooted in an internet video.
at the present(sept 16) - to conclude - yes - she's the United Nations Ambassador for crying out loud. She drew the short straw to go on Face the Nation that Sunday. I'm not expecting anything other than some cleaned up crap to be spewed on the Sunday shows anyway. It's typical State Dept speak - crap like "broader failure of policy" And the using the video story was the perfect State Dept crap to talk about on a Sunday show.
