What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

U.S. Ambassador to Libya Killed in Rocket Attack (2 Viewers)

Jackstraw said:
I don't understand how we can bomb a doctors without borders facility and kill far more people and its a collective fart in the wind. But Benghazi is such a bid damn deal regardless of who's fault or failure it was. I just can't understand the degree of concern with this one incident when there have been dozens of worse screw ups over the last several decades. Reagan turned tail and run when over 200 military got killed in Beirut and he didn't get near the amount of grief Hill and O got for Benghazi.  USS Cole etc etc. 

Why this one? What was so different? 
Click to expand...
Because the Republican voter base take to this kind of stuff like they do a family sized bag of Cool Ranch Doritos and a 128oz Mountain Dew. No need for substance. Ever.

 
Jackstraw said:
I don't understand how we can bomb a doctors without borders facility and kill far more people and its a collective fart in the wind. But Benghazi is such a bid damn deal regardless of who's fault or failure it was. I just can't understand the degree of concern with this one incident when there have been dozens of worse screw ups over the last several decades. Reagan turned tail and run when over 200 military got killed in Beirut and he didn't get near the amount of grief Hill and O got for Benghazi.  USS Cole etc etc. 

Why this one? What was so different? 
Click to expand...
Pretty sure you know the answer to that question.  And deep down so does everyone else, if they're honest with themselves.

 
Sounds like we are back to the same old same old...the Republicans are inept and as far as the dems go if you have a D next to your name there is nothing you do that is wrong...the GOP is wasting people's money trying to nail Hillary and the dems are lying about the video for political purposes...it should cost about ten dollars to figure this one out...

 
How did Republicans get perceived as experts on everything military related? When did this start and how? I have people on Facebook absolutely convinced that the Middle East would be lollipops and rainbows if GWB was still president. :loco:  

 
Apple Jack said:
Because the Republican voter base take to this kind of stuff like they do a family sized bag of Cool Ranch Doritos and a 128oz Mountain Dew. No need for substance. Ever.
Click to expand...
Kind of like how the democrat voter base takes everything HRC says at face value - no questions asked.  

At the very least, this report just further soldifies what everyone (if you're honest with yourself) already knows: that HRC is a compulsive liar.

 
MaxThreshold said:
Kind of like how the democrat voter base takes everything HRC says at face value - no questions asked.  

At the very least, this report just further soldifies what everyone (if you're honest with yourself) already knows: that HRC is a compulsive liar.
Click to expand...
You have been trying to run this theme for months now.

I don't think you have even managed to convince yourself.

 
MaxThreshold said:
Kind of like how the democrat voter base takes everything HRC says at face value - no questions asked.  

At the very least, this report just further soldifies what everyone (if you're honest with yourself) already knows: that HRC is a compulsive liar.
Click to expand...
That's what these 9 investigations were for.  To show a long term politician lies. 

:kicksrock:

 
So we have Irishidiot and Max retreating to the very poignant "BUT THAT POLITICIAN IS A LIAR!" routine.

An impressive plan B if ever there was one. :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?" McCarthy told Hannity. "But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee....a Select Committee...what are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping." 

 
The Benghazi investigation has gone on longer than the investigations into the JFK assassination, the 9/11 attacks, and the Pearl Harbor attacks.  Time and money well spent I guess.  :rolleyes:  

 
I haven't followed this much (I dislike Hillary enough as it is), does the new report contain the smoking gun the GOP has been fabricating praying for?  Or is this just going to end up much like Bill's impeachment - a lot of time and tax payer money gone to waste without much impact?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MaxThreshold said:
Kind of like how the democrat voter base takes everything HRC says at face value - no questions asked.  

At the very least, this report just further soldifies what everyone (if you're honest with yourself) already knows: that HRC is a compulsive liar.
Click to expand...
hey look.  its Max with a "but your side is worse" argument.  well that never happens.

 
[SIZE=14pt]Hicks also testified about Rice’s appearance on Face the Nation:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]So Magariaf, at great personal risk to himself, goes to Benghazi to initiate an investigation and lend his own personal gravitas. Remember he's from the Benghazi area himself. So he goes to lend his own personal gravitas and reputation to an investigation of what happens. And he gets on—and he is on these programs speaking from Benghazi, and he says this was an attack by Islamic extremists, possibly with terrorist links. He describes what happens. He tells the truth of what happened. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]And so, you know, Ambassador Rice says what she says, contradicting what the President of Libya says from Benghazi. There's a cardinal rule of diplomacy that we learn in our orientation class, and that rule is never inadvertently insult your interlocutor. The net impact of what has transpired is the spokesperson of the most powerful country in the world has basically said that the President of Libya is either a liar or doesn't know what he's talking about. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]The impact of that is immeasurable. Magariaf has just lost face in front of not only his own people, but the world. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]And, you know, my jaw hit the floor as I watched this. I've never been—I have been a professional diplomat for22 years. I have never been as embarrassed in my life, in my career as on that day.There have been other times when I've been embarrassed, but that's the most embarrassing moment of my career.[/SIZE][SIZE=8.5pt]31[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/documents/3 Part II Redacted DR.pdf

- Gregory Hicks, State Department Deputy Chief of Mission in Tripoli, Libya.

 
[SIZE=14pt]Other subject matter experts within the State Department also recognized problems with what Rice said on the talk shows. State Department employees in Washington D.C. who had spoken with those on the ground in Libya after the attack were universal in their condemnation of Rice’s statements. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.”[/SIZE][SIZE=8.5pt]317[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!”[/SIZE][SIZE=8.5pt]3[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
[SIZE=14pt]Diplomatic Security Agent 30, Diplomatic Security Command Center, State Department, was in the Diplomatic Security Command Center while the attacks transpired and aware of real-time information coming straight from Benghazi during the attack, was asked if there was any rioting in Benghazi reported prior to the attack. His response was: “Zip, nothing nada.”[/SIZE]
Click to expand...



 
Last edited by a moderator:
What does the outcome of this investigation say about the impotence of Congressional Republicans? I mean with all that evidence and the super awesome prosecutor Gowdy...one big nothing burger .

 
BigSteelThrill said:
Good catch Saints. I was in the benghazi reuters thread and linked a link within. :wrong:
Click to expand...
That's ok, it's not a bad point by itself, if we consider that riots are or were likely frequent in Benghazi, I'm sure. It's not that crazy to think the administration thought such a thing was plausible, there's just direct evidence it never actually happened on the day of the attack. That also doesn't make it an evil plot or cover up either IMO.

 
I recall seeing the riots on TV, but that was Egypt with all the video coverage. Bad assumption.

SaintsInDome2006 said:
That's ok, it's not a bad point by itself, if we consider that riots are or were likely frequent in Benghazi, I'm sure. It's not that crazy to think the administration thought such a thing was plausible, there's just direct evidence it never actually happened on the day of the attack. That also doesn't make it an evil plot or cover up either IMO.
Click to expand...

 
MaxThreshold said:
Kind of like how the democrat voter base takes everything HRC says at face value - no questions asked.  

At the very least, this report just further soldifies what everyone (if you're honest with yourself) already knows: that HRC is a compulsive liar.
Click to expand...
That's your takeaway from this whole fiasco?  

 
[SIZE=14pt]Normally, upon completion of the PDB, the Executive Coordinator [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]would travel to the White House, brief the Chief of Staff, and if the [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]President required a briefing, she would brief the President.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]She testified:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]So during the weeks that I produced the PDB, I would produce [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]it, and then they would drive me to the White House, and I [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]would produce[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]—or I would brief Jack Lew first, who was the [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]Chief of Staff.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]And if the President required a brief during that day or chose to take a brief, then I would give him a brief, and if not, then his briefer—then the DNI would brief him. [/SIZE]

...

[SIZE=14pt]On September 12, 2012, the morning after the Benghazi attacks, the [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]Executive Coordinator—the individual presenting the President with his Presidential Daily Brief—traveled to the White House.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]That day, however, she did not present the PDB to the President.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]...[/SIZE]

Q: How did it happen on the 12th that day?
A:
I was here.
So we were not traveling yet.
We were in D.C.
So
I would have
—
I had a driver, and the driver drives me to the
White
House.
I drop off the book first with the usher and then I
go down and I brief Jack Lew.
Q: Okay.
And what time was that on the 12th?
A:
So we always arrive by 7:00, and so it would've been around
7:00. I mean, I'm assuming around 7:00.
Q:
So that day at 7:00, the booklet that has been put together,
you take it to the White
House, you visit with Jack Lew and then
someone walk
ed it into
—
A:
No.
First we give the brief to the usher.
So my driver drops
me off at the front gate.
I go through—
Q: You actually physically hand the document
—or the material.
A:
Yeah, I physically hand the material to the usher and then I
walk back down with my briefcase and go see Jack Lew and wait for him and then I brief him.
...

Q: But you did talk with Mr. Lew that day?
A: I did.
Click to expand...
 
 
The very first written piece produced by CIA analysts regarding the Benghazi attacks was an overnight Situation Report written very early in the morning on September 12, 2012.
This piece included the line “the presence of armed assailants from the outset suggests this was an intentional assault and not the escalation of a peaceful protest.”
Click to expand...

http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/documents/14 App H Sit Rep-PDB Redacted.pdf

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackstraw said:
I don't understand how we can bomb a doctors without borders facility and kill far more people and its a collective fart in the wind. But Benghazi is such a bid damn deal regardless of who's fault or failure it was. I just can't understand the degree of concern with this one incident when there have been dozens of worse screw ups over the last several decades. Reagan turned tail and run when over 200 military got killed in Beirut and he didn't get near the amount of grief Hill and O got for Benghazi.  USS Cole etc etc. 

Why this one? What was so different? 
Click to expand...
Hillary could become President.

 
Seriously it is amazing that people deride, despise, defame etc. Hillary because she is dishonest (a valid reason to dislike someone btw) yet so very many of those people are going to turn around and vote for Donald Drumpf who is the biggest, and most unashamed liar to ever run for the Presidency.

It's insane.

 
Chaka said:
Seriously it is amazing that people deride, despise, defame etc. Hillary because she is dishonest (a valid reason to dislike someone btw) yet so very many of those people are going to turn around and vote for Donald Drumpf who is the biggest, and most unashamed liar to ever run for the Presidency.

It's insane.
Click to expand...
biggest is Nixon. unashamed - without a doubt.

 
Chaka said:
Seriously it is amazing that people deride, despise, defame etc. Hillary because she is dishonest (a valid reason to dislike someone btw) yet so very many of those people are going to turn around and vote for Donald Drumpf who is the biggest, and most unashamed liar to ever run for the Presidency.

It's insane.
Click to expand...
I certainly hope you don't support HRC.  If you do, it's quite hypocritical of you to be calling others out for being huge and blatant liars.

 
MaxThreshold said:
HRC being a very close second.  Basically, the King and Queen of presidential liars.
Click to expand...
That is one of the most delusional things I have ever heard.  Drumpf is a pathological liar, and that has been clearly demonstrated virtually every single day since he started his campaign.  There is no way to argue against that.  Yet so many people pretend to care about honesty when they truly only care about...what? I have no idea.

 
Chaka said:
That is one of the most delusional things I have ever heard.  Drumpf is a pathological liar, and that has been clearly demonstrated virtually every single day since he started his campaign.  There is no way to argue against that.  Yet so many people pretend to care about honesty when they truly only care about...what? I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Your lying to yourself if you think HRC isn't in the same conversation.

 
MaxThreshold said:
I certainly hope you don't support HRC.  If you do, it's quite hypocritical of you to be calling others out for being huge and blatant liars.
Click to expand...
I don't but I'm in a state where it doesn't matter who I support because she is going to win.  And the point is how terribly hypocritical it is for people to call out Hillary for being dishonest when Drumpf is the most dishonest candidate perhaps in the history of the Presidency.  You cannot deny that, he has been called out for lying constantly but nothing sticks to him.  It's like he's made of Teflon.

 
Chaka said:
I don't but I'm in a state where it doesn't matter who I support because she is going to win.  And the point is how terribly hypocritical it is for people to call out Hillary for being dishonest when Drumpf is the most dishonest candidate perhaps in the history of the Presidency.  You cannot deny that, he has been called out for lying constantly but nothing sticks to him.  It's like he's made of Teflon.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that he's a bald faced liar.  But I also agree that HRC is a bald faced liar too.  Such awful choices to choose from which is why I'm either not voting or voting 3rd party.

 
timschochet said:
Last month the committee actually interviewed a Sean Hannity caller: 

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/06/benghazi-committee-embarassed-again-after

So embarrassing. 
Click to expand...


Drone Pilot # 1—May 25, 2016:This remotely piloted aircraft pilot operated a remotely piloted aircraft, commonly known as a drone, over Benghazi during the attacks.

Drone Pilot # 2 — May 25, 2016 This remotely piloted aircraft pilot operated a remotely piloted aircraft, commonly known as a drone, over Benghazi during the attacks.

Sensor Operator # 1—June 9, 2016: Operated the sensor controls on aremotely piloted aircraft, commonly known as a drone, flown over Benghazi during the attacks.

Sensor Operator # 2—June 9, 2016: Operated the sensor controls on a remotely piloted aircraft, commonly known as a drone, flown over Benghazi during the attacks.
Click to expand...
http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/documents/15 App I Int Summaries.pdf

- Apparently he was one of these guys. Yeah it took until 2016 for him to be interviewed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MaxThreshold said:
I agree with you that he's a bald faced liar.  But I also agree that HRC is a bald faced liar too.  Such awful choices to choose from which is why I'm either not voting or voting 3rd party.
Click to expand...
The problem with Drumpf is that while HRC is not someone I agree with ideologically I cannot deny that she is tremendously qualified for the job.  Drumpf OTOH has no consistent ideology that I can discern and he is such a loose cannon that I think he is downright dangerous.  We can recover from a Clinton Presidency and there is a chance that she may actually do some good (Obama hasn't been nearly as bad as people try to paint him) but I cannot say the same thing about a Drumpf Presidency with any degree of confidence.

I know you won't do this but if you're in a battleground state I strongly urge you to vote HRC, it may suck but it not nearly as much as having a pathological liar/megalomaniac in office.  Voting for Drumpf is voting against the self interest of the nation.

 
I tried to go back and read through some of this thread and I had to stop, it's one of the biggest pieces of trash this forum has ever seen (and that's saying a lot).

I'll just say this:  I TOLD YOU SO

 
rascal said:
what did you say?
Click to expand...
That the Secretary of State was not directly culpible

That a military response was not feasible

That the State Department security apparatus and the CIA fumbled

That old school State Department bureaucracy got in the way (doing things the way we always do)

And that this was a complete witch hunt that would end the way it did today

 
Chaka said:
The problem with Drumpf is that while HRC is not someone I agree with ideologically I cannot deny that she is tremendously qualified for the job.  Drumpf OTOH has no consistent ideology that I can discern and he is such a loose cannon that I think he is downright dangerous.  We can recover from a Clinton Presidency and there is a chance that she may actually do some good (Obama hasn't been nearly as bad as people try to paint him) but I cannot say the same thing about a Drumpf Presidency with any degree of confidence.

I know you won't do this but if you're in a battleground state I strongly urge you to vote HRC, it may suck but it not nearly as much as having a pathological liar/megalomaniac in office.  Voting for Drumpf is voting against the self interest of the nation.
Click to expand...
What has she done that is good? What makes her qualified?  Is it because she has been in the government for so many years?  That,  alone,  makes her the best choice? 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
What Are Current Bad Habits You Have That You'd Like To Give Up? (12/30)
Replies
10
Views
634
Jakey
J
GordonGekko
How Should Children Be Trained And Taught To Handle Bullies? (14/30)
Replies
9
Views
581
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
rustycolts
My wife had a heart attack Saturday. She's going to be ok
Replies
28
Views
689
rustycolts
rustycolts

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top