IDBillzFan Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The Martha Maccalum point is the most clear. One can only assume that the WH has something to hide, no? I mean, let's do some quick timeline work. Four Americans were left for dead by the WH and State Department. Obama and Clinton promise the families of the people left for dead that they will find the people who did this and bring them to justice. CNN interviews the lead suspect. No one is arrested. Obama says there's nothing left to the Benghazi story. Yep..nothing to see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Ummmm....What to say about this monstrosity? Yes, Bush's f'd up second term fp wasn't as bad as a disaster as the first term. Wonderful! Still, Obama, Hillary or any President or sec state can't micro manage everything. See Christie and his bridge. Lincoln couldn't get McClellan to attack Lee after Antietam or Meade to attack after Gettysburg. Presidents can only do so much, I'm sure Ari would agree You're a !@#$ing retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The Liars list grows longer by the day, Fmr. CIA Director Morell May Have Altered Benghazi Talking Points to Benefit Obama Admin. Former CIA Director Mike Morell may have altered the Benghazi talking points to benefit the Obama administration during the 2012 election, Catherine Herridge of Fox News reports. On September 15 one day before Susan Rice made her infamous appearances on various Sunday shows, according to the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report Morell received an email from the CIA station chief in Libya indicating the Benghazi attacks were “not/not an escalation of protests.” The report does not indicate when Morell read the email, but that same day Morell cut the word “Islamic” from the talking points and left the word “demonstration.” On September 16, Morell emailed embassy staff in Tripoli asking for more information. The FBI and CIA reviewed the closed circuit footage on September 18 showing there were no protests. Yet, President Obama still employed the “demonstration” verbiage just days later. http://freebeacon.co...it-obama-admin/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The Liars list grows longer by the day, http://freebeacon.co...it-obama-admin/ At some point you have to think that somebody is going to turn rat. The former CIA director conincidentally gets a job at a Clinton front/"reasearch" operation? Coincidence? Looks a lot like he twisted the talking points to protect Hillary, based on the promise of having a safe place to land. I wonder: did this whole thing blindside Obama? Is this what the WH is really trying to cover....not that they lied about anything, but, that they couldn't/didn't control who was lying about what? Was Susan Rice operating on Obama's instructions? Or Hillary's? Consider: how bad does it look for Obama if he isn't running his own outfit, and Hillary decided her political damage control was more important than whateve he had to say/wanted? The more I hear about this, the less outlandish that sounds, the more likely it sounds. The real cover up: Obama was too weak to control Hillary. You'd think with all these R ex-prosectuors in the House that they'd know how to turn up the heat/apply pressure and get somebody to give it up. Perhaps we'll have to wait...and see if the Senate goes over. Then, they would have no excuse not to appoint a special comittee/special prosecutor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 From ABC News; 7 Seconds: Lawmaker's Benghazi Question Stumps Top US Officials Seven seconds of total silence. The nation's top intelligence officials have answered the question countless times over the past year and a half, but they seemed stumped during a House hearing Tuesday when a Florida congressman asked them one more time: "Can anybody at the table tell us when somebody will be held responsible for the murders in Benghazi?" For seven seconds, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA director John Brennan, Defense Intelligence Agency director Michael Flynn, National Counterterrorism Center director Matt Olsen and FBI director James Comey sat quietly – each one seemingly waiting for one of the others to rescue them from a question for which they have no easy answer, regarding a tragedy that almost since the outset has been wrapped in political partisanship. http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=22365382 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 From ABC News; http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=22365382 Probably they were just confused at hearing a direct, straightforward question asked at a Congressional hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 From ABC News;http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=22365382 Egg meet face. Maybe they should contact CNN, who had an interview with the lead suspect responsible for the deaths of four Americans after the WH and State Dept. left them for dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 So every politician has lied to cover their ass? All of them except Newt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 All of them except Newt And this from the poster who likes to make himself sound smart by telling people on a regular their posts bring nothing to the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 And this from the poster who likes to make himself sound smart by telling people on a regular their posts bring nothing to the conversation. Just pointing out your hypocrisy my man. You partisan tool you.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Just pointing out your hypocrisy my man. You partisan tool you.. Please explain how you've pointed out my hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Just pointing out your hypocrisy my man. You partisan tool you.. You add nothing to this board. You detract from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 (edited) IT’S LIES ALL THE WAY DOWN: Did CIA official suppress Benghazi narrative? Accounts raise new questions. According to the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi, on Sept. 15, four days after the attack and one day before Rice’s appearance, the CIA’s most senior operative on the ground in Libya emailed Morell and others at the agency that the attack was “not/not an escalation of protests.” Fox News has confirmed that three days earlier, the CIA Chief of Station and the agency’s team in Libya also sent situation reports, known as sitreps, to Washington.The raw intelligence reporting described a coordinated attack by extremists, not an out-of-control protest. . . . Fox News is told that after an update from personnel on the ground, Washington’s singular focus on the video left participants in Libya baffled, angry and dismayed that Morell seemed to dismiss their on-the-ground reporting. Just not very persuasive lies. . . Edited February 15, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Please explain how you've pointed out my hypocrisy. It's so obvious, if you don't see it I can't help you, no matter how many questions you ask to avoid the truth IT’S LIES ALL THE WAY DOWN: Did CIA official suppress Benghazi narrative? Accounts raise new questions. According to the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi, on Sept. 15, four days after the attack and one day before Rice’s appearance, the CIA’s most senior operative on the ground in Libya emailed Morell and others at the agency ;s team Fox News is told that after an update from personnel on the ground, Washington’s singular focus on the video left participants in Libya baffled, angry and dismayed that Morell seemed to dismiss Chef, is this guy ultra partisan? With all his cute cartoons, far right blog posts and ultra conservative web site posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Chef, is this guy ultra partisan? With all his cute cartoons, far right blog posts and ultra conservative web site posts? Yes, but still not as bad as you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Chef, is this guy ultra partisan? With all his cute cartoons, far right blog posts and ultra conservative web site posts? Yes. What the !@#$ does that have to do with me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 It's so obvious, if you don't see it I can't help you, no matter how many questions you ask to avoid the truth Chef, is this guy ultra partisan? With all his cute cartoons, far right blog posts and ultra conservative web site posts? So that you can prove yourself right rather than make a far reaching claim, why don't you systematically refute B-Man's posts? I mean like do the job right, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 It's so obvious, if you don't see it I can't help you, no matter how many questions you ask to avoid the truth And I knew this would be your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 “In this instance, there was widespread knowledge, as was pointed out by Congressman Issa, the British knew that there were al-Qaeda threats, and they pulled their people out because they knew they couldn’t protect them.” “Our people knew there were al-Qaeda threats, and they not only did not protect them, but they didn’t pull them out. That, in my view, is a neglect of important responsibilities. The idea that it falls to someone down the line, I think, is a misunderstanding. Clearly, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is the person responsible.” -- Donald Rumsfeld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 And I knew this would be your answer. That's the only answer it deserved. “In this instance, there was widespread knowledge, as was pointed out by Congressman Issa, the British knew that there were al-Qaeda threats, and they pulled their people out because they knew they couldn’t protect them.” “Our people knew there were al-Qaeda threats, and they not only did not protect them, but they didn’t pull them out. That, in my view, is a neglect of important responsibilities. The idea that it falls to someone down the line, I think, is a misunderstanding. Clearly, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is the person responsible.” -- Donald Rumsfeld. Shouldn't he be looking for the WMD still? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts