BO`s Benghazi BS and Cover Up Far Worse Than Watergate

Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
Krauthammer Nails Obama To The Wall: “Why the Hell” Did You Have Rice Address Benghazi If She “Had Nothing To Do With It?”…

Bingo.
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Well, you called it his one show of passion. I would say it was his usual show of indignation which is his default response whenever he feels defensive or backed into a corner. You know, “How dare you attack my UN ambassador?” And he gives the strangest defense by saying, “She didn’t have anything to do with the Benghazi affair.” Well then why the hell are you sending her out there? Why don’t you send, why didn’t you send out the Secretary of State or the CIA director or Panetta or somebody who did know?

And then he does play this sort of Lancelot defending the mistress in distress. You know, it made Mitt Romney and the binders with women look positively feminist in comparison. This kind of patronizing attack on the two male Senators who would dare attack the girl, which is what was intended in his tone. This is all its usual, you know, if you attack his pride he’ll strike you on that. And it was clearly defensive, and it was also a stonewall.

I mean, after all, what she said was absolutely and completely misleading either inadvertently, in which case is complete incompetence, or on purpose in which case it’s deception. And he basically he took the bait on that and said, “Look, that wasn’t her speaking. That was me speaking. If you want to pick on somebody, pick on me.”

Well how can anybody pick on him or even question him if he hasn’t had a press conference in eight months? You know, he clearly hasn’t been out there. He’s been hiding behind inquiries, behind investigations, and now behind Susan Rice.
But now I think he’s out there, and he’s vulnerable on this. I think he may regret having said that.


Krauthammer Nails Obama To The Wall: “Why the Hell” Did You Have Rice Address Benghazi If She “Had Nothing To Do With It?”… | Weasel Zippers

​
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
CBS News Obtains Talking Points Given To Susan Rice: Benghazi Attack “Spontaneously Inspired” By Mohammed Film Protests, Omits Terrorism…



They knew it was terrorism five days before she was given these talking points. So shady.
(CBS News) – CBS News has obtained the CIA talking points given to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice on Sept. 15 regarding the fatal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, four days earlier. CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan says the talking points, which were also given to members of the House intelligence committee, make no reference to terrorism being a likely factor in the assault, which left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.

Rice, who was considered a likely nominee to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, has been attacked by Republican lawmakers for saying on “Face the Nation” (video) on Sept. 16 that all indications were the attack “began spontaneously” – suggesting it likely sprang from a protest against an anti-Muslim video found on the Internet. Protests of that nature had been seen in other Muslim nations in the days and weeks before the Benghazi attack.
The CIA’s talking points read as follows:

• ”The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US diplomatic post in Benghazi and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.
• This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.
• The investigation is on-going, and the US Government is working with Libyan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of US citizens.”


Keep reading…


http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/15/cbs-news-obtains-talking-points-given-to-susan-rice-benghazi-attack-spontaneously-inspired-by-mohammed-film-protests-omits-terrorism/

​
 
damngrumpy

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Right from the start of this topic, is the key phrase of the day we are at the tipping point of dictatorship.
This is done in a way that suggests democracy is in danger, the press is on payroll of the dictator and
the Republicans were discriminated against and Obama is a very bad man. Give me a break.
First off the constitution is still in affect in America therefore democracy is not even in question.
Second Obama is no better and certainly no worse than say Ronald Reagan who is the father of
America's problems and no Better than Abe Lincoln who was incompetent and didn't use the full war
machine at its full potential and could have ended the war much sooner thatn he did.
As for the media, they report on all kinds of things during an election campaign.

First of the Democrats if they did have unflattering news they kept it quiet until after the election as every
party in any democracy has done for a couple of centuries.
However the Democrats didn't have someone get up and talk about legitimate rape, they never held a
closed session in which they demean 47% of the population and write them off as Romney did. Nope
the Republicans did themselves in with nonsense that made the main stream Republicans who are
respectable cringe. With the campaign they ran, that was anti minority, anti Latino and against the elderly
and those wanting medicare is it any wonder they ran themselves into the ground.
Now they use terms like Watergate to describe this situation half way round the world. Again Nonsense.
there might be incompetence that someone will have to pay for but unlike Nixon and some members of
the Republican Administrate the acts were not of a criminal nature therefore you cannot compare the two.
Now they send up flack, about the President is guilty of something or he is incompetent. No one knows
that, he might not have been told until after the election, and he might not have been told about the State
Department Plan to use or not use Marines.
My opinion is the Republicans may have a legitimate issue about how this matter was handled. There is nothing
that can be done about what happened and if they used their influence right they could see measures are put in
place to ensure it doesn't happen again. Instead they whine and complain and use the issue for politics instead
of for the good of ensuring the safety of others. This is why they are losing their credibility.
 
damngrumpy

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
The point is in three and a half years people won't even remember this event.
Watergate was a criminal act done by the government of the day.
This incident may be what ever it is but there is no evidence of criminal wrong doing.
With holding a news story in an election campaign is smart politics, not a criminal act
and a Petros said the Republicans are obstructionists withholding funds for all kinds of
things now they are whining because their saving cost three lives and touched off a
furor. I can't wait for the Democrats to use this very thing to highlight the Tea Party and
what their obstructionist ways cost the American People.
There are many who believe the economy will improve in America in the next eighteen
months and when it does, this will become a tempest in a tea pot. The only reason its this
big is because the post election blues leaves the media with nothing else to fixate on.
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
It'll sure be remembered by the families and friends of those murdered now won't it.
 
EagleSmack

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
damngrumpy said:
The point is in three and a half years people won't even remember this event.
Watergate was a criminal act done by the government of the day.
This incident may be what ever it is but there is no evidence of criminal wrong doing.
Click to expand...

We shall see.

I can't wait for the Democrats to use this very thing to highlight the Tea Party and
what their obstructionist ways cost the American People.
Click to expand...

By what... voting?

There are many who believe the economy will improve in America in the next eighteen
months and when it does, this will become a tempest in a tea pot. The only reason its this
big is because the post election blues leaves the media with nothing else to fixate on.
Click to expand...

Excluding the sudden surge in unemployment in the past two weeks? The stock market spiraling downwards? Oh what great signs. Sadly even I will forget you said this and your post will be lost.
 
gopher

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
damngrumpy said:
Right from the start of this topic, is the key phrase of the day we are at the tipping point of dictatorship.
This is done in a way that suggests democracy is in danger, the press is on payroll of the dictator and
the Republicans were discriminated against and Obama is a very bad man. Give me a break.
First off the constitution is still in affect in America therefore democracy is not even in question.
Second Obama is no better and certainly no worse than say Ronald Reagan who is the father of
America's problems and no Better than Abe Lincoln who was incompetent and didn't use the full war
machine at its full potential and could have ended the war much sooner thatn he did.
As for the media, they report on all kinds of things during an election campaign.

First of the Democrats if they did have unflattering news they kept it quiet until after the election as every
party in any democracy has done for a couple of centuries.
However the Democrats didn't have someone get up and talk about legitimate rape, they never held a
closed session in which they demean 47% of the population and write them off as Romney did. Nope
the Republicans did themselves in with nonsense that made the main stream Republicans who are
respectable cringe. With the campaign they ran, that was anti minority, anti Latino and against the elderly
and those wanting medicare is it any wonder they ran themselves into the ground.
Now they use terms like Watergate to describe this situation half way round the world. Again Nonsense.
there might be incompetence that someone will have to pay for but unlike Nixon and some members of
the Republican Administrate the acts were not of a criminal nature therefore you cannot compare the two.
Now they send up flack, about the President is guilty of something or he is incompetent. No one knows
that, he might not have been told until after the election, and he might not have been told about the State
Department Plan to use or not use Marines.
My opinion is the Republicans may have a legitimate issue about how this matter was handled. There is nothing
that can be done about what happened and if they used their influence right they could see measures are put in
place to ensure it doesn't happen again. Instead they whine and complain and use the issue for politics instead
of for the good of ensuring the safety of others. This is why they are losing their credibility.
Click to expand...



But the Dems have a role in this as well - they could have gone after Reagan for his lies in the Iran-Contra affair, had plenty of opportunity to do the same to Bush after his incessant lies about WMD, or after any one of those embassies were attacked in which more Americans were killed than in Benghazi. But, as always, they sit back like passive prissies while Republicans attack and disrupt the president's agenda. Can't say I blame the Republicans for being enterprising. If anything I blame the Democrats for their endless passivity.
 
EagleSmack

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
gopher said:
But the Dems have a role in this as well - they could have gone after Reagan for his lies in the Iran-Contra affair, had plenty of opportunity to do the same to Bush after his incessant lies about WMD, or after any one of those embassies were attacked in which more Americans were killed than in Benghazi. But, as always, they sit back like passive prissies while Republicans attack and disrupt the president's agenda. Can't say I blame the Republicans for being enterprising. If anything I blame the Democrats for their endless passivity.
Click to expand...

Gopher are you serious? The Dems didn't go after Reagan about Iran-Contra?



People went to JAIL!
 
T

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36
Background.............

Eric Cantor (R) was contacted by Joe Heck who was contacted by the shirtless FBI guy, Cantor contacted the Mittens campaign and they didn't want to touch it, because even they recognized it was 'an affair' situation and the rendition story from one of the 'ladies' was to put the heat on the other 'lady'so that the intrusion into her affair would stop.


It's a true thing of beauty. Caution,the following video of Republican Joe Heck's 'logic' may insult your sensibilities.......


"You can't put somebody out as the face of the issue on all the Sunday morning talk shows, and turn around weeks later and say she knew nothing about the incident, had nothing to do with it. That is just plainly wrong. You don't put somebody out who doesn't know about the issue and have them go out to feed us the information that the administration wants put out. So we have to get to the bottom of what happened in Benghazi, and certainly the Senate will hold confirmation hearings, if she's nominated."​
THEN she goes there:

"Isn't that exactly analagous of what happened to Condoleezza Rice, who John McCain supported, and who Lindsey Graham supported?"​
Heck then proceeded to explain that they're not the same, because "Condi Rice was in the position to be able to be the face. The information was wrong," whereas with Susan Rice, "we had wrong information, and weeks later the administration was coming back saying this person had nothing to do with the situation."


So, it's different because what Condoleezza Rice did was worse? That sounds like what he was saying. The difference is that Condoleezza Rice helped lead the U.S. into the Iraq War by disseminating bad intelligence about which she was in a position to know better, whereas Susan Rice had nothing to do with Benghazi, save delivering exactly what intelligence sources were telling the administration at the time. But that can't be right.



Soledad, looking quite puzzled, wants the Congressman to clarify the difference a little better:


"Let's walk through that more slowly — let me walk through that more slowly so you don't lose me," O'Brien replied. "You're saying the issue in both cases, weapons of mass destruction and information intelligence coming to the U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, both cases the information was wrong. What you take exception with is what the White House did later?"

"Exactly."


"What I'm trying to figure out," "is, are you saying that Condoleezza Rice actually should have known, because she had more intimacy with the information and then still said something that she knew was wrong and then, in fact, Susan Rice is a sacrificial lamb because she was put out as the face of the administration but didn't know anything? Matter of fact, it's more of a defense of Susan Rice than it is a condemnation of Susan Rice."





Republican Congressman Joe Heck Baffles Soledad O'Brien With Bizarre Quasi-Defense Of Susan Rice - YouTube
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
via sda:
Petraeus - Benghazi

Former CIA Director David Petraeus testified in a closed-door hearing Friday morning that his agency determined immediately after the Sept. 11 Libya attack that “Al-Qaeda involvement” was suspected — but the line was taken out in the final version circulated to administration officials, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.​
Funny, that's a different story than the "according to our source" spin CNN was pushing prior to his testimony.



Roger L. Simon » Who Is Responsible for Benghazi?
 
J

Jenson

Time Out
Nov 16, 2012
64
0
6
What a frickin witch hunt this is. Perhaps the focus shoud be on the fiscal cliff. It's not like obama started an illegal war that cost thousands of lives or fell asleep months before 9/11
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom