Benghazi - Ayotte, Collins, Graham, Rice use same language on 9/12/2012

Star

Gold Member
Apr 5, 2009
2,532
614
190
.
Benghazi - Ayotte, Collins, Graham, Rice use same language on 9/12/2012. Anything else would've been a breach of national security.

Shame on these slimeball Republicans for politicizing an attack on American soil, the death of 4 Americans and jeopardizing the investigation into bringing the perps to justice.


Susan Rice's Senate Opponents Voted for Resolution on Benghazi Protests

By Garance Franke-Ruta

Dec 4 2012

The Republicans who object to her claim that protests in Libya preceded four Americans' deaths approved a Senate measure that used similar wording.

Is voting for something in the Senate a less significant statement of beliefs than saying the same thing on a Sunday talk show?

That's the standard the troika of GOP senators leading the charge against U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice is using today. Their comments come in the wake of revelations that they voted by acclimation to sign a measure in September asserting a similar account of the events in Benghazi on September 11 and 12 as laid out by Rice on the Sunday talk shows the weekend after the attack.

The issue might partly be due to bad wording in Senate Resolution 588, which stated in the process of honoring the four Americans who lost their lives in the attack in Libya that "the violence in Benghazi coincided with an attack on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also swarmed by an angry mob of protesters on September 11, 2012."

That "also" suggests that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was swarmed by a mob of protestors like the ones who breached the U.S. embassy in Cairo, rather than a mob of armed militants, some of whom had been inspired to action that evening by media coverage of the protests in Cairo, as has since been reported.
According to ABC News:
The Senate passed a resolution the day after the attack in Benghazi, on Sept. 12, S. Res. 551. The resolution was updated and passed again Sept. 22 to add the names of those who had died. The original resolution and the update were approved by "Unanimous Consent," meaning that all 100 senators were officially listed as sponsors or co-sponsors.
Neither resolution uses the words "terrorist" or "extremist" or "al-Qaeda." Both resolutions use the phrase "swarmed by an angry mob of protestors" to describe the attacks in Cairo and Benghazi.

Several of the resolution's co-sponsors -- including Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., and moderate Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. -- have criticized Susan Rice for using language similar to the Senate resolution in describing the attack days after it happened.

"This president and this administration has either been guilty of colossal incompetence or engaged in a cover-up, neither of which are acceptable to the American people," McCain said Nov. 14. "If someone carried a message to the American people that was totally and utterly false with no basis in fact, then that person also has to be held accountable as well."

The senators have targeted Rice's use of the word "mob" to describe the attack, based on the talking points given to her by the CIA, rather than to admit that it was terrorism...
Ayotte's office says the resolutions' language, which passed in the days after the attack, and that of Rice the Sunday after the attack are not comparable.

"A resolution honoring fallen Americans can't be compared to Ambassador Rice's Sunday show appearances, when she made misleading assertions that al-Qaeda had been 'decimated,' security at the consulate was 'substantial' and the attack was a 'spontaneous' reaction to a 'heinous and offensive video,'" Ayotte spokesman Jeff Grappone told ABC.

Sen. McCain's office called the comparison between the language of the resolution and Rice's words "pathetic."

"This is total nonsense," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in a statement to ABC News.
.
 
Let me see if i understand this. The Administration lies to the people about what happened, most likely because of the election. And it's the Republicans who are politicizing this?

Start demanding accountability for your leaders actions and we wont have a government nearly so corrupt
 
Kinda fucked up huh??

Its the Reps fault that they all lied through their teeth for weeks??

What can one expect from folks who could care less about those four dead men. The only important thing in their eyes was getting that fuck another four years in the WH.
 
Can you imagine how much more they would be squeling if Embassador Rice had given out classified information?

They have no shame, they're Republicans.
 
Let me see if i understand this. The Administration lies to the people about what happened, most likely because of the election. And it's the Republicans who are politicizing this?

Start demanding accountability for your leaders actions and we wont have a government nearly so corrupt



If you ask me, you're just aping Republican dinky dau talk - think for yourself for a change... Republicans are so hypocritical -- try to pay attention, if it's accountability you want, start with Ayotte, Collins, Graham, and McCain, et al for not only voting aye on Senate Resolution 588, but for also cosponsoring Senate Resolution 588 which quotes the same declassified talking points that the "intelligence community" gave to Ambassador Rice and-----and get this Ayotte, Collins, Graham, and McCain, et al cosponsored Senate Resolution 588 a FULL 10 DAYS AFTER the Benghazi attack.


WTF, why didn't they have the info that it was a terrorist attack---I wonder, did somebody miss an intelligence briefing?
.
 
So you're telling me to think for myself by agreeing with every stupid thing you say? No thank you.
 
Can you imagine how much more they would be squeling if Embassador Rice had given out classified information?

They have no shame, they're Republicans.

No. They have no shame. They are Democrats.

Seems they could care less about those four dead men.

They could also care less that Rice was told to lie her ass off about Benghazi because of the election.

They also don't seem to mind that Barry jetted off to his fundraise as those men fought for their lives.

Yep. Lots of outrage among the Dems
 
Star,

Let see if I understand your problem - you are faulting Republicans(including Rice) for not knowing the Obama Administration was lieing in the first week or so after the attack? The people that had all the actual info were in the administration - and they were just filtering and sending what they wanted to congress.

We now know that the director of national intelligence for Obama actually removed any lines in the intial reports to congress that identified the attack as a cooridnated terrorist attack. They conviently used the fact of protests in other countries over the stupid video to cover up a actual real attack.

They watched with a predator drone over head as this cooridnated attack took place and choose not to act militarily - even though special forces were only 1 hour flight away in Italy(and the attack went on for 7 hours).

I believe the reasons were this:

1. In the months that proceeded the attack the administration purposelfully ignored requests for increase security because they did not want the public to understand Libya was not going as well as they had hoped, but the biggest reason was fear of offending the locals with a strong military presense. They just figured the attacks that happen previously(like blowing a big hole in the wall) were just a fluke.

2. If the administration were to give any public credibility to increased al-Qaeda activity in Libya it would undermine one of the presidents lines for re-election - that he had al-Qaeda on the run and almost destroyed after taking out Bin-Laden.

3. So they rolled the dice that no big attacks would happen, at least not before the election. When the attack did happen - they were given a miracle - something to cover it up with - it just so happened that there were protests all over the muslim world on 9/11 about a stupid video made. They saw an opportunity and pushed it. They believed with the help of most of the media they could cover what happened long enough to at least get through the election.

4. That plan did'nt work as well as they hoped - and we had Obama near the election actually trying claim he called it a terrorist attack from the begining - what a joke!

5. Fortunately for those who died - a little over half the US population gave him the election anyway despite his utter failure in this incident(to see the danger and act on before, and to send in special forces when he could have in middle of attack).

If someone can produce tapes or written records of any kind indicating what Obama ordered his National security director and other high officials to do - he could be impeached. But I doubt that truth will ever see the light of day.
 
When the only one telling the truth after the attack was the President of Libya who insisted that this was an organized assault on the compound, it's a sad day.

Obama and the Administration lie thru their teeth; Americans are left to believe the Libyan President.

And he was correct. How pathetic can the White House get?

Wait, don't answer that:eusa_silenced:
 
Can you imagine how much more they would be squeling if Embassador Rice had given out classified information?

They have no shame, they're Republicans.

What the f... is classified about who attacked us? Everyone knew it wasn't about the f...ing video from day f...ing one. The left are pros at turning out BS storylines it only took you almost two months this time bravo. Keep repeating the story line maybe some day you'll even believe it.
 
Here is a time line for FACT CHECK.org it clearly shows that the administration was not telling the truth or they are completely incompetent. Couple this with the killing of an American citizen and his son and maybe Obama should be impeached.

FactCheck.org : Benghazi Timeline
 
Can you imagine how much more they would be squeling if Embassador Rice had given out classified information?

They have no shame, they're Republicans.

Not sure if you were trying to call her Emperor Rice or something else. :eusa_angel:
 
Can you imagine how much more they would be squeling if Embassador Rice had given out classified information?

They have no shame, they're Republicans.

What the f... is classified about who attacked us? Everyone knew it wasn't about the f...ing video from day f...ing one. The left are pros at turning out BS storylines it only took you almost two months this time bravo. Keep repeating the story line maybe some day you'll even believe it.

General Petraus already testified as to what was still classified when the Embassador when on the Sunday talkies. It was her job to discuss the media talking point developed through concensus by a number of agencies. Just like it was Condi's job to discuss the Bush Administrations false talking point about the Iraqis new WMD programs.

Besides they're just raising a stink because they want Kerry nominated anyway........
 
So the White House hid information from GOP members in Congress and they're blamed for not knowing the correct information the day after the attack.

Did the CIA give GOP members an intel briefing before that resolution??? No.

The OP is a stupid fucking idiot.
 
Shitbag....who is the Embassador?

Oh, Petreaus at the time was lying to Congress because Obamination blackmailed him with the affair.

Terrorists attacking our compound was not classified, period. It was on the fucking news you stupid piece of shit.

The lone classified info might've been the "names" of the attackers, but that doesn't prevent stating it was a terrorist attack......I believe the terrorists knew they attacked us, moron.

Can you imagine how much more they would be squeling if Embassador Rice had given out classified information?

They have no shame, they're Republicans.

What the f... is classified about who attacked us? Everyone knew it wasn't about the f...ing video from day f...ing one. The left are pros at turning out BS storylines it only took you almost two months this time bravo. Keep repeating the story line maybe some day you'll even believe it.

General Petraus already testified as to what was still classified when the Embassador when on the Sunday talkies. It was her job to discuss the media talking point developed through concensus by a number of agencies. Just like it was Condi's job to discuss the Bush Administrations false talking point about the Iraqis new WMD programs.

Besides they're just raising a stink because they want Kerry nominated anyway........
 
Blackmail? :lol: Here's your site: Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie

Naming the group al Queda clearly was not allowed by the CIA at that point.

She did her job. The opposition just wants Kerry out of the Senate.

You seem very angry. Did someone pee in your Post Tosties again?

:D

Shitbag....who is the Embassador?

Oh, Petreaus at the time was lying to Congress because Obamination blackmailed him with the affair.

Terrorists attacking our compound was not classified, period. It was on the fucking news you stupid piece of shit.

The lone classified info might've been the "names" of the attackers, but that doesn't prevent stating it was a terrorist attack......I believe the terrorists knew they attacked us, moron.

What the f... is classified about who attacked us? Everyone knew it wasn't about the f...ing video from day f...ing one. The left are pros at turning out BS storylines it only took you almost two months this time bravo. Keep repeating the story line maybe some day you'll even believe it.

General Petraus already testified as to what was still classified when the Embassador when on the Sunday talkies. It was her job to discuss the media talking point developed through concensus by a number of agencies. Just like it was Condi's job to discuss the Bush Administrations false talking point about the Iraqis new WMD programs.

Besides they're just raising a stink because they want Kerry nominated anyway........
 
.
Benghazi - Ayotte, Collins, Graham, Rice use same language on 9/12/2012. Anything else would've been a breach of national security.

Shame on these slimeball Republicans for politicizing an attack on American soil, the death of 4 Americans and jeopardizing the investigation into bringing the perps to justice.


Susan Rice's Senate Opponents Voted for Resolution on Benghazi Protests

By Garance Franke-Ruta

Dec 4 2012

The Republicans who object to her claim that protests in Libya preceded four Americans' deaths approved a Senate measure that used similar wording.

Is voting for something in the Senate a less significant statement of beliefs than saying the same thing on a Sunday talk show?

That's the standard the troika of GOP senators leading the charge against U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice is using today. Their comments come in the wake of revelations that they voted by acclimation to sign a measure in September asserting a similar account of the events in Benghazi on September 11 and 12 as laid out by Rice on the Sunday talk shows the weekend after the attack.

The issue might partly be due to bad wording in Senate Resolution 588, which stated in the process of honoring the four Americans who lost their lives in the attack in Libya that "the violence in Benghazi coincided with an attack on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also swarmed by an angry mob of protesters on September 11, 2012."

That "also" suggests that the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi was swarmed by a mob of protestors like the ones who breached the U.S. embassy in Cairo, rather than a mob of armed militants, some of whom had been inspired to action that evening by media coverage of the protests in Cairo, as has since been reported.
According to ABC News:
The Senate passed a resolution the day after the attack in Benghazi, on Sept. 12, S. Res. 551. The resolution was updated and passed again Sept. 22 to add the names of those who had died. The original resolution and the update were approved by "Unanimous Consent," meaning that all 100 senators were officially listed as sponsors or co-sponsors.
Neither resolution uses the words "terrorist" or "extremist" or "al-Qaeda." Both resolutions use the phrase "swarmed by an angry mob of protestors" to describe the attacks in Cairo and Benghazi.

Several of the resolution's co-sponsors -- including Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., and moderate Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. -- have criticized Susan Rice for using language similar to the Senate resolution in describing the attack days after it happened.

"This president and this administration has either been guilty of colossal incompetence or engaged in a cover-up, neither of which are acceptable to the American people," McCain said Nov. 14. "If someone carried a message to the American people that was totally and utterly false with no basis in fact, then that person also has to be held accountable as well."

The senators have targeted Rice's use of the word "mob" to describe the attack, based on the talking points given to her by the CIA, rather than to admit that it was terrorism...
Ayotte's office says the resolutions' language, which passed in the days after the attack, and that of Rice the Sunday after the attack are not comparable.

"A resolution honoring fallen Americans can't be compared to Ambassador Rice's Sunday show appearances, when she made misleading assertions that al-Qaeda had been 'decimated,' security at the consulate was 'substantial' and the attack was a 'spontaneous' reaction to a 'heinous and offensive video,'" Ayotte spokesman Jeff Grappone told ABC.

Sen. McCain's office called the comparison between the language of the resolution and Rice's words "pathetic."

"This is total nonsense," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in a statement to ABC News.
.

:lol:they didn't have the information hello that Rice apparently did via the Presidential Daily Briefing, which as a cabinet member she is privy too...:rolleyes:
 
further this is exactly what some of us here supposed as to one of the reasons why they deep sixed AQ etc. form the talking points-




U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands
By JAMES RISEN, MARK MAZZETTI and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
Published: December 5, 2012



The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year, but American officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants, according to United States officials and foreign diplomats.

No evidence has emerged linking the weapons provided by the Qataris during the uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi to the attack that killed four Americans at the United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, in September.

But in the months before, the Obama administration clearly was worried about the consequences of its hidden hand in helping arm Libyan militants, concerns that have not previously been reported. The weapons and money from Qatar strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force since the fall of the Qaddafi government.

more at-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/w...-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?pagewanted=all
 

Forum List

Back
Top