Candy Crawley Just Lied During The Debate To Help Obama

[Rinata]

I'm tired of watching these two assholes interrupt Romney.

Fucken bullshit.

What??? I hope you are kidding!!! Romney is the one that did that. He was rude and obnoxious.

 

[Rinata]

The right wing nut jobs were determined to criticize Candy before the debate even started.

 

[Meister]

Romney swung.

Romney whiffed.

Romney lost.

The President won.

Romney didn't get hurt by the debate. Not like how Obama got hurt by the first debate. Personally I thought it was pretty damn close.
I think the left's hoopla from last night is that Obama did much better than he did the first debate. For that...yes, Obama beat his first debate.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I'm tired of watching these two assholes interrupt Romney.

Fucken bullshit.

What??? I hope you are kidding!!! Romney is the one that did that. He was rude and obnoxious.

Romney was trying to pin down the liar.

 

[mudwhistle]

I want a liberal to tell me why obama allowed the ambassador to the UN go on five major networds FIVE days later and tell the Americans that it was a spontaneous mob action. Wouldn't you like to know the answer to that?

Any of you liberals care to weigh in the questions being asked about this? Or, you just don't have anything?

Irrelevant spin. The thread topic and the subject of much debate concerns the last Presidential debate and the fraudulent claim that Crawley lied about the plain fact that Obama had indeed referred to the Benghazi attack as an act of terror in his speech in the Rose Garden on Sept 11th. He referred to it as an "act of terror" again in a speech on Sept 13th.

There were reports coming out of Libya that indicated that the attack happened during an anti-US protest.

What we liberals have is the facts and the truth. What you rightwingnut retards have is lies and spin.

Try reading the BBC reports I just posted a couple of posts ago, you braindead partisan nitwit. The American officials knew about the possible terrorist link but the investigation was still going on because it had just happened. There were riots in other cities that were very directly caused by that offensive anti-Muslim video. There were reports from official Libyan sources that claimed that the gunmen used an anti-US protest to cover their attack. US officials who mentioned the video as a possible cause of the attack were correct as far as they knew at the time. There seemed to be a possible link at that time. Further investigation showed that it was clearly a planned terrorist attack. The only reason this is supposed to be some 'big deal' is because Romoney is trying to play politics with the issue and he got caught trying to distort the facts for political points.

So you're saying now that Obama never said it was over a video and that it was the result of a protest?

Seems to me you're the one trying to lie about the facts.

The Libyan President said there was no protest and that it was clear from the outset it was an organized attack.

 

[mudwhistle]

Romney swung.

Romney whiffed.

Romney lost.

The President won.

Romney didn't get hurt by the debate. Not like how Obama got hurt by the first debate. Personally I thought it was pretty damn close.
I think the left's hoopla from last night is that Obama did much better than he did the first debate. For that...yes, Obama beat his first debate.

They would have liked to claim victory last time but they couldn't sell it.

This time they want to claim victory but aside from all of the interruptions Romney cleaned his fucken clock. And if it wasn't for the obvious collusion by Candy Crowley Obama wouldn't have won anything.

Obama gave himself away when he told her to read the transcripts.

What fucken transcripts one should ask?

The transcripts he made sure she would have in front of her when they planned this little stunt.

How else would he know she would have the transcripts for a question that hadn't been asked unless the whole thing was pre-arranged.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. September 19th - Matthew Olsen, Director of the Counterterrorism Center, testifies in a Senate hearing that the attack was terrorism

2. September 20th, whitehouse press secretary Jay Carney calls the attack terrorism.


For the math challenged, 2 weeks from 9/11/12 is 9/26/12.

Link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/us/politics/questions-and-answers-on-the-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0

 

[mudwhistle]

1. September 19th - Matthew Olsen, Director of the Counterterrorism Center, testifies in a Senate hearing that the attack was terrorism

2. September 20th, whitehouse press secretary Jay Carney calls the attack terrorism.


For the math challenged, 2 weeks from 9/11/12 is 9/26/12.

Link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/us/politics/questions-and-answers-on-the-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0

The question was about when Obama.......let me spell it in big letters for the English impaired.....when OBAMA said it. Not when his staff said it. Obama's statements were often in direct conflict with the State Department and his press secretary.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

What a despicable display.

I can't remember when Obama said that the attacks were an act of terrorism. Weeks later he was still saying it was over a video. A spontaneous act.

Now the moderator lied for him and you could tell she was lying because she started stuttering.

A bold-faced lie to support Obama, and everyone saw it.

He called it an outrageous attack.

You don't think it was outrageous?

An outrageous attack is not by definition "Terrorism".

It could be a drunk at a football game punching out a fan for the opposing team.

I'm sure that's what Obama meant.


(Do you morons actually believe the crap coming out of your mouths?)

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

BTW - why does Obama need to explicitly state the obvious for you morons?

Reminds me of the Bush years when you fucking moronic righties felt like if someone didn't remind you every 5 minutes that Sadam Hussein is evil it must mean they are antiAmerican terrorists.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

1. September 19th - Matthew Olsen, Director of the Counterterrorism Center, testifies in a Senate hearing that the attack was terrorism

2. September 20th, whitehouse press secretary Jay Carney calls the attack terrorism.


For the math challenged, 2 weeks from 9/11/12 is 9/26/12.

Link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/us/politics/questions-and-answers-on-the-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0

The question was about when Obama.......let me spell it in big letters for the English impaired.....when OBAMA said it. Not when his staff said it. Obama's statements were often in direct conflict with the State Department and his press secretary.

Here's where Obama "apologizes"

The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack.

Here's where he says its not an act of terror

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

And here's where he says how much he hates America:

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

(to lefies - I realize the quotes are kinda the opposite of what I'm saying they mean, but you gotta understand I'm talkin' to a rightie and they read things differently).

http://www.sodahead.com/united-stat...t-the-rose-garden-9-12-2012/question-3252357/

 

[mudwhistle]

1. September 19th - Matthew Olsen, Director of the Counterterrorism Center, testifies in a Senate hearing that the attack was terrorism

2. September 20th, whitehouse press secretary Jay Carney calls the attack terrorism.


For the math challenged, 2 weeks from 9/11/12 is 9/26/12.

Link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/us/politics/questions-and-answers-on-the-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0

The question was about when Obama.......let me spell it in big letters for the English impaired.....when OBAMA said it. Not when his staff said it. Obama's statements were often in direct conflict with the State Department and his press secretary.

Here's where Obama "apologizes"



Here's where he says its not an act of terror

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

And here's where he says how much he hates America:

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

(to lefies - I realize the quotes are kinda the opposite of what I'm saying they mean, but you gotta understand I'm talkin' to a rightie and they read things differently).

Full Transcript of Obama's Speech at the Rose Garden 9-12-2012

Obama reading a speech somebody else wrote doesn't prove dick.

What Obama said on numerous occasions after the Rose Garden speech is what is important.

I'm not gonna waste my time giving you quotes because I know you're fully aware of them.

 

[candycorn]

If you recall the Trayvon Martin murder, George Zimmerman (the murderer) called the police to report his suspicions. When he was going to get out of his rig to physically confront Martin, the police said, "We don't need you to do that."

Predictably, conservatives raced to Zimmerman's defense to gun down an unarmed black man. When it was pointed out the cops told Zimmerman not to pursue his quarry, conservatives swore that cops didn't tell him to do that. One dumbfuck even said; "they were just offering advice". You can hear those echoes here, can you not?

I read a book once that was called (deep breath); "It's Not the Big that Eat the Small; it's the Fast that Eat the Slow". It was one of those management guru books that recommended that you act fast first in almost every case--fast was determined by you contemporaries. Anyway, the #1 rule the authors had was this; "Don't BS yourself." I think the cons have jumped the shark on that.

 

[mudwhistle]

The guidelines in the memorandum of understanding that was agreed upon by the debate commission, as well as both campaigns, stated:​

The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the two-minute response period.

Those restrictions did not sit well with feminist groups, who've managed to make even a presidential debate about women's issues.

So, on behalf of the sisterhood, Candy Crowley took to the town hall podium and proceeded to defy the rules and run the debate her own way. The result was dreadful -- not only for Candy's reputation as a journalist, but also for a weak incumbent who looked like he needed a woman to protect him from being verbally spanked. Moreover, her performance did nothing to convince the debate commission that female moderators should be granted more freedom in the future.

The reason why? Candy Crowley cut off Mitt Romney 28 times, including when he was making a point about Barack Obama's gunrunning debacle, "Fast and Furious." According to CNN's own count, Candy allowed Obama to speak for a total of 44 minutes and 4 seconds and ordered Romney back to his stool by cutting him off and bringing his time down to 40 minutes and 50 seconds.

The CNN anchor showed obvious deference to the president. Every time he spoke, her eyes widened in admiration and she exhibited an odd mix of what looked like coaxing and agreeing. While claiming to be an unbiased moderator, Candy Crowley adjudicated on the president's behalf when he stretched the truth on the subject of Libya.

Most would agree that Candy's foot-in-mouth moment came when Mitt Romney accused Obama of not calling the attack in Benghazi an act of terror for two weeks and flying to Las Vegas and Colorado for a fundraiser the day after four Americans died. Crowley, like a mother hen protecting her chick, interrupted Romney and said: "It -- it -- it -- he did in fact, sir. So let me -- let me call it an act of terror."

In response, lily-livered Obama smirked, hid behind mama's apron strings, and then asked her to restate the falsehood on his behalf, saying, "Can you say that a little louder, Candy?" Candy gladly complied. Stuttering, stammering, and tripping over herself to rush to Junior's defense, Candy added: "He -- he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that."

If hard-hitting girl power representative Candy Crowley was really looking to bolster female credibility, she should have gone according to the original script and asked Obama, "Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?" If Crowley were really mixing it up with the boys, she could have demanded an answer from Barack Obama as to why it took fourteen days to acknowledge an al-Qaeda terrorist attack that left four Americans dead in the streets of Benghazi.

After the fact, Candy Crowley is now being forced to admit that Romney, who insisted that Obama did not call the incident a terrorist attack for weeks, was right -- "in the main" -- on Benghazi.

Rather than conceding that Obama picked the wrong way to go about handling the murder of an American ambassador, Ms. Crowley instead chooses to say that Romney "picked the wrong way to go about talking about it." Attempting to explain her unmitigated favoritism, Candy underscored that her second "two week" point favored Romney and generated applause much like her first point, which generated applause from one half of the audience led by an unrestrained Michelle Obama.

Prior to the Hofstra debate, America was forced to endure listening to Crowley whine about a woman's rightful role as a debate moderator. Then, during the actual debate, the nation witnessed the hot mess Candy made while shilling for Obama.

Suffice it to say that Candy proved that the "memorandum of understanding" was correct in its attempt to limit her role, because by the end of the debate, every headline should have read: "Eye Candy" Lies, and Candy Swears to It.​

Excerpts from this article.......Articles: 'Eye Candy' Lies, and Candy Swears to It

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The question was about when Obama.......let me spell it in big letters for the English impaired.....when OBAMA said it. Not when his staff said it. Obama's statements were often in direct conflict with the State Department and his press secretary.

Here's where Obama "apologizes"



Here's where he says its not an act of terror



And here's where he says how much he hates America:

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

(to lefies - I realize the quotes are kinda the opposite of what I'm saying they mean, but you gotta understand I'm talkin' to a rightie and they read things differently).

Full Transcript of Obama's Speech at the Rose Garden 9-12-2012

Obama reading a speech somebody else wrote doesn't prove dick.

Right. Someone else wrote the words "act of terror" - so even though its Obama saying them, he didn't say them.

What Obama said on numerous occasions after the Rose Garden speech is what is important.

How is that relevant to Mittens false claim that it took him 2 weeks to call it an act of terror?

I'm not gonna waste my time giving you quotes because I know you're fully aware of them.

Why would I need any quotes? The issue is whether or not he waited a couple weeks to call it a terror attack - that was Mitt's claim - and its been shown that claim is false by direct quotation of the Presidnet on the day after the attack. What additional quotes are needed?

I — I — I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

See? That's a lie. Its not true. Do you understand the words I am communicating to you?

 

[Katzndogz]

obama was so concerned with investigating the attack that he delayed allowing the investigators in for three weeks. Only after it became an embarrassment was he pressured to let the investigators in did he do so. After all even obama can only claim investigations with no investigations for so long. It's a pattern. obama acts when he's embarrassed into action. Otherwise, he plays golf.

 

[Bfgrn]

obama was so concerned with investigating the attack that he delayed allowing the investigators in for three weeks. Only after it became an embarrassment was he pressured to let the investigators in did he do so. After all even obama can only claim investigations with no investigations for so long. It's a pattern. obama acts when he's embarrassed into action. Otherwise, he plays golf.

Bullshit!


Security Fears Hobble Inquiry on Libya Attack

September 28, 2012

BENGHAZI, Libya — Sixteen days after the death of four Americans in an attack on a United States diplomatic mission here, fears about the near-total lack of security have kept F.B.I. agents from visiting the scene of the killings and forced them to try to piece together the complicated crime from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away.

“It’s a cavalcade of obstacles right now,” said a senior American law enforcement official who is receiving regular updates on the Benghazi investigation and who described the crime scene, which has been trampled on, looted and burned, as so badly “degraded” that even once F.B.I. agents do eventually gain access, “it’ll be very difficult to see what evidence can be attributed to the bad guys.”

Piecing together exactly how Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died here would be difficult even under the best of conditions. But the volatile security situation in post-Qaddafi Libya has added to the challenge of determining whether it was purely a local group of extremists who initiated the fatal assault or whether the attackers had ties to international terrorist groups, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested Wednesday.

The Libyan government has advised the F.B.I. that it cannot ensure the safety of the American investigators in Benghazi. So agents have been conducting interviews from afar, relying on local Libyan authorities to help identify and arrange meetings with witnesses to the attack and working closely with the Libyans to gauge the veracity of any of those accounts.

“There’s a chance we never make it in there,” said a senior law enforcement official.

more

 

[JennaV]

First off I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I have watched this years presidential debate in absolute disgust we are headed towards a financial meltdown like this country has never seen and all the democrats can do is LIE and then LIE some more, please fact check this: 80% of all mainstream media journalist are regristered voters for the democratic party and show HUGE favortisim to Obama even if it means lieing just to be right,they do not expose the president for the fraud that he is, now by saying this I will be labeled a RACIST but please keep that under raps as I'm not so sure my hispanic husband of eight years would like to hear that and it makes me wonder how many of you WHITE DEMOCRATS live in a minority neighborhood or even a poor neighborhood my guess it is only a tiny perentage. NEW FLASH WE ARE NOT YOUR VICTIMS, WE DON'T WANT YOUR FOOD STAMPS, WE WANT JOBS, OUR PRIDE AND OUR DIGNITY BACK!!!!!!!!! we will never obtain this by handouts thus becoming nothing more than beggars. I have to believe that you take this stance on the pretense that you are trying to help the disadvantaged, the gays and the ones YOU feel cannot fight for themselves for that I applaude your efforts but please stop because infact you are KILLING us!!! We the poor have learned to scam the system better than anyone, SOME of this mess we have to OWN and by never being forced to accept our share of responsibility we continue our downward spiral. As for me and my family we are sick and tired of being your pillar to stand in the name of righteousness. I do NOT hate Obama because he is half black or half white, I hate his blatant lies, I hate how he passes the buck at every turn yet never passes up the oppurtunity to blame everyone else for his own mistakes,I hate that he gets a nobel prize for doing absolutley nothing but sinking us further into debt, in my opinion that is something earned, not given,I hate that his supporters are so brainwashed into believeing his lies as truths that they will stop at nothing (intimidation at the polls, cover-ups, publicly humilating a child who wears her canidates shirt to school even comparing it to the KKK!@@#@#, moderators who speak their own ill informed information, I hate that he never owns up to anything I.E recent example Hillary Clinton took the bullet for him in his latest cover-up and the list goes on and on. I will not call names as it is just in poor taste but my god people WAKE up!!!!! We are asleep at the wheel for once stop pointing fingers and come together to find a solution. I am an American Creole and I want to be proud of my nation again. futhermore I support gay marriages and the rights of women but I do NOT support the democratic party in my opinion you have lost your path, a LIE will always be a LIE, you are no better than those that you cast your stones at

 

[Bfgrn]

First off I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I have watched this years presidential debate in absolute disgust we are headed towards a financial meltdown like this country has never seen and all the democrats can do is LIE and then LIE some more, please fact check this: 80% of all mainstream media journalist are regristered voters for the democratic party and show HUGE favortisim to Obama even if it means lieing just to be right,they do not expose the president for the fraud that he is, now by saying this I will be labeled a RACIST but please keep that under raps as I'm not so sure my hispanic husband of eight years would like to hear that and it makes me wonder how many of you WHITE DEMOCRATS live in a minority neighborhood or even a poor neighborhood my guess it is only a tiny perentage. NEW FLASH WE ARE NOT YOUR VICTIMS, WE DON'T WANT YOUR FOOD STAMPS, WE WANT JOBS, OUR PRIDE AND OUR DIGNITY BACK!!!!!!!!! we will never obtain this by handouts thus becoming nothing more than beggars. I have to believe that you take this stance on the pretense that you are trying to help the disadvantaged, the gays and the ones YOU feel cannot fight for themselves for that I applaude your efforts but please stop because infact you are KILLING us!!! We the poor have learned to scam the system better than anyone, SOME of this mess we have to OWN and by never being forced to accept our share of responsibility we continue our downward spiral. As for me and my family we are sick and tired of being your pillar to stand in the name of righteousness. I do NOT hate Obama because he is half black or half white, I hate his blatant lies, I hate how he passes the buck at every turn yet never passes up the oppurtunity to blame everyone else for his own mistakes,I hate that he gets a nobel prize for doing absolutley nothing but sinking us further into debt, in my opinion that is something earned, not given,I hate that his supporters are so brainwashed into believeing his lies as truths that they will stop at nothing (intimidation at the polls, cover-ups, publicly humilating a child who wears her canidates shirt to school even comparing it to the KKK!@@#@#, moderators who speak their own ill informed information, I hate that he never owns up to anything I.E recent example Hillary Clinton took the bullet for him in his latest cover-up and the list goes on and on. I will not call names as it is just in poor taste but my god people WAKE up!!!!! We are asleep at the wheel for once stop pointing fingers and come together to find a solution. I am an American Creole and I want to be proud of my nation again. futhermore I support gay marriages and the rights of women but I do NOT support the democratic party in my opinion you have lost your path, a LIE will always be a LIE, you are no better than those that you cast your stones at

You start off with a HUGE lie, then you expect anyone to believe your ignorant rant about lies? There have been a lot of lies. Obama and the Democrats are not totally innocent, but they pale in comparison to the lies, deceit and what can only be described as domestic terrorism perpetrated by Republicans and a right wing echo chamber that Joseph Goebbels would be proud of.

EDUCATE yourself. Start by turning off Fox News. It is PURE propaganda.

 

[antiquity]

EDUCATE yourself. Start by turning off Fox News. It is PURE propaganda.

Right....turn on MSNBC and get the real propaganda. LOL