Rep. Peter King Doubles Down: Obama Administration’s Benghazi Cover-Up Was For Electo

[Mustang]

Any other conservatives here who want to give aid and comfort to the terrorists by undermining the very US Gov't which is trying to bring them to justice for killing American consulate personnel?

You are delusional. This gov't. is trying it's best to protect the enemy.

I wish Romney would say that publicly. We could watch his poll numbers REALLY plummet then.

 

[beretta304]

Any other conservatives here who want to give aid and comfort to the terrorists by undermining the very US Gov't which is trying to bring them to justice for killing American consulate personnel?

You are delusional. This gov't. is trying it's best to protect the enemy.

I wish Romney would say that publicly. We could watch his poll numbers REALLY plummet then.

Does your leg tingle?

 

[Lakhota]

Any other conservatives here who want to give aid and comfort to the terrorists by undermining the very US Gov't which is trying to bring them to justice for killing American consulate personnel?

You are delusional. This gov't. is trying it's best to protect the enemy.

The Obama Administration is trying to conduct SANE foreign diplomacy while protecting America. Armchair NaziCons don't have a clue.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Any other conservatives here who want to give aid and comfort to the terrorists by undermining the very US Gov't which is trying to bring them to justice for killing American consulate personnel?

You are delusional. This gov't. is trying it's best to protect the enemy.

I wish Romney would say that publicly. We could watch his poll numbers REALLY plummet then.

Yeah right. Only because idiot lefties hate the truth.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Any other conservatives here who want to give aid and comfort to the terrorists by undermining the very US Gov't which is trying to bring them to justice for killing American consulate personnel?

You are delusional. This gov't. is trying it's best to protect the enemy.

The Obama Administration is trying to conduct SANE foreign diplomacy while protecting America. Armchair NaziCons don't have a clue.

Wrong as usual idiot. Obamaturd is doing all he can to appease the evil muslims. Worst foreign policy since carter.

 

[Freewill]

There's a real scandal here...

Impeachment type if this asshole gets re-elected.

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

You're just making things up as you go. Could you please provide a quote to where anyone said we knew exactly where the WMD could be found? You may have a valid argument if the administration would have just said that the riots that killed our American brethren was a tragedy and left it like that. But no they gave a BS story and lied their asses off. If truth means nothing to you then vote for Obama.

 

[depotoo]

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

and what possible good could come up blaming it on a film in which you don't know yet, either? Works both ways, ya know. And the film could be much more damaging as it brings to light something most over there didn't even know existed.

The film had already been shown to cause widespread protests and rioting, especially when certain Muslim fundamentalists chose to exploit it for their own purposes. In that sense, the film explanation could easily serve as a plausible cover story for an investigation that explored other possibilities while also lulling the real culprits into a false sense of security that their true identity might not be known or even suspected. Considering that nobody stepped forward to claim responsibility for the attack, it seems pretty likely that their intention was to keep a lower profile than other groups who brag about their exploits.

This begs the question as to whose side American conservatives are on. While that may sound like a ridiculous statement, conservatives sure are spending a lot of time (this thread is evidence of that) assailing and undermining the very gov't whose responsibility it is to bring the killers to justice which is what the Obama administration is quite obviously trying to do. In that sense, it looks like the terrorists have an unwitting ally who is giving aid and comfort to the enemy by distracting our gov't from the task at hand.

If they didn't know for sure, they should have stated that. Stated there would be an investigation and condemn the deplorable act. It showed incompetence and weakness to our enemies. They made things worse. Plain and simple. And they apologized for one of our most basic freedoms.

 

[depotoo]

Any other conservatives here who want to give aid and comfort to the terrorists by undermining the very US Gov't which is trying to bring them to justice for killing American consulate personnel?

trying so hard the crime site has been completely trashed and they haven't even gotten there yet.

 

[Amelia]

There's a real scandal here...

Impeachment type if this asshole gets re-elected.

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

Withholding judgement would be saying, "We are withholding judgement".

It would not be blaming it on a movie.



The spokespeople would have had an excuse to say, "no comment at this time". They didn't choose to do that. They chose to lie.

 

[Political Junky]

Will Peter King ever get rid of his version of an Elvis hairdo? He must have had a lot of fun in the '50s.

 

[WillowTree]

I think Peter King should stick to writing about sports.

Peter King (born June 10, 1957 in Springfield, Massachusetts) is an American sportswriter. He writes for Sports Illustrated, including the weekly multiple-page column Monday Morning Quarterback. He is the author of five books, including Inside the Helmet. He was named National Sportswriter of the Year for 2010.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_King_(sportswriter)

So, King knows sports and has awards for his work. So why is he sticking is nose in politics/foreign/affairs?

The King we're talking about is a US Congressman. (R). doofus.

 

[Grandma]

It's so fun running the government from our living rooms (or garages, or basements, wherever the computer is...) We can determine foreign policy with absolutely no real experience whatsoever - even less than Romney or Sarah Palin! Go team us!! Yay!!

I don't know why it took two damn weeks for the Administration to set the record straight. It does seem a bit overlong. But calling for impeachment? Really? Please, try some logic.

 

[Ernie S.]

There's a real scandal here...

Impeachment type if this asshole gets re-elected.

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

So if they were withholding information to protect a criminal investigation, why the hell did they give information the the NY Times, but not the US Senate?
Story

Senate Republicans are furious the Obama administration rebuffed their attempts to learn details of the Benghazi attack, only to give the coveted information to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

 

[Erand7899]

There's a real scandal here...

Impeachment type if this asshole gets re-elected.

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

An armed attack on a US consulate is not a crime, it is an act of war. The administration knew, within 24 hours of the attack that it was an act of terrorism by Jihadists associated with Al Quada.

However, several days later, the administration was still attempting to sell the idea that the attack was simply a protest that got out of hand. They lied to the American people about a terrorist attack, and they lied to further their political ambitions. That is unacceptable and proof that we cannot trust the Obama administration to tell us the truth.

The world is laughing at us. Is that the credibility that you desire?

 

[The Infidel]

You guys want this to be like Watergate SOOOOOOO bad, dontcha?

Its worse dipshit.

 

[The Infidel]

I think Peter King should stick to writing about sports.

Peter King (born June 10, 1957 in Springfield, Massachusetts) is an American sportswriter. He writes for Sports Illustrated, including the weekly multiple-page column Monday Morning Quarterback. He is the author of five books, including Inside the Helmet. He was named National Sportswriter of the Year for 2010.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_King_(sportswriter)

So, King knows sports and has awards for his work. So why is he sticking is nose in politics/foreign/affairs?

The King we're talking about is a US Congressman. (R). doofus.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

vote this administation OUT folks

And replace it with what?

This is the blind idiocy of the partisan right – clearly unaware of the fact they’ve failed to offer voters a viable alternative.

There's a real scandal here...

Impeachment type if this asshole gets re-elected.

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

There is no ‘scandal,’ as you correctly note the Administration’s actions are perfectly appropriate.

This is yet another failed attempt by the right to contrive a controversy where none exists.

 

[Mustang]

There's a real scandal here...

Impeachment type if this asshole gets re-elected.

What's the scandal, again?

I ask because it's SOP for law enforcement to withhold official judgment on a suspicious death even as they investigate it as a possible homicide right from the beginning.

So too with the attack on our consulate. What possible good could it do to come out publicly and declare it a terrorist attack (and possibly attribute it to whom, exactly?) without the evidence to support that contention? The US Gov't would have egg on it's face, internationally, if it made that claim and it later turned out to not be true.

And if you don't believe that, recall all the fall out from our declaration prior to the Iraq War that Saddam actually had WMDs and we knew exactly where they were, thereby justifying our 'preemptive war.' In the war against Islamic extremism, the US is not served well by throwing around unsubstantiated accusations that we may later have to retract. Let al Qaeda make those kinds of mistakes. That hurts THEIR credibility in the Muslim world. We don't need our credibility any more tarnished than it has been by a series of screw ups from the Iraq War intelligence fiasco to Abu Ghraib.

You're just making things up as you go. Could you please provide a quote to where anyone said we knew exactly where the WMD could be found? You may have a valid argument if the administration would have just said that the riots that killed our American brethren was a tragedy and left it like that. But no they gave a BS story and lied their asses off. If truth means nothing to you then vote for Obama.

Rumsfeld said it.

 

[American_Jihad]

Dick Cheney: Obama Administration 'Involved In A Cover-Up​

10/2/12
By Sarah Bufkin

Former Vice President Dick Cheney criticized the Obama administration for attempting "a cover-up" of what transpired in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, when traumatic attacks killed four Americans, including U.S. Amb. Chris Stevens.

"It looks to me like [the Libya investigation] is going to get messier and messier, and in fact, it looks like the administration’s been involved in a cover-up claiming that it was all caused by this YouTube video," Cheney said on Sean Hannity's radio show on Tuesday. "When in fact, it was clearly the result of the developments with respect to al Qaeda and terrorism in North Africa. ... They refuse to recognize the situation we are in, and that's the first step towards ultimate failure and ultimately, future terrorist attacks."

Cheney pointed toward the Benghazi episode as symptomatic of the inadequacies of Obama's foreign policy.

"They like to go out and say, 'Bin Laden is dead. Terrorism is dead. Al Qaeda is dead, and you know, we're great in the foreign policy field,'" Cheney said. "But that's hogwash."

---

Dick Cheney: Obama Administration 'Involved In A Cover-Up' On Libya Attack

 

[tinydancer]

Dick Cheney: Obama Administration 'Involved In A Cover-Up​

10/2/12
By Sarah Bufkin

Former Vice President Dick Cheney criticized the Obama administration for attempting "a cover-up" of what transpired in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, when traumatic attacks killed four Americans, including U.S. Amb. Chris Stevens.

"It looks to me like [the Libya investigation] is going to get messier and messier, and in fact, it looks like the administration’s been involved in a cover-up claiming that it was all caused by this YouTube video," Cheney said on Sean Hannity's radio show on Tuesday. "When in fact, it was clearly the result of the developments with respect to al Qaeda and terrorism in North Africa. ... They refuse to recognize the situation we are in, and that's the first step towards ultimate failure and ultimately, future terrorist attacks."

Cheney pointed toward the Benghazi episode as symptomatic of the inadequacies of Obama's foreign policy.

"They like to go out and say, 'Bin Laden is dead. Terrorism is dead. Al Qaeda is dead, and you know, we're great in the foreign policy field,'" Cheney said. "But that's hogwash."

---

Dick Cheney: Obama Administration 'Involved In A Cover-Up' On Libya Attack

The whole "we wiped AQ off the map" meme isn't so hot now is it?