Romney's Attack On Obama Falling Apart


zzzzzzzzzzzzz liar Absolute Pubduperie.

Anything that won't get Fakie any additional welfare is pubicrap.

Frakie is a total moron.....
 
Get some sleep, twit. Bengazi was and is incommunicado. Nite!

Then explain this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQSfqHJd2mU]Benghazi Libya Attack: State Department's Charlene R. Lamb Opening Statement - YouTube[/ame]

Tell me how they knew and coordinated the events testified to.
 
Yep, and the evidence is Romney is only up 52 to 45 in the most Current Poll out there.

lol

October 12, 2012

Tagg Romney; Ponzi Scheme

"The private equity firm run by Tagg Romney—Mitt’s eldest son, who is now taking a leadership role in guiding his father’s presidential campaign—misled reporters last year about its involvement with a company run by men accused of taking part in a multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme.

In a nutshell, Tagg helped these investors form a company—called Solamere Advisors, a nod to Tagg’s firm Solamere Capital—shortly after their boss, Allen Stanford, was caught by law enforcement for his elaborate Ponzi fraud.

When I interviewed him in Las Vegas, Tagg told me that his associates were “cleared” of any wrongdoing associated with the Stanford Ponzi scheme. Court documents directly contradict Tagg and show that the lawsuit has not been dismissed."

allenstanford_mittromney_taggromney.png

:eusa_whistle:
 
(Mother Jones article):

why did Rice suggest that the attacks came after a "spontaneous" protest at the Benghazi consulate? There was no protest.

True, but Rice didn't know that at the time because the CIA talking points still referred to "demonstrations" that had been inspired by the protests in Cairo. As David Martin reports: "Over that same weekend, U.S. intelligence began to uncover evidence that there had not been a protest outside the consulate. That new intelligence did not get to Rice before she appeared on the Sunday talk shows, making her the target of Republican accusations the administration was trying to cover up the terrorist attack."

But why did anyone think there was anything "spontaneous" about this in the first place? In fact, the assault on the consulate was preplanned by "al-Qaeda elements," as Libyan President Mohammed Magarief said, wasn't it?

No. The LA Times reports that Magarief was mistaken: "The assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi last month appears to have been an opportunistic attack rather than a long-planned operation, and intelligence agencies have found no evidence that it was ordered by Al Qaeda, according to U.S. officials and witnesses interviewed in Libya....The attack was 'carried out following a minimum amount of planning,' said a U.S. intelligence official....A second U.S. official added, 'There isn't any intelligence that the attackers pre-planned their assault days or weeks in advance.' Most of the evidence so far suggests that 'the attackers launched their assault opportunistically after they learned about the violence at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo' earlier that day, the official said."

Still, the Obama administration was negligent in refusing a stream of requests from American diplomats in Libya to provide more security, wasn't it?

That's possible. However, increased security probably wouldn't have changed anything. As the New York Times reported a couple of weeks ago, "The requests were denied, but they were largely focused on extending the tours of security guards at the American Embassy in Tripoli — not at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, 400 miles away."

Bottom line: There were conflicting reports on the ground, and that was reflected in conflicting and sometimes confused reports from the White House. I don't think anyone would pretend that the Obama's administration's response to Benghazi was anywhere near ideal. Nevertheless, the fact is that their statements were usually properly cautious; the YouTube video really did play a role; the attack was opportunistic, not preplanned; and it doesn't appear to have had any serious connection with al-Qaeda. It's true that it took about ten days for all this to really shake out, but let's be honest: ten days isn't all that long to figure out what really happened during a violent and chaotic attack halfway around the world. I get that it's a nice opportunity for Republicans to score some political points in the runup to an election, but really, there's not much there there.
 
President Obama 277 Governor Romney 261

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

Much depends on who states their case best tonight. Personally, after the Governor's premature comments on the events that night, I think that he is unfit to sit in the Oval Office.

Nate Silver has it 288 to 250 for Obama. With a 67.6 per cent chance of the President winning re-election. Going to be interesting to see how his forecasts stack up against the polls.

Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com
 
Only a loony Obamabot could continue defending Obama on Libya. It's an awful mess. And it's all his.
 
Romney is falling apart ?

His favorability ratings are on the rise (2.0 over Obama) and his national poll numbers are up.

Ohio still trending Romney.

Romney does not need to attack Obama....
 

Forum List

Back
Top