Should anyone in this admin go to jail if

If it was proven that this administration did in fact deny Chris Stevens and the other 3 men with the security they needed after they begged for it. And they told them NO and to quit complaining . Do you think that anyone would go to jail?? I mean the buck stops at Hilary and Obama, I doubt that would happen.. But what do you think ????So far this admin has 6 bodies that they are REASON they died.. Brian Terry , Jamie Zapata and now the 4 in Libya

XOqnA.jpg


Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican and chairman of the House intelligence committee, told CNN there was no sign of intelligence “chatter” leading up to the Benghazi consulate attack that would have warned U.S. officials to take extra precautions.

All U.S. embassies were ordered to conduct a security review in preparation for the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and were told to enhance their security if needed, according to a senior administration official who briefed reporters yesterday on condition of anonymity.

U.S. Diplomatic Security Tightened With Few Good Options - Bloomberg

This came from the Huffington Post and like much of that they publish, it isn't true.

What Mike Rogers REALLY said was:

"It was very clear to me that they picked information for convenience sake. That fit a narrative that they believed. I don't want to question their motive or what they thought they were doing. I don't know if it was political or not. I don't have any information that it was political...I know other committees are going back to see if Congress was deliberately misled, which would be a violation of the law."
Rep. Rogers went on to say, the Committee had requested cables from the Libyan embassy for the months leading up to the attack but have not received them, adding "The cooperation is not what we had hoped."

Rep. Mike Rogers on Libya: White House picked information that fit a narrative – CNN Press Room - CNN.com Blogs
 
Jail is pretty extreme. In any other time in history the media would have exhibited a little outrage and perhaps shown videos of the funerals of Ambassador and the two Navy Seals and a little investigative reporting and we wouldn't have to worry about Hillary's negligence because she would be on the next train to Arkansas.
 
Watergate was a cover up scandal over a minor break in, no one died. John N. Mitchell, H.R. Haldeman, John Erlichman, and Charles Colson all went to prison. This cover up is mountains worse than Watergate. The Libyan scandal is so bad that it even eclipses Fast and Furious.
 
The attempted coverup is nothing short of a cluster fuck surrounded by a circle jerk by Barry and his administration, with special consideration to our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

And like all scandals it's going to fester and be troublesome, especially once Romney zeroes in on it during the next two debates as it's squarely a foreign policy issue...a BIG issue that's not going away.

This one ain't over, folks...
 
The attempted coverup is nothing short of a cluster fuck surrounded by a circle jerk by Barry and his administration, with special consideration to our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

And like all scandals it's going to fester and be troublesome, especially once Romney zeroes in on it during the next two debates as it's squarely a foreign policy issue...a BIG issue that's not going away.

This one ain't over, folks...

Ain't it grand? Romney's the only one that got it right from the get-go... think about it, Pres. Barry Kardashian has been wrong nearly 100% of the time.. from GM, to the Cambridge Police, to Libya to this... WRONG.

:lol:
 
Last edited:
Was "gross negligence" the reason our last President sent our soldiers to the wrong war for the wrong reasons where over 3000 of them, and counting has died in vain?
*Ahem!*

Of course this is being ignored.

I'm not ignoring it. I disagree with the premise you two portray. After 19 cease fire violations Iraq got what they had coming.

I will however say the war was conducted wrong imo.
Invade
Bomb
Depose the regime
Leave

That's what should have happened. Two month war tops
 
I think you'd have to have proof that the administration had political motives for allowing an incident to happen. IOW, if there were internal memos or something of that nature where they were observed colluding in a "wag the dog" type scenario in order to to gin up foreign policy credentials for Obama, then we could call it criminal. Now, of course, in my more cynical moments I can't help but wonder... but the best explanation rationally is that they're just STUPID. Obama's foreign policy stance has been hopelessly naive and incompetent so far, so it stands to reason that this is just another example of it.

I'm curious though as to whether the families of the slain can bring any sort of civil litigation. I expect they're likely barred from it, but I'm not a lawyer so I don't know. :eusa_eh:
 
What law was broken by a member of this administration that they should go to jail for?
Covering up evidence, lying for starters. This whole thing has a Nixonian feel to it. Now we discover there were no protest whatsoever, and yet we were told 5 days afterwards that this was a protest that went out of control.

That's my beef with them. The lying and the evasiveness. I'd put them in prison just for that. And for being stupid.

Careful what you hope for, if we put people in prison for stupidity you might find yourself in a cell with warrior as your rommie.
 
The acts of this admin in the libya attack are despicable and appalling. Continuous lies, deception, have placed this tragedy at the top of the heap of O's growing list of scandals.
 
I think you'd have to have proof that the administration had political motives for allowing an incident to happen. IOW, if there were internal memos or something of that nature where they were observed colluding in a "wag the dog" type scenario in order to to gin up foreign policy credentials for Obama, then we could call it criminal. Now, of course, in my more cynical moments I can't help but wonder... but the best explanation rationally is that they're just STUPID. Obama's foreign policy stance has been hopelessly naive and incompetent so far, so it stands to reason that this is just another example of it.

I'm curious though as to whether the families of the slain can bring any sort of civil litigation. I expect they're likely barred from it, but I'm not a lawyer so I don't know. :eusa_eh:

When obama whispered into Medeved's ear that after the election he'd have more flexibility to deal with Russia's demands, was that collusion for yet another activity by the obama royal regime?

There are only two options. The regime acted deliberately and in collusion with islamic forces, or they were hopelessly naive and incompetent.
 
Then why was his pants on backwards in the photo's that's been shown? Did he do that before he died??
You just keep siding with your islamic friends....traitor! You're so freaking stupid!
 
Your Dems sent them too...without their approval it never would have happened. He wasn't like Obama is and just decide to do it on his own...
 
You'd basically have to prove that, at the very least, the admin was knew the attack was coming for sure and purposely didn't do anything about it. I'm no lawyer but i'm sure you'd probably need much more than that even. Considering that, it'll end up just being a black eye on the admin, bigger to some than others.
 
The real problem the Hussein administration has now is if they lied and covered up their mistakes after the attacks.

We already know their pleas for more security went ignored. Same shit happened with Khobar Towers with Clinton 1.

If however the administration has lied about their actions and knowledge of threats to the FBI then certainly people can go to jail.

This is a huge scandal. If a (R) President had done this there would be wardrums blasting for impeachment. But since we have a liberal President the media is more than happy to look the other way and make excuses.

Liberals went apeshit over a made up scandal of Valerie Plame. This one is real and people died in a terror attack that was ignored, and yet they are silent.



The media not only looking the other way, but actively participating in the cover-up.

The media should be held just as accountable.
 
Threats of a terrorist attack SHOULD be enough to get the security they needed. So no, it doesn't matter that the KNEW it was coming. The terrorists normally won't tell you when they're attacking so security should have been in place when the first couple threats were made.

But you're right, i'm sure Obama and Clinton will not pay for what happened. And we all know they're not going to admit to doing anything wrong either.....
 

Forum List

Back
Top