Woods father calls WH Murderers, Liars, Cowards

[Trajan]

Of course she's frustrated by the investigation. When a murder takes your child, and there are investigation that require time, it's always frustrating. Who can say that wouldn't frustrate anyone?

That does not change the "warm" reception given to her (which my response was in direct reference to) she described that is in direct odds with that of the father.

Warm reception? You do realize that the people giving her that warm reception were in fact the very people who's inaction led to her son's death? I don't think she had any idea at all what had really happened in Bengazi that day or she would have punched Hilary Clinton right in the face and told Obama and Biden to go fuck themselves. I'd love to see someone interview her NOW to find out if her thoughts about the Obama Administration are still so warm and fuzzy now that she knows they threw her son away and then gave her a hug.

Apparently, in your world, the investigation is complete, all the facts are in, and the Fox news unsourced accounts are all that matters.

I would be careful with the unsourced accounts remark.....

 

[Oldstyle]

Of course she's frustrated by the investigation. When a murder takes your child, and there are investigation that require time, it's always frustrating. Who can say that wouldn't frustrate anyone?

That does not change the "warm" reception given to her (which my response was in direct reference to) she described that is in direct odds with that of the father.

Warm reception? You do realize that the people giving her that warm reception were in fact the very people who's inaction led to her son's death? I don't think she had any idea at all what had really happened in Bengazi that day or she would have punched Hilary Clinton right in the face and told Obama and Biden to go fuck themselves. I'd love to see someone interview her NOW to find out if her thoughts about the Obama Administration are still so warm and fuzzy now that she knows they threw her son away and then gave her a hug.

Apparently, in your world, the investigation is complete, all the facts are in, and the Fox news unsourced accounts are all that matters.

What I find amusing about that charge, Paperview...is that as far as this Administration was concerned the "investigation" seemed to be complete hours after Ambassador Stevens and the others were murdered. We were assured repeatedly that this was not an organized attack by terrorists but a protest of the YouTube video that got out of hand even though the Obama Administration knew from streaming video that there was no protest that took place but was in fact an organized attack by terrorists.

It's only after their subterfuge was revealed that the Obama Administration changed their narrative...now telling us not to jump to conclusions and to wait until a full investigation is complete (which won't of course happen until after the election!) before we find fault with the way they handled the situation. Hilary Clinton has the gall to lecture us about "cherry picking" information after doing EXACTLY THAT when they disregarded the reports that said it was indeed a terror attack.

Kindly explain to me how it is Leon Panetta can excuse the Administration's non-action on not knowing what was happening on the ground in Libya when there were not one but two drones overhead providing Washington with live streaming video of the attack? It's yet one more lie following on the heels of lies by Clinton, Rice and Obama.

 

[Pheonixops]

The father is being a father. God Bless his son and his family and the families of all of the people who were killed in that attack. Something definitely broke down, I don't think that the Administration purposely did anything to not help those people in ham's way. It was obviously a very chaotic situation, I've seem people state that they should have sent C-130's over there or a gunship. it's not as simple as people think.

Dude, they had CIA operators at the Annex, a mile away from the Embassy asking three times for permission to go to the Embassy and attempt to rescue the Ambassador. That permission was repeatedly denied. It's almost seven hours between the time the attacks on the embassy began and when Mr. Woods son was killed at the Annex. During that time they had been fighting a pitched battle with those terrorists. How the fuck do we NOT send backup in a situation like that? Seven hours? You've got to be kidding me. The more I learn the facts of what happened in Bengazi the more infuriated I become.

I agree with you. Surprised? I said that someone dropped the ball. They should investigate those allegations (denials to send help and reinforcements) to see who the actual person was at the top of the chain of command that denied the requests and go from there. I'm just not into the manic speculations and accusations some people are making in an hysterical manner. I DO find it VERY funny that some of the same people who want to make the President DIRECTLY responsible for Benghazi are the SAME hypocrites who wanted to distance the President as far as possible from the successful mission to get OBL.........................

 

[Pheonixops]

CIA spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood ( that is Petraeus) said in a statement today "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”


President Obama Begs Off Answering Whether Americans in Benghazi Were Denied Requests for Help - ABC News


its time for obama to hold a press conf. and answer questions on this, in fact its paste time, but, here we are.

What's so "damning" withe the article? "“Well, we are finding out exactly what happened,” the president again said. “I can tell you, as I’ve said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened so that it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice. And I guarantee you that everyone in the state department, our military, the CIA, you name it, had number one priority making sure that people were safe. These were our folks and we’re going to find out exactly what happened, but what we’re also going to do it make sure that we are identifying those who carried out these terrible attacks.”"

"Earlier today, Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin reported that CIA agents in the second U.S. compound in Benghazi were denied requests for help.

In response, CIA spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood said, “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”

Someone here is lying. The CIA operators who were THERE at the Annex say that they requested permission three times to affect a rescue of the Ambassador and others at the consulate and were told to stand down three times. The "selfless Americans" who gave their lives in an effort to rescue their comrades were in fact those very same CIA operators who disobeyed orders and went to the embassy to try and rescue Stevens.

Now our choice of WHO is lying is between a bunch of politicians in Washington trying desperately to get their asses out of this bonfire...and the the guys who were there on the ground in Libya fighting the battle.

Call me crazy, Pheon but I'm going to go with the guys on the ground. I think the "powers that be" let a lot of people die that day that didn't have to die and they've been scrambling to cover their own incompetence since it happened.

I agree with you that someone is lying, I think that the situation should be investigated to find who is or was lying and have them dealt with judicially.

 

[MisterBeale]

The father is being a father. God Bless his son and his family and the families of all of the people who were killed in that attack. Something definitely broke down, I don't think that the Administration purposely did anything to not help those people in ham's way. It was obviously a very chaotic situation, I've seem people state that they should have sent C-130's over there or a gunship. it's not as simple as people think.

Sigonella airbase ( in Sicily) is a huge base. It is 480 miles away from Benghazi....there is a squadron of A-10's there, they have a cruise speed of 340 mph and a top speed of 440. Sigonella also has at least 2 flights of KC-10 Tankers........the fighting lasted over 5 hours, then there was the annex battle.....in addition, they C-130's with a cruise speed of 336 mph and a range upwards of 2000, they had a Spec op grp.( Delta) they could have sent.

In 5-7 hours I would expect after seeing the real time action, they would have been sent. Those Seals there have painted more targets with laser I bet than you or I have......even if you wind up waving them off, you don't do nothing...unless..... command paralysis.

Benghazi Massacre: Fox/Huffington CIA Tale Nonsense
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/26/benghazi-massacre-foxhuffington-cia-tale-nonsense/

The US does maintain 2 C130 gunships in the region. These are slow moving transport aircraft stationed at times in Northern Sardinia but more often further away at Aviano in Italy, North of Venice.

These are Air Force planes, not Navy.

The gunships are extremely effective weapons and would have been of help had they been available, had they been called though all radio and telephone traffic was jammed as with the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty and had the personnel in need of support been stationary and secure with strobe markers to secure them from the 20mm, 40mm and 105mm weapons on the AC130.

Instead, we have been informed, a two pronged and highly coordinated attack drove the US group to a safe house, into vehicles and corralled them in a pre-positioned ambush where their vehicle was attacked by a “quad 50″ anti-aircraft gun mounted on the back of a truck.

Such a weapon could destroy a Bradley Armoured Personnel Carrier or shoot down an Apache attack helicopter.

What is clear is that help was not available, that America moved into Libya with a minimal presence so as to seem unaggressive, to please critics of President Obama’s foreign policy among Republicans in Congress.

Blame them.

VT’s 30 Day Old Story on Benghazi Had it Right
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/22/vts-30-day-old-story-on-benghazi-had-it-right/

HOW DID THIS PHOTO TAKEN BY THE KILLERS GET DIRECTLY TO THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN? (Source: Romney Fundraising Email)

Those efforts would have been useless without the influx of GOP funding for the Jones telethon, without Google’s violation of its own policies, keeping an offensive YouTube video online and without key sources in the Middle East promoting the video carefully time to the assault by highly trained special operations forces believed to have flown in from Dubai.

Management of the US press, continually dancing from one conspiracy theory to another, is a clear sign that this operation originated in the United States.

It was handed off to an intelligence agency tied to the Romney campaign and Netanyahu, who turned to friends in the Gulf, as intelligence reports confirmed, to complete the complex and well coordinated military operation on two continents.

Below, from Newsweek, an Israel/American publication uses what we are told is actors demonstrating “Muslim rage.” Note the western/Israel “handler” pushing them up to the camera. It is his hand with bitten nails and a wedding ring we see “controlling the scene.”

COME ON, YOU CAN DO BETTER…PRETEND YOU CAUGHT YOUR WIFE WITH THE RABBI…Newsweek Blamed Killings on Muslim Rage, Staged By Their Own Staff as Seen Above


In politics, the Riots, the Benghazi Massacre, and how they have been used by Romney and his Israeli allies against the current administration are what has been commonly known as the "October Surprise." It is best to be aware though, that the truth of what really happened is even more damaging to the administration, so there isn't a whole lot they can do. Even if (when) they win the election, don't expect clarification, truth or justice to come out after all this is over.

What are they going to do, tell the American public that they have peripheral control over all these groups? That they are equipping and shipping terrorists to Syria? The up shot of this is to effectively say, Washington is arming both sides of every conflict and that American Taxpayers are paying for it. (We're getting into Iron Mountain Report territory now.) It would be a scandal. If Americans knew this, they would not even turn out to vote for any body, as they should. It would De-legitimize the whole process and the whole government. They sure as hell can't have that, after all, they are murdering the world's poor in our name. If they can't murder the world's poor in our name, then they become nothing more than the war criminals they are.

 

[Trajan]

The father is being a father. God Bless his son and his family and the families of all of the people who were killed in that attack. Something definitely broke down, I don't think that the Administration purposely did anything to not help those people in ham's way. It was obviously a very chaotic situation, I've seem people state that they should have sent C-130's over there or a gunship. it's not as simple as people think.

Sigonella airbase ( in Sicily) is a huge base. It is 480 miles away from Benghazi....there is a squadron of A-10's there, they have a cruise speed of 340 mph and a top speed of 440. Sigonella also has at least 2 flights of KC-10 Tankers........the fighting lasted over 5 hours, then there was the annex battle.....in addition, they C-130's with a cruise speed of 336 mph and a range upwards of 2000, they had a Spec op grp.( Delta) they could have sent.

In 5-7 hours I would expect after seeing the real time action, they would have been sent. Those Seals there have painted more targets with laser I bet than you or I have......even if you wind up waving them off, you don't do nothing...unless..... command paralysis.

Benghazi Massacre: Fox/Huffington CIA Tale Nonsense
Benghazi Massacre: Fox/Huffington CIA Tale Nonsense | Veterans Today
Quote:

The US does maintain 2 C130 gunships in the region. These are slow moving transport aircraft stationed at times in Northern Sardinia but more often further away at Aviano in Italy, North of Venice.

so hes not sure? Does he KNOW ac-130s or c-130 U's were NOT in Sicily?

and I have already spoke to their speed, approx 330 mph, hello, and the AC-10's?

your point is?

These are Air Force planes, not Navy.

Sigonella is an AIR FORCE base....

The gunships are extremely effective weapons and would have been of help had they been available, had they been called though all radio and telephone traffic was jammed as with the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty and had the personnel in need of support been stationary and secure with strobe markers to secure them from the 20mm, 40mm and 105mm weapons on the AC130.



Instead, we have been informed, a two pronged and highly coordinated attack drove the US group to a safe house, into vehicles and corralled them in a pre-positioned ambush where their vehicle was attacked by a “quad 50″ anti-aircraft gun mounted on the back of a truck.

a lot of assumptions, they can be jammed? I see, and shot down? At night...from guys who had little success vs. Qaddafis helicopters?


can I se the report btw on that quad .50?

Such a weapon could destroy a Bradley Armoured Personnel Carrier or shoot down an Apache attack helicopter.

Really? where did he get that from?

helicopter yes....IF they got a chance to see them....

What is clear is that help was not available, that America moved into Libya with a minimal presence so as to seem unaggressive, to please critics of President Obama’s foreign policy among Republicans in Congress.

Blame them.

overall, sounds like hes not very well informed and has an axe to grind....not very convincing.

 

[asaratis]

“This is not about politics,” Chip Woods, father of Tyrone Woods said. “If it were about politics it would dishonor my son’s death. This has to do with honor, integrity, justice.”

Despite three separate orders to “stand down” during the attack, Woods’ son went to the consulate to try and save the U.S. ambassador.

“This news that he disobeyed his orders does not surprise me,” Woods said. “My son was an American hero. And he was going — he had the moral strength to do what was right even if that would professionally cost him his job, even if it could potentially cost him his life. He was a hero who was willing to do whatever was necessary to respond to their cries for help.”

“If in fact those people in the White House were as courageous and had the moral strength that my son Ty had, immediately within minutes of the first attack they would have given permission — not denied permission — for those C-130s to have gone up there.”


Father of slain SEAL accuses White House of murder [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller

He is correct! Obama is a gutless, un-presidential liar. He has surrounded himself with similar staff.

Obama should be impeached for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

 

[Missourian]

Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods will be interviewed tonight @ 9 pm et by Jeanine Pirro on Fox News Channel.

 

[MisterBeale]

overall, sounds like hes not very well informed and has an axe to grind....not very convincing.

Thanks for the very insightful analysis and the expert critique, much appreciated. (and agreed to an some extent, though I don't believe the attack would've have taken place if assurances weren't extended to the attackers that resistance would be minimal.) I never take everything I read at that site as the gospel truth. Often times I know the empirical facts might be correct, but the way they are interpreted are going to be, like most news organizations, heavily spun. This site was much more reliable during the primary process in revealing the heavy corruption and media bias against Ron Paul. (obviously)

Due to the fact that a lot of their editorial staff is made up of former military and government officials, they have connections with inside intel. that often can't be released to the public. So this is one of those, "you just have to trust us" on this sort of deal. (You know, our sources have to remain confidential.) Is this anymore reliable than how the public gets it's information now? Not really. The government and it's experts create media releases and that is what we believe.

On the point of his "axe to grind?" Yes, you are correct, he is in the tank for Obama. I do not trust him, nor should anyone else. If you have ever heard of an organization called the Trilateral Commission, it has had very little currency since the Carter administration. It might be what is behind this site, though there is little to no proof. Several times a year the lead editor will write an article praising Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the enlisted men commenting there aren't idiots, they completely rag on those pieces and it seems at those points, readership declines. Everyone knows the relationship between Ziggy and Obama. Axe to grind? At this point, you bet. Be sure there was some disinfo. in that piece. But a wise man can find the information in every piece of disinformation.

The fact remains, this source of news is far better than the NYT, the Washington Post, or anything you are going to get on your evening news.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/3302-elites-push-government-funded-public-media

It is best to combine it with other sources of information to get a clearer picture of what is going on. Although his site is supported by Ziggy, his staff is pretty independent, and he has connections to quite a few others in the independent and whistle blowing media.

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2012/10/03/syria-the-story-thus-far/#more-16199
http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/conflicts/27-09-2012/122279-ambassador_stevens-0/
http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/09/16/website-us-ambassador-stevens-raped-and-dragged-in-street-warning-graphic-photo/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/libyas-green-resistance-did-it-and-nato-powers-are-covering-up
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=6414
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2012/1024/Benghazi-e-mails-What-did-Obama-administration-know-when*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20072745*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223747/CIA-agents-Benghazi-twice-asked-permission-help-Ambassador-Chris-Stevens-bullets-flying-twice-told-stand-down.html*
* not exactly independent of corporate and establishment power and interests, but still revealing articles.


From information I have read, it sounds like the administration knew there was a substantial amount of pre-planning, and heavy armaments involved in the attack. There might have also been the great probability that to commit more US forces to this incident might have turned it into an ambush or a "black hawk down" situation.

It seems to me, that for the administration, at that time, with the amount of force they could bring to bear, it was either a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type situation. They were either going to lose a few good men, or it might have turned into a truly nightmarish public relations fiasco. Would slaughtering 30, 40, 50 or more Libyans have done them any good or would it have just inflamed the entire region? And could they have possibly lost a lot more men? It sounds like there was a LOT of heavy armaments possessed by the militants in the area.

 

[Oldstyle]

overall, sounds like hes not very well informed and has an axe to grind....not very convincing.

Thanks for the very insightful analysis and the expert critique, much appreciated. (and agreed to an some extent, though I don't believe the attack would've have taken place if assurances weren't extended to the attackers that resistance would be minimal.) I never take everything I read at that site as the gospel truth. Often times I know the empirical facts might be correct, but the way they are interpreted are going to be, like most news organizations, heavily spun. This site was much more reliable during the primary process in revealing the heavy corruption and media bias against Ron Paul. (obviously)

Due to the fact that a lot of their editorial staff is made up of former military and government officials, they have connections with inside intel. that often can't be released to the public. So this is one of those, "you just have to trust us" on this sort of deal. (You know, our sources have to remain confidential.) Is this anymore reliable than how the public gets it's information now? Not really. The government and it's experts create media releases and that is what we believe.

On the point of his "axe to grind?" Yes, you are correct, he is in the tank for Obama. I do not trust him, nor should anyone else. If you have ever heard of an organization called the Trilateral Commission, it has had very little currency since the Carter administration. It might be what is behind this site, though there is little to no proof. Several times a year the lead editor will write an article praising Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the enlisted men commenting there aren't idiots, they completely rag on those pieces and it seems at those points, readership declines. Everyone knows the relationship between Ziggy and Obama. Axe to grind? At this point, you bet. Be sure there was some disinfo. in that piece. But a wise man can find the information in every piece of disinformation.

The fact remains, this source of news is far better than the NYT, the Washington Post, or anything you are going to get on your evening news.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/3302-elites-push-government-funded-public-media

It is best to combine it with other sources of information to get a clearer picture of what is going on. Although his site is supported by Ziggy, his staff is pretty independent, and he has connections to quite a few others in the independent and whistle blowing media.

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2012/10/03/syria-the-story-thus-far/#more-16199
http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/conflicts/27-09-2012/122279-ambassador_stevens-0/
http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/09/16/website-us-ambassador-stevens-raped-and-dragged-in-street-warning-graphic-photo/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/libyas-green-resistance-did-it-and-nato-powers-are-covering-up
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=6414
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2012/1024/Benghazi-e-mails-What-did-Obama-administration-know-when*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20072745*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223747/CIA-agents-Benghazi-twice-asked-permission-help-Ambassador-Chris-Stevens-bullets-flying-twice-told-stand-down.html*
* not exactly independent of corporate and establishment power and interests, but still revealing articles.


From information I have read, it sounds like the administration knew there was a substantial amount of pre-planning, and heavy armaments involved in the attack. There might have also been the great probability that to commit more US forces to this incident might have turned it into an ambush or a "black hawk down" situation.

It seems to me, that for the administration, at that time, with the amount of force they could bring to bear, it was either a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type situation. They were either going to lose a few good men, or it might have turned into a truly nightmarish public relations fiasco. Would slaughtering 30, 40, 50 or more Libyans have done them any good or would it have just inflamed the entire region? And could they have possibly lost a lot more men? It sounds like there was a LOT of heavy armaments possessed by the militants in the area.

With all due respect, Mister Beale? My guess would be that one targeted air strike on that mortar position that ended up killing the two ex-seals would have immediately ended that attack on the Annex. Why that wasn't done is beyond me. If there is one thing that the terrorists have learned to fear it's drone strikes and laser guided missiles. Those people fighting for their lives at the Annex deserved help. Not giving them air support was signing their death warrants. Shame on the Obama Administration for sitting on their hands while brave Americans were killed.

 

[Oldstyle]

As for "inflaming" the Libyan people by fighting back? We aided them in their fight to rid themselves of a despicable tyrant and they repay us by killing our Ambassador? Fuck them if they have a problem with us defending ourselves.

 

[mex]

woods and doherty were lighting up the attackers position with laser... for HOURS. They were in radio contact the entire time.

They could have hit those bastards from 30 miles away.

The truth will soon be upon us, and obam will be exposed as the fraud he always has been.

 

[Oldstyle]

The effort to wall this off from President Obama is already underway, Mex.

We're supposed to believe that Barry sits in on things like the Osama Bin Laden raid but when it comes to our embassy being attacked and our Ambassador killed he didn't know a thing about it.

You buying that? I'm not.

 

[mex]

The effort to wall this off from President Obama is already underway, Mex.

We're supposed to believe that Barry sits in on things like the Osama Bin Laden raid but when it comes to our embassy being attacked and our Ambassador killed he didn't know a thing about it.

You buying that? I'm not.

of course I buy it.

the NYT would be all over it if it were not true... right?

 

[MisterBeale]

The truth will soon be upon us, and obam will be exposed as the fraud he always has been.

Who is going to expose him? He runs the government. The government never investigates itself. No, you don't have a thorough grasp of reality.

Whether or not we could stop the attack is not relevant. The question that should be asked is whether or not they wanted to stop the attack. From what I have read, the indication is no, it appears the risks were too high for them to stop the attack. They were double dealing, as they always do. It is a story of destabilization. There were things that they did not want the world to know, and the people that attacked there had been our "allies." I'm not sure they wanted to destroy the local political muscle.
http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MNJ180008.pdf
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/12/the_salafi_moment?page=0,1

This demonstration of mid-east terrorism may have been necessary to increase voter turn out in the U.S. I think more people will vote now either way.

This is the primary goal here. In a power vacuum, the only power that has any weight is the ability to project clandestine power. They may not have wanted to neutralize valuable intelligence assets, but who can say for sure, it is all cloak and dagger. Really though, don't expect anything more.

But Mrs. Clinton has already accepted responsibility, she said the incident should not be politicized, so that will be the end of it. No real investigation will be done that will have any great or lasting effect on politics in this nation. This was meant as an October surprise mainly.

http://live.wsj.com/video/hilary-clinton-accepts-blame-for-benghazi-attack/542941FC-A9B7-4D11-AD75-BF1B5D624A7E.html?link=MW_article_tboright4#!542941FC-A9B7-4D11-AD75-BF1B5D624A7E

 

[mex]

I'd just like them to explain why they lied about it for two weeks

 

[thanatos144]

We have to remember for all that Obama pats himself on the back for Osama being killed it took him some 16 hours to give the order....Our president can not make critical decisions without hours and hours of thought. The man was most likely afraid the Libyans would look at him bad if he acted....the man is a giant pussy.

 

[MisterBeale]

I'd just like them to explain why they lied about it for two weeks

Why is Romney lying about his position on abortion now?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdVRB9x_DAA]Mitt Romney Says He is Pro-Choice in 2002 - YouTube[/ame]
Because, politicians lie to get elected, is that such a mystery. For the administration, this was probably damage control.

Indications are, this thing was agitated by powerful forces allied with the conservatives and with Israel. Israel is supporting Romney. Go figure.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/blasphemy-as-a-political-tactic

 

[Wehrwolfen]

It boils down to one simple fact. When the 3 AM crisis phone call came in, Barack Obama hatched a plot to attack American free speech rights. And then he went to bed. This man does not deserve to be president.

 

[idb]

It boils down to one simple fact. When the 3 AM crisis phone call came in, Barack Obama hatched a plot to attack American free speech rights. And then he went to bed. This man does not deserve to be president.

You have to admire a man with a brain that can plot that clearly after being woken up at 3am.