Did I miss something today?

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Im still around. Just reading the responses. I missed most of it today so any imput on my part would be uninformed.

I do believe they lied to the American people. For what purpose I don't know. And that's about all I know for sure.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

If Benghazi was nothing, why did your messiah feel a need to lie to the American people about what happened there?

If Benghazi was nothing, why does your messiah continue to stonewall the congress over the documents surrounding the incident.

There is absolutely no doubt now that the President, and his minions, lied to the American people in the aftermath of the Benghazi attacks on our diplomats. They had absolutely no intelligence that any demonstration took place outside the consulate, and they had no intelligence that a video had anything to do with the attacks. They made that stuff up themselves, and had the CIA talking points revised to support that lie.

Until the question of who told Ambassador Rice it was a YouTube video that incited this whole thing is answered, there is a cover up.

Americans should know who sent Rice out and why they blamed it on a YouTube video. Ambassador Rice got f'ed in this whole deal.

But neither of you have any objective, documented evidence to support this partisan contrivance.

You and others on the right have it backwards: you don’t claim there’s a ‘cover up’ and then scramble trying to find ‘evidence’ in support; rather, you first search for evidence and follow that evidence to wherever it might lead you: perhaps to a cover up, perhaps not.

What are you talking about? The administration knew from the start that this attack was a terrorist attack and had nothing to do with the anti Mohammed video.

The Administration also knew that the target of the attack was the home of a covert CIA facility, and likely had decent National Security reasons for not wanting all of the intel on the attack to be public knowledge.

 

[ScienceRocks]

It's a shame that House Republicans cut funding for embassy security.

Did they cut our ability to send special forces? No, Obama just didn't use them and told them to stand down. He didn't blow the terrorist to hell is my problem.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no cover up, folks. End of story.

That explains why Hicks was specifically told that he had to have a chaperone to talk to investigators.

 

[ScienceRocks]

what makes me even angry is the fact that he bowed to the middle east after allowing these bastards to kill our people.

How the **** could you be happy that he acted like a weasel in front of the Islamic world?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It was the right wing who wanted to focus on this and spend a shit ton of money on it. Don't start bitching now, this is what conservatives wanted. A whole dog and pony show, a political circus, even though they knew it wouldn't amount to jack shit.

Even if something was found out, then what? Obama would still serve the rest of his term even if impeachment charges were brought up. And even if he was, by some unbelievable miracle, impeached before his term was up, then we get Biden!? **** that, I would rather have Obama than Biden.

This whole Benghazi thing was nothing more than a fevered attempt to have some mud to sling at democrats come the next election. It was never a serious attempt to hold anyone accountable for anything.

If Benghazi was nothing, why did your messiah feel a need to lie to the American people about what happened there?

If Benghazi was nothing, why does your messiah continue to stonewall the congress over the documents surrounding the incident.

There is absolutely no doubt now that the President, and his minions, lied to the American people in the aftermath of the Benghazi attacks on our diplomats. They had absolutely no intelligence that any demonstration took place outside the consulate, and they had no intelligence that a video had anything to do with the attacks. They made that stuff up themselves, and had the CIA talking points revised to support that lie.

There is no cover up, folks. End of story.

Until the question of who told Ambassador Rice it was a YouTube video that incited this whole thing is answered, there is a cover up.

Americans should know who sent Rice out and why they blamed it on a YouTube video. Ambassador Rice got f'ed in this whole deal.

But neither of you have any objective, documented evidence to support this partisan contrivance.

You and others on the right have it backwards: you don’t claim there’s a ‘cover up’ and then scramble trying to find ‘evidence’ in support; rather, you first search for evidence and follow that evidence to wherever it might lead you: perhaps to a cover up, perhaps not.

I really love it when you pontificate yourself into a untenable position.

Tell me something, what is it that, in your non educated opinion, makes Hicks testimony non objective evidence? Is he part of a super secret Republican sleeper cell that infiltrated the State Department 20 years ago solely to discredit Hilliary and Obama? Do you have any objective, documented, evidence to back up your claim that his testimony is part of a partisan contrivance, or are we supposed to accept it because it comes from the resident conspiracy nut?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Issa?s absurd claim that Clinton?s ?signature? means she personally approved it - The Washington Post

Hate to break this to you, but no lawyer ever signs anything without reading it. Unless you want to argue that Clinton ignored the first thing every lawyer learns, you are wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's a shame that House Republicans cut funding for embassy security.

The real shame is that you keep saying this when the State Department had unspent funds available for security.

 

[Locke11_21]

There's no media cover-up. Everyone could watch the testimony for themselves, with no media input, and there's still nothing to be said of the whole fiasco.

If you don't think there is a media cover-up, then you truly fall into the category of low information voter. If we truly had a fair and objective media, FOX and conservative radio never would have made it to where they are.

Rest assured, if this happened under George W. Bush, we would be seeing the Democrat party's ass-puppets in the media cover this infinitely. Learn the rules, if you have the letter D in front of your name, you get a free pass.

This whole Benghazi thing was nothing more than a fevered attempt to have some mud to sling at democrats come the next election. It was never a serious attempt to hold anyone accountable for anything.

Then by your standards, Watergate was nothing more than a fevered attempt by Democrats to sling mud at Nixon and Republicans. At least nobody was killed during Watergate.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One, the creepy reactionaries here do not or will not accept the facts.

Two, that is nothing new.

The administration fucked up (not nearly as badly as RR in Lebanon) not covered up.

 

[Synthaholic]

We spent a shit ton of money to find out what? Granted I haven't heard all the testimony but the highlights I've heard are all the same shit we've already known for months.

If there was something new please clue me in.

The republicans desperately tried to get the media to help them make their point but the media ain't havin' none of it.

So basically the media is in on the coverup.

As we have been saying all along.

Mud haz a sad.

 

[Synthaholic]

Ah, what a lovely sight. All those yapping 'Conservatives' unable to do anything but repeat the same old bullshit. This will shut down the same way the last one did, with the fruitloops quietly closing things down and sneaking out the back door with their tails dragging in the mud.

Did anyone notice Michelle Bachmann sitting in the front row, behind the witnesses?

 

[Synthaholic]

Sept. 16: UN Ambassador Susan Rice, in five television interviews, blames the attack on a spontaneous mob angered by an anti-Islam YouTube video

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-S-Ambassador-UN-said-spontaneous-attack.html

 

[Synthaholic]

There is no cover up, folks. End of story.

Until the question of who told Ambassador Rice it was a YouTube video that incited this whole thing is answered, there is a cover up.

Americans should know who sent Rice out and why they blamed it on a YouTube video. Ambassador Rice got f'ed in this whole deal.

 

[konradv]

Issa?s absurd claim that Clinton?s ?signature? means she personally approved it - The Washington Post

Hate to break this to you, but no lawyer ever signs anything without reading it. Unless you want to argue that Clinton ignored the first thing every lawyer learns, you are wrong.

Everything goes out under the Secretary's signature. That doesn't mean she read every last one. You obviously don't have a clue how things really work!

 

[Synthaholic]

It's a shame that House Republicans cut funding for embassy security.

How did they get the money to hire the Libyan militia to protect Stevens then?

You do know that his security as provided by Hilary Clinton was a Libyan militia.

Are you denying that the House cut funding for embassy security?

 

[Synthaholic]

There is no cover up, folks. End of story.

That explains why Hicks was specifically told that he had to have a chaperone to talk to investigators.

National security.

 

[Synthaholic]

Issa?s absurd claim that Clinton?s ?signature? means she personally approved it - The Washington Post

Hate to break this to you, but no lawyer ever signs anything without reading it. Unless you want to argue that Clinton ignored the first thing every lawyer learns, you are wrong.

The obvious:

• You didn't read the link
• You do not want any info that contradicts your predetermined opinion.

You're a ******* hack. From the link:

Signature​

a. The Communications Center (IRM/OPS/MSO/MSMC) will place the name of the Secretary on all telegrams to posts.​

b. Domestic telegrams originated within the Washington metropolitan area and transmitted through the 5th Floor Communications Center will bear the signature name of the Secretary at the end of the telegram. If a "signed by" line is used, it must appear as part of the text before the "End of Message" symbol.​

 

[Synthaholic]

Jon Stewart makes wingnuts look foolish, 782nd Edition:

 

[EriktheRed]

But neither of you have any objective, documented evidence to support this partisan contrivance.

You and others on the right have it backwards: you don’t claim there’s a ‘cover up’ and then scramble trying to find ‘evidence’ in support; rather, you first search for evidence and follow that evidence to wherever it might lead you: perhaps to a cover up, perhaps not.

I really love it when you pontificate yourself into a untenable position.

Tell me something, what is it that, in your non educated opinion, makes Hicks testimony non objective evidence? Is he part of a super secret Republican sleeper cell that infiltrated the State Department 20 years ago solely to discredit Hilliary and Obama? Do you have any objective, documented, evidence to back up your claim that his testimony is part of a partisan contrivance, or are we supposed to accept it because it comes from the resident conspiracy nut?

You guys have been crying wolf about all kinds of other issues regarding this incident (like saying "he watched while they died") and you have the nerve to call him "the resident conspiracy nut"??

That's rich.