Hillary: "What difference does it make?"

[BullKurtz]

Face it, Benghazi is yesterdays news;

The Democrats are absolutely relying on people believing that.

A short attention span is vital to keeping their voter base.

Correct. Deny it, try to spin it, then say "we're looking into it", then promise "those who did this will be brought to justice", then change the subject, then deny it again. No effort has been made to find those who did this because that puts it back on Fox and talk radio. Nobody will be prosecuted for perjury because nobody knew who was in charge, or it's "classified" and they can't talk about it. 15 months later....Four are still dead and Hillary is now going to run for president again.

 

[BlindBoo]

Did worst part of our Benghazi failures come, not after the attacks, but BEFORE them?


Did the Obama administration and State Department deliberately pretend security could be safely reduced in our embassies and consulates, to craft an image of peace and success for the upcoming Nov. 2012 elections? Even as attacks against our facilities kept increasing over that spring and summer, and our personnel on the spot kept pleading for more reinforcements and security?

Did Obama basically trade four American lives in the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, for a bigger electoral margin in the Nov. elections?

Here was a good answer back then.....

On September 11, 2012, in the wake of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and a wave of protests around the region against that absurd YouTube video, an attack in Benghazi killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials. American officials were surprised by the attack, shocked and horrified by the death of a close colleague, clearly confused about what exactly had happened, and a bit disorganized in their public statements. Reporters, politicians, and analysts have a number of serious important unanswered questions about the nature of the attack, security arrangements in Benghazi, the real role of al Qaeda, and the implications for possible future attacks. They might also be asking questions about why the protests so quickly fizzled and why so many Arab governments and political activists denounced the attacks and their perpetrators.

But that's not the debate we're having. Instead, in what passes for foreign policy debate six weeks before a presidential election, Republicans are focused on selectively parsing words to concoct a fantasy of the greatest scandal in American history -- worse than Watergate! As dangerous as the failure to connect dots before 9/11! Grounds for impeachment! The political calculations here are almost painfully transparent, as the Romney campaign desperately flails about for a way to attack Obama on foreign policy and change the subject to anything which doesn't include the phrase "47 percent."


- See more at: The failure of #Muslimrage

 

[Sunni Man]

All the "phony scandals" aside, this one is TREASON.....pure and simple. Our people in Benghazi were cashed in for political expediency. If there was ever a more clear lesson to the leftist trash that their commisars care only for their themselves, this one is it. What makes it clear what serious danger we're in, is the media covering this up and telling us to "move on" "old news", yada yada. NO, this needs to stay on a front burner until even the leftist trash can't abide what's being done in their names.

Only if a republican wins the presidency in 2016 will issue of Benghazi be throughly examined by the government.

Otherwise, the events of Benghazi will just remain a minor event only found in history books. ...

 

[Little-Acorn]

Did worst part of our Benghazi failures come, not after the attacks, but BEFORE them?


Did the Obama administration and State Department deliberately pretend security could be safely reduced in our embassies and consulates, to craft an image of peace and success for the upcoming Nov. 2012 elections? Even as attacks against our facilities kept increasing over that spring and summer, and our personnel on the spot kept pleading for more reinforcements and security?

Did Obama basically trade four American lives in the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, for a bigger electoral margin in the Nov. elections?

Here was a good answer back then.....

On September 11, 2012, in the wake of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and a wave of protests around the region against that absurd YouTube video, an attack in Benghazi killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials. American officials were surprised by the attack, shocked and horrified by the death of a close colleague, clearly confused about what exactly had happened, and a bit disorganized in their public statements. Reporters, politicians, and analysts have a number of serious important unanswered questions about the nature of the attack, security arrangements in Benghazi, the real role of al Qaeda, and the implications for possible future attacks. They might also be asking questions about why the protests so quickly fizzled and why so many Arab governments and political activists denounced the attacks and their perpetrators.

But that's not the debate we're having. Instead, in what passes for foreign policy debate six weeks before a presidential election, Republicans are focused on selectively parsing words to concoct a fantasy of the greatest scandal in American history -- worse than Watergate! As dangerous as the failure to connect dots before 9/11! Grounds for impeachment! The political calculations here are almost painfully transparent, as the Romney campaign desperately flails about for a way to attack Obama on foreign policy and change the subject to anything which doesn't include the phrase "47 percent."

Changing the subject from "Why were we so unprepared for a major attack despite the increasing tempo of small attacks?", to "Look what the Republicans are saying now!"....

.... is a "good" answer??

 

[BullKurtz]

Did worst part of our Benghazi failures come, not after the attacks, but BEFORE them?


Did the Obama administration and State Department deliberately pretend security could be safely reduced in our embassies and consulates, to craft an image of peace and success for the upcoming Nov. 2012 elections? Even as attacks against our facilities kept increasing over that spring and summer, and our personnel on the spot kept pleading for more reinforcements and security?

Did Obama basically trade four American lives in the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, for a bigger electoral margin in the Nov. elections?

Here was a good answer back then.....

On September 11, 2012, in the wake of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and a wave of protests around the region against that absurd YouTube video, an attack in Benghazi killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials. American officials were surprised by the attack, shocked and horrified by the death of a close colleague, clearly confused about what exactly had happened, and a bit disorganized in their public statements. Reporters, politicians, and analysts have a number of serious important unanswered questions about the nature of the attack, security arrangements in Benghazi, the real role of al Qaeda, and the implications for possible future attacks. They might also be asking questions about why the protests so quickly fizzled and why so many Arab governments and political activists denounced the attacks and their perpetrators.

Fantasy. al-Qaida flags were flying within a mile of the compound. There was a hole blown in the outside wall in June. Stevens begged for more security...he was denied. Everybody else had pulled out but we did not, despite the growing presence of more than 300 al-Qaida fighters forming into an attack brigade while their radio broadcasts were PROMISING an attack. Response from Hillary's leadership team?....no response. Then came September 11....Hillary was in the south pacific oblivious to the situation Stevens found himself in. The attack began, he cabled for immediate help....none came. Several hours after the initial breach of the compound walls, still no wheels up for a rescue force.

This was willful. This was cowardice of the highest order. This was treason.

 

[Freewill]

I am quite sure Hillary cares about the deaths of those men, it dealt her political career a stomach punch. I think if she had it to do over she would have actually did her job and avoided the deaths.

Doesn't seem that way to me. You all really liked her more than Obama but now that it's getting closer to her running for president, you seem to be grasping for talking points once again.

Try concentrating on finding at least one smart Republican who might be able to win back the WH over her.

I have given up. With the economy the way it was and with the UR rate not moving Obama should have lost big just as he said. But the electorate are apparently stuck on stupid. So a Hillary presidency, in my opinion, may happen regardless of her record of no accomplishments. If the electorate will elect someone with no experience like Obama and will elect someone like Hillary then there is absolute no one that can be put up against her. Romney by far was more qualified then Obama and was middle of the road if not left of center and yet he didn't win. Qualifications don't matter.

 

[BlindBoo]

Did worst part of our Benghazi failures come, not after the attacks, but BEFORE them?


Did the Obama administration and State Department deliberately pretend security could be safely reduced in our embassies and consulates, to craft an image of peace and success for the upcoming Nov. 2012 elections? Even as attacks against our facilities kept increasing over that spring and summer, and our personnel on the spot kept pleading for more reinforcements and security?

Did Obama basically trade four American lives in the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, for a bigger electoral margin in the Nov. elections?

Here was a good answer back then.....

On September 11, 2012, in the wake of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and a wave of protests around the region against that absurd YouTube video, an attack in Benghazi killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials. American officials were surprised by the attack, shocked and horrified by the death of a close colleague, clearly confused about what exactly had happened, and a bit disorganized in their public statements. Reporters, politicians, and analysts have a number of serious important unanswered questions about the nature of the attack, security arrangements in Benghazi, the real role of al Qaeda, and the implications for possible future attacks. They might also be asking questions about why the protests so quickly fizzled and why so many Arab governments and political activists denounced the attacks and their perpetrators.

But that's not the debate we're having. Instead, in what passes for foreign policy debate six weeks before a presidential election, Republicans are focused on selectively parsing words to concoct a fantasy of the greatest scandal in American history -- worse than Watergate! As dangerous as the failure to connect dots before 9/11! Grounds for impeachment! The political calculations here are almost painfully transparent, as the Romney campaign desperately flails about for a way to attack Obama on foreign policy and change the subject to anything which doesn't include the phrase "47 percent."

Changing the subject from "Why were we so unprepared for a major attack despite the increasing tempo of small attacks?", to "Look what the Republicans are saying now!"....

.... is a "good" answer??

Consulates are not Embassies and Other Musings on Benghazi…

Consulates are not Embassies and Other Musings on Benghazi? | Ordinary Times

 

[BlindBoo]

Did worst part of our Benghazi failures come, not after the attacks, but BEFORE them?


Did the Obama administration and State Department deliberately pretend security could be safely reduced in our embassies and consulates, to craft an image of peace and success for the upcoming Nov. 2012 elections? Even as attacks against our facilities kept increasing over that spring and summer, and our personnel on the spot kept pleading for more reinforcements and security?

Did Obama basically trade four American lives in the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, for a bigger electoral margin in the Nov. elections?

Here was a good answer back then.....

On September 11, 2012, in the wake of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and a wave of protests around the region against that absurd YouTube video, an attack in Benghazi killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials. American officials were surprised by the attack, shocked and horrified by the death of a close colleague, clearly confused about what exactly had happened, and a bit disorganized in their public statements. Reporters, politicians, and analysts have a number of serious important unanswered questions about the nature of the attack, security arrangements in Benghazi, the real role of al Qaeda, and the implications for possible future attacks. They might also be asking questions about why the protests so quickly fizzled and why so many Arab governments and political activists denounced the attacks and their perpetrators.

Fantasy. al-Qaida flags were flying within a mile of the compound. There was a hole blown in the outside wall in June. Stevens begged for more security...he was denied. Everybody else had pulled out but we did not, despite the growing presence of more than 300 al-Qaida fighters forming into an attack brigade while their radio broadcasts were PROMISING an attack. Response from Hillary's leadership team?....no response. Then came September 11....Hillary was in the south pacific oblivious to the situation Stevens found himself in. The attack began, he cabled for immediate help....none came. Several hours after the initial breach of the compound walls, still no wheels up for a rescue force.

This was willful. This was cowardice of the highest order. This was treason.

Good word for that......

 

[BullKurtz]

Here was a good answer back then.....

On September 11, 2012, in the wake of the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and a wave of protests around the region against that absurd YouTube video, an attack in Benghazi killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials. American officials were surprised by the attack, shocked and horrified by the death of a close colleague, clearly confused about what exactly had happened, and a bit disorganized in their public statements. Reporters, politicians, and analysts have a number of serious important unanswered questions about the nature of the attack, security arrangements in Benghazi, the real role of al Qaeda, and the implications for possible future attacks. They might also be asking questions about why the protests so quickly fizzled and why so many Arab governments and political activists denounced the attacks and their perpetrators.

Fantasy. al-Qaida flags were flying within a mile of the compound. There was a hole blown in the outside wall in June. Stevens begged for more security...he was denied. Everybody else had pulled out but we did not, despite the growing presence of more than 300 al-Qaida fighters forming into an attack brigade while their radio broadcasts were PROMISING an attack. Response from Hillary's leadership team?....no response. Then came September 11....Hillary was in the south pacific oblivious to the situation Stevens found himself in. The attack began, he cabled for immediate help....none came. Several hours after the initial breach of the compound walls, still no wheels up for a rescue force.

This was willful. This was cowardice of the highest order. This was treason.

Good word for that......

Yeah? Feel free to correct what I wrote or STFU boy....one way or the other.

 

[Old Rocks]

Hey Bull, that's President Hillary to you

 

[BullKurtz]

All the "phony scandals" aside, this one is TREASON.....pure and simple. Our people in Benghazi were cashed in for political expediency. If there was ever a more clear lesson to the leftist trash that their commisars care only for their themselves, this one is it. What makes it clear what serious danger we're in, is the media covering this up and telling us to "move on" "old news", yada yada. NO, this needs to stay on a front burner until even the leftist trash can't abide what's being done in their names.

Only if a republican wins the presidency in 2016 will issue of Benghazi be throughly examined by the government.

Otherwise, the events of Benghazi will just remain a minor event only found in history books. ...

Problem is it never happens. Both parties have an unwritten promise not to tear the last administration a new one. Obama might have succeeded in getting Bush43 indicted in some manner. He had the Senate. He had the House. He had enough of the Supremes so as not to be timid about it....yet he didn't do. And for not going after Dubya, the next GOP president will give him immunity too.

 

[rightwinger]

Face it, Benghazi is yesterdays news;

The Democrats are absolutely relying on people believing that.

A short attention span is vital to keeping their voter base.

Frankly, Republicans played their Benghazi card against Obama in 2012. It failed miserably as you could see from the results

If you still think the story will have legs in 2016, I encourage you to bring up Vince Foster, Whitewater and blowjobs

 

[BullKurtz]

Face it, Benghazi is yesterdays news;

The Democrats are absolutely relying on people believing that.

A short attention span is vital to keeping their voter base.

Frankly, Republicans played their Benghazi card against Obama in 2012. It failed miserably as you could see from the results

If you still think the story will have legs in 2016, I encourage you to bring up Vince Foster, Whitewater and blowjobs

Bullshit. The election was a little over 7 weeks after the attack. Susan Rice was still claiming it was a "spontaneous event about the video" and the media played along. And then the pattern I described earlier in this thread went into aciton. You're a known liar, a fraud, and a coward.....in other words a typical prog who thinks somehow you benefit by keeping these jackals in power. How about a couple new Palin jokes....something about cutting off her tits maybe?

 

[rightwinger]

My fellow Republicans,

Face it, Benghazi is yesterdays news; and low on the list of things American voters are concerned about.

So give it up.......

We need to focus on finding an strong candidate to run against Hillary in 2016.

Otherwise, republicans can look forward to 8 more years of sucking hind tit. .....

All the "phony scandals" aside, this one is TREASON.....pure and simple. Our people in Benghazi were cashed in for political expediency. If there was ever a more clear lesson to the leftist trash that their commisars care only for their themselves, this one is it. What makes it clear what serious danger we're in, is the media covering this up and telling us to "move on" "old news", yada yada. NO, this needs to stay on a front burner until even the leftist trash can't abide what's being done in their names.

TREASON, Impeachment, prosecution

Republicans looked at all angles and came up with nothing. Ten congressional inquiries and you came up with squat. Does that mean you will let it lie for the next three years? Hell no ! Republicans still think this is the way they can beat Hillary

 

[rightwinger]

The Democrats are absolutely relying on people believing that.

A short attention span is vital to keeping their voter base.

Frankly, Republicans played their Benghazi card against Obama in 2012. It failed miserably as you could see from the results

If you still think the story will have legs in 2016, I encourage you to bring up Vince Foster, Whitewater and blowjobs

Bullshit. The election was a little over 3 weeks after the attack. Susan Rice was still claiming it was a "spontaneous event about the video" and the media played along. And then the pattern I described earlier in this thread went into aciton. You're a known liar, a fraud, and a coward.....in other words a typical prog who thinks somehow you benefit by keeping these jackals in power. How about a couple new Palin jokes....something about cutting off her tits maybe?

The attacks were Sept 11 the election was Nov 6

By the 2012 election the public had already moved past it....just like we do on all terrorist attacks

 

[BullKurtz]

My fellow Republicans,

Face it, Benghazi is yesterdays news; and low on the list of things American voters are concerned about.

So give it up.......

We need to focus on finding an strong candidate to run against Hillary in 2016.

Otherwise, republicans can look forward to 8 more years of sucking hind tit. .....

All the "phony scandals" aside, this one is TREASON.....pure and simple. Our people in Benghazi were cashed in for political expediency. If there was ever a more clear lesson to the leftist trash that their commisars care only for their themselves, this one is it. What makes it clear what serious danger we're in, is the media covering this up and telling us to "move on" "old news", yada yada. NO, this needs to stay on a front burner until even the leftist trash can't abide what's being done in their names.

TREASON, Impeachment, prosecution

Republicans looked at all angles and came up with nothing. Ten congressional inquiries and you came up with squat. Does that mean you will let it lie for the next three years? Hell no ! Republicans still think this is the way they can beat Hillary

Yet more lies. The House committee hearings were stonewalled....evidence withheld, perjury so blatant even the witnesses sometimes laughed about what they'd testified to. Hillary had to fake a concussion to draw out her absence before she could resign. GOP knew they'd never get her fat, lying ass under oath again....she'd just disappear again. Issa had them all by the short and curlies so the media puppets lit into him. Now we're told it's "old news" or "the election decided what happened" and all the other bullshit they rained down. Bottom line? Hopefully someday you will experience a home-invasion and be terrified for hours while the promised help never comes. And then after you are murdered, your relatives will be lied to and ignored while the 911 operator who took your call but didn't dispatch a patrol car, is promoted.

 

[BullKurtz]

Frankly, Republicans played their Benghazi card against Obama in 2012. It failed miserably as you could see from the results

If you still think the story will have legs in 2016, I encourage you to bring up Vince Foster, Whitewater and blowjobs

Bullshit. The election was a little over 3 weeks after the attack. Susan Rice was still claiming it was a "spontaneous event about the video" and the media played along. And then the pattern I described earlier in this thread went into aciton. You're a known liar, a fraud, and a coward.....in other words a typical prog who thinks somehow you benefit by keeping these jackals in power. How about a couple new Palin jokes....something about cutting off her tits maybe?

The attacks were Sept 11 the election was Nov 6

By the 2012 election the public had already moved past it....just like we do on all terrorist attacks

WOW...you got me there....7 weeks instead of 3....makes all the difference in the world. Okay, you win. Everybody performed wonderfully and Stevens and his guards had it coming and Hillary will make a fantastic president and Barry belongs on Mt. Rushmore.

You ******* dwarf.

 

[Fishlore]

The fuss over the Benghazi incident is just another over-blown Republican pseudo-scandal. Like the IRS-TEA Party scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, the fake birth certificate scandal and all the other nonsense cooked up by Rep. Issa, there is no there there. The Obama haters feel it must be true but it isn't. The right wing has been churning up the Republican voters with nonsense like this for five years now and all it has produced is the lowest public approval rating for the GOP in modern times.

 

[rightwinger]

Bullshit. The election was a little over 3 weeks after the attack. Susan Rice was still claiming it was a "spontaneous event about the video" and the media played along. And then the pattern I described earlier in this thread went into aciton. You're a known liar, a fraud, and a coward.....in other words a typical prog who thinks somehow you benefit by keeping these jackals in power. How about a couple new Palin jokes....something about cutting off her tits maybe?

The attacks were Sept 11 the election was Nov 6

By the 2012 election the public had already moved past it....just like we do on all terrorist attacks

WOW...you got me there....7 weeks instead of 3....makes all the difference in the world. Okay, you win. Everybody performed wonderfully and Stevens and his guards had it coming and Hillary will make a fantastic president and Barry belongs on Mt. Rushmore.

You ******* dwarf.

Americans have long memories. Most Americans remember terrorist attacks and embassy attacks dating back to the 70s. In terms of outrage, Benghazi doesn't even rank in the top 20

If Republicans think they can continue to churn Benghazi public outrage four years after the attack when the public was obviously over it in 7 weeks they are dillusional

 

[Freewill]

Frankly, Republicans played their Benghazi card against Obama in 2012. It failed miserably as you could see from the results

If you still think the story will have legs in 2016, I encourage you to bring up Vince Foster, Whitewater and blowjobs

Bullshit. The election was a little over 3 weeks after the attack. Susan Rice was still claiming it was a "spontaneous event about the video" and the media played along. And then the pattern I described earlier in this thread went into aciton. You're a known liar, a fraud, and a coward.....in other words a typical prog who thinks somehow you benefit by keeping these jackals in power. How about a couple new Palin jokes....something about cutting off her tits maybe?

The attacks were Sept 11 the election was Nov 6

By the 2012 election the public had already moved past it....just like we do on all terrorist attacks

And in my opinion that is proof positive of the stupidity of the electorate. NOTHING matters anymore. 4 men, and one of them gay, are sacrificed on the alter of political correction and NO one was brought to justice, either on the side of those who murdered them or on the side of those who failed, FAILED, to protect them. Sad state of affairs.