Question for "objective" right-wingers.....

[nat4900]

bush didnt send people out to LIE ABOUT attacks on embassies because he was in the middle of a re-election campaign; only obama did that

why do left-wingers keep lying to themselves and creating straw man arguments?

As usual, a moronic response......

Rice went on to report on the Benghazi attack based on what the best guess was for the attack from the intelligence community (Petraeus?)........and til THIS day, we DO NOT know if it was a so-called lie....
Only FOX and other right wing sources have been telling you that it was a lie.

 

[nat4900]

NO, its actually the truth. Clinton's degrading of our intelligence services by not letting them share data, coupled with his refusal to take OBL when he could have is the direct cause of 9/11.

Such fucked up "conclusion" show that you are a partisan moron.

So, your basis for truth is that Clinton......for whatever screwed up reasons you may believe....decided to NOT let info be shared (as told you by FOX news).......Further, unless we are a nation of outlaws, taking out OBL based on rumors is as stupid as you surely are.

Yes, keep SHIELDING Bush and Cheney of ANY culpability and you'll continue to be the eternal board moron.

 

[bedowin62]

bush didnt send people out to LIE ABOUT attacks on embassies because he was in the middle of a re-election campaign; only obama did that

why do left-wingers keep lying to themselves and creating straw man arguments?

As usual, a moronic response......

Rice went on to report on the Benghazi attack based on what the best guess was for the attack from the intelligence community (Petraeus?)........and til THIS day, we DO NOT know if it was a so-called lie....
Only FOX and other right wing sources have been telling you that it was a lie.

she lied; the only moron is you.........................as usual

 

[bedowin62]

this is why missing emails are important; left-wing losers come to inaccurate conclusions without them:

Email reveals Obama advisor urged Rice to blame video for ...
www.mediaite.com/.../fox-email-reveals-obama-advisor-urged-r...

• Cached
• Similar

Mediaite
Loading...
Apr 29, 2014 - RELATED: ABC News Reports Benghazi Talking Points Were Revised 12 .... Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an ... were global anti-American protests in response to the video, often violent, ... Morell (CIA) testified that he did not know where the youtube video came from.

 

[bedowin62]

Surprise: State Department labeled Benghazi 'terrorism ...
hotair.com/.../surprise-state-department-labeled-benghazi-terroris...

• Cached

Hot Air
Loading...
May 27, 2015 - For starters, then-CIA director David Petraeus told CNN that the US ... The Obama administration, while busy dismissing Benghazi as a “phony scandal” ... terrorist attack, Clinton was still angrily denouncing obscure online clip in ... in Libya testified that the YouTube video was a “non-event” in that country.

 

[kaz]

The whole yellowcake story was bull crap from beginning to end. Yet as you show here, you're still pushing it while you whine about a current investigation that Obama is actually impeding

Let me get this straight, imbecile......YOU bring up "yellowcake".....and I (perhaps foolishly) respond to that issue...........and you "accuse" me of "still pushing" it?????

OK, fair enough. I retract the word "pushing."

And that was all you got out of my post? Your flaming hypocrisy didn't register at all?

So Nat, you think you're "objective," give an honest answer to these questions.

1) Bush said "British intelligence" said Hussein tried to buy yellowcake in Africa. We know he did, BTW, the only question was timing. But the British confirmed they said that, and to this day they stayed with it. So no matter what the British based it on, how could W have "lied" saying the British reported that? They did report that

2) The British said they had more than Wilson's sources of the forged document and they weren't telling him what it is to protect their sources. Furthermore Wilson's own report didn't say Hussein didn't try to buy yellowcake, it only said he couldn't verify he had. How do you prove a negative? He never proved anything about Hussein not buying yellowcake, all he couldn't do was prove he did. So again, how do you know anyone lied or was even wrong?

3) Why would the administration have the CIA send anyone to investigate a statement by it's own leader?

4) If they did, why would they send a partisan for the other party who wasn't even in the CIA? It's like the Democrats sending Rubio to investigate Benghazi, yeah, you'd do that

5) The media knew Plame was a CIA agent, she talked about it at coctail parties. Tim Russert, a declared Democrat said he and the rest of the DC reporters knew that. How does it make sense that anyone therefore would think "outing" her was punishment? And how could she possibly have been harmed by that since obviously she was a DC bureaucrat at that point and not a field agent. Or if she was she was the worst one ever since she talked about it in front of the media.

This is all basic information,and it clearly shows what a bunch of hack liars you are that you don't want money wasted on frivolous investigations, this was the most conjured investigation ever, it was utter stupidity from start to finish

So Gnat, your balls are calling, they want your manhood back. You raised the whole political investigation crap and asked for Republicans to be "objective."

Well, so be objective, simple questions, man up to it

 

[nat4900]

Do you believe that it was caused by a video? or were obama, clinton, and rice lying for weeks in order to protect obama's reelection campaign?

Neither....although the video triggered wide-spread demonstrations all over north Africa. Interesting that your ilk accepts the carnage in Paris over a bunch of cartoons, but WILL NOT accept that a video would trigger armed demonstrations by a bunch of lunatics.

 

[kaz]

Do you believe that it was caused by a video? or were obama, clinton, and rice lying for weeks in order to protect obama's reelection campaign?

Neither....although the video triggered wide-spread demonstrations all over north Africa. Interesting that your ilk accepts the carnage in Paris over a bunch of cartoons, but WILL NOT accept that a video would trigger armed demonstrations by a bunch of lunatics.

No one said that it couldn't happen, we just know in this case it didn't. See the difference?

Now what about manning up to the lamest of all politically motivated witchhunts in the modern era since you claim this is a standard you hold for the "objective"

 

[nat4900]

So Gnat, your balls are calling, they want your manhood back. You raised the whole political investigation crap and asked for Republicans to be "objective."

Well, so be objective, simple questions, man up to it

What the hell are you talking about now?

I DID ask for objective right wingers.......and you morons certainly don't fit the category....

Had I asked for "smart" right wingers.....and you idiots followed directions, NONE of you would be on here.

 

[kaz]

So Gnat, your balls are calling, they want your manhood back. You raised the whole political investigation crap and asked for Republicans to be "objective."

Well, so be objective, simple questions, man up to it

What the hell are you talking about now?

I DID ask for objective right wingers.......and you morons certainly don't fit the category....

Had I asked for "smart" right wingers.....and you idiots followed directions, NONE of you would be on here.

Swish, that's really what you got out of that post. LOL, it probably is.

Your standard is you oppose politically motivated investigations, so man up to my simple questions on the lamest of all, the "yellowcake" manufactured controversy

 

[bedowin62]

Do you believe that it was caused by a video? or were obama, clinton, and rice lying for weeks in order to protect obama's reelection campaign?

Neither....although the video triggered wide-spread demonstrations all over north Africa. Interesting that your ilk accepts the carnage in Paris over a bunch of cartoons, but WILL NOT accept that a video would trigger armed demonstrations by a bunch of lunatics.

1. because there is no evidence of it, idiot
2. because it was the anniversary of 9-11; a much more important date and event in the minds of islamic extremists
3. because an OBAMA ADMIN OFFICIAL TESTIFIED IN FRONT OF CONGRESS THE VIDEO WAS A "NON-EVENT' AS FAR AS A CAUSE FOR THE ATTACK ON BENGHAZI, A "NON-STARTER"
4. BECAUSE an e-mail was found saying the order to blame it on the video came from the white house
5. because all of the other embassies belonging to other countries had already been abandoned in the deteriorating security situation


libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[bedowin62]

Several days after various assessments concluded that Benghazi had been an orchestrated terrorist attack, Clinton was still angrily denouncing obscure online clip in public and peddling false stories to bereaved relatives in private. Former acting CIA director Mike Morell has affirmed that the “demonstrations” line didn’t come from the agency, and the late Amb. Stevens’ top deputy in Libya testified that the YouTube video was a “non-event” in that country.

 

[nat4900]

1. because there is no evidence of it, idiot
2. because it was the anniversary of 9-11; a much more important date and event in the minds of islamic extremists
3. because an OBAMA ADMIN OFFICIAL TESTIFIED IN FRONT OF CONGRESS THE VIDEO WAS A "NON-EVENT' AS FAR AS A CAUSE FOR THE ATTACK ON BENGHAZI, A "NON-STARTER"
4. BECAUSE an e-mail was found saying the order to blame it on the video came from the white house
5. because all of the other embassies belonging to other countries had already been abandoned in the deteriorating security situation

YOU are an idiot....and you insist on showing what an imbecile you must be.

First, ALL of your "proof" is bullshit that you picked up from FOX talking heads.

Second, the attack was NOT at an embassy (which was in Tripoli) but at a covert location in Benghazi.

The entire committee hearing IS a witch hunt...which never happened under Bush's 8 years where over 50 embassy and consulate personnel were killed by militants...

But, keep on hoping that the bullshit you spew, sticks.

 

[bedowin62]

1. because there is no evidence of it, idiot
2. because it was the anniversary of 9-11; a much more important date and event in the minds of islamic extremists
3. because an OBAMA ADMIN OFFICIAL TESTIFIED IN FRONT OF CONGRESS THE VIDEO WAS A "NON-EVENT' AS FAR AS A CAUSE FOR THE ATTACK ON BENGHAZI, A "NON-STARTER"
4. BECAUSE an e-mail was found saying the order to blame it on the video came from the white house
5. because all of the other embassies belonging to other countries had already been abandoned in the deteriorating security situation

YOU are an idiot....and you insist on showing what an imbecile you must be.

First, ALL of your "proof" is bullshit that you picked up from FOX talking heads.

Second, the attack was NOT at an embassy (which was in Tripoli) but at a covert location in Benghazi.

The entire committee hearing IS a witch hunt...which never happened under Bush's 8 years where over 50 embassy and consulate personnel were killed by militants...

But, keep on hoping that the bullshit you spew, sticks.

i cited the testimony of an obama official in front of Congress

you crybaby left-wing losers are hilarious!! cry about Fox and just ignore reality idiot!!

lmao

 

[nat4900]

i cited the testimony of an obama official in front of Congress

you crybaby left-wing losers are hilarious!! cry about Fox and just ignore reality idiot!!

POST IT !!!!!

 

[bedowin62]

that it was a covert operations center supports the notion the event wasnt caused by a video nobody saw leftard
you're making my case for me

idiots and hypocrites

 

[bedowin62]

i cited the testimony of an obama official in front of Congress

you crybaby left-wing losers are hilarious!! cry about Fox and just ignore reality idiot!!

POST IT !!!!!

Several days after various assessments concluded that Benghazi had been an orchestrated terrorist attack, Clinton was still angrily denouncing obscure online clip in public and peddling false stories to bereaved relatives in private. Former acting CIA director Mike Morell has affirmed that the “demonstrations” line didn’t come from the agency, and the late Amb. Stevens’ top deputy in Libya testified that the YouTube video was a “non-event” in that country.

 

[nat4900]

that it was a covert operations center supports the notion the event wasnt caused by a video nobody saw leftard
you're making my case for me

idiots and hypocrites

Re-read the stupid nonsense you're posting...."because the site was a covert annex...then that means that the video was NOT seen by militants"??????

How the **** does THAT make sense, moron?

 

[nat4900]

Several days after various assessments concluded that Benghazi had been an orchestrated terrorist attack, Clinton was still angrily denouncing obscure online clip in public and peddling false stories to bereaved relatives in private. Former acting CIA director Mike Morell has affirmed that the “demonstrations” line didn’t come from the agency, and the late Amb. Stevens’ top deputy in Libya testified that the YouTube video was a “non-event” in that country.

How the hell does he know that the video was not an "event" in that country??? It certainly was in Egypt and Tunisia and Morocco and Yemen.

 

[bedowin62]

that it was a covert operations center supports the notion the event wasnt caused by a video nobody saw leftard
you're making my case for me

idiots and hypocrites

Re-read the stupid nonsense you're posting...."because the site was a covert annex...then that means that the video was NOT seen by militants"??????

How the **** does THAT make sense, moron?

apparently i'm trying to debate a retard. the point dimwit is that it was a covert operations center that had their cover blown and was destroyed by terrorists, it had nothing to do with a video