Susan Rice Still Lying About Benghazi

[mudwhistle]

New Declassified Docs Expose Obama’s Benghazi Lies
January 14, 2014 by Arnold Ahlert

Newly declassified documents reveal that high-ranking members of the Obama administration were aware that the September 11, 2012 assault on the American consulate in Benghazi was a “terrorist attack” only minutes after the battle began. In classified testimony given on June 26, 2013 to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation, Gen. Carter Hamm, former head of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) revealed he was the one who broke the news to former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Hamm testified that he learned about the attack only 15 minutes after it began at 9:42 p.m. Libya time. Thus, the administration’s carefully crafted narrative that the attack was based on a video has once again been revealed for the lie it always was.

“My first call was to General Dempsey, General Dempsey’s office, to say, ‘Hey, I am headed down the hall. I need to see him right away,’” the General told lawmakers. ”I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta.” Hamm characterized the ability to meet with both men so soon after the attack occurred as a fortunate ”happenstance” because “they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House.”

That meeting had been pre-scheduled with the president for 5 p.m. EST. A Defense Department (DOD) timeline notes that the meeting occurred one hour and 18 minutes after the attack began, and even as the battle at the consulate was ongoing. The DOD also revealed that an unarmed drone arrived over the battlefield during that time. As both men revealed in subsequent testimony, the meeting with the president lasted approximately 30 minutes — after which they never heard from anyone in the White House again.

Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), an Iraq war veteran and Army reserve officer, pressed the General more forcefully on the nature of his conversation with Panetta and Dempsey. He expressed his concern “that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration” rather than a terrorist attack. Hamm noted their was some “preliminary discussion” of the point, but emphasized that they were aware of what was really going on. “But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack,” he testified. Hamm also reiterated that “with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir.”

“The American people deserve the truth. They deserve to know what’s going on, and I honestly think that that’s why you have seen — beyond the tragedy that there was a loss of four Americans’ lives – is that the American people feel misled.”

Kim R. Holmes, a former assistant secretary of state under President George W. Bush, echoed that assertion. ”Leon Panetta should have spoken up,” he insisted. ”The people at the Pentagon and frankly, the people at the CIA stood back while all of this was unfolding and allowed this narrative to go on longer than they should have.”​

Read more at....New Declassified Docs Expose Obama?s Benghazi Lies | FrontPage Magazine

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Watch this folks. Behold the double talking liberal......

So, liberals.....

Was it a spontaneous attack due to a video, or was it a planned terror attack? Just answer the question.

You tell us what happened.

Why do you need someone to tell you? You don't know either?

I really don't know, compadre.

If we somehow knew, what does that mean? That Rice is a liar and deserves death by female castration? OK.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

New Declassified Docs Expose Obama’s Benghazi Lies
January 14, 2014 by Arnold Ahlert

Newly declassified documents reveal that high-ranking members of the Obama administration were aware that the September 11, 2012 assault on the American consulate in Benghazi was a “terrorist attack” only minutes after the battle began. In classified testimony given on June 26, 2013 to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation, Gen. Carter Hamm, former head of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) revealed he was the one who broke the news to former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Hamm testified that he learned about the attack only 15 minutes after it began at 9:42 p.m. Libya time. Thus, the administration’s carefully crafted narrative that the attack was based on a video has once again been revealed for the lie it always was.

“My first call was to General Dempsey, General Dempsey’s office, to say, ‘Hey, I am headed down the hall. I need to see him right away,’” the General told lawmakers. ”I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta.” Hamm characterized the ability to meet with both men so soon after the attack occurred as a fortunate ”happenstance” because “they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House.”

That meeting had been pre-scheduled with the president for 5 p.m. EST. A Defense Department (DOD) timeline notes that the meeting occurred one hour and 18 minutes after the attack began, and even as the battle at the consulate was ongoing. The DOD also revealed that an unarmed drone arrived over the battlefield during that time. As both men revealed in subsequent testimony, the meeting with the president lasted approximately 30 minutes — after which they never heard from anyone in the White House again.

Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), an Iraq war veteran and Army reserve officer, pressed the General more forcefully on the nature of his conversation with Panetta and Dempsey. He expressed his concern “that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration” rather than a terrorist attack. Hamm noted their was some “preliminary discussion” of the point, but emphasized that they were aware of what was really going on. “But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack,” he testified. Hamm also reiterated that “with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir.”

“The American people deserve the truth. They deserve to know what’s going on, and I honestly think that that’s why you have seen — beyond the tragedy that there was a loss of four Americans’ lives – is that the American people feel misled.”

Kim R. Holmes, a former assistant secretary of state under President George W. Bush, echoed that assertion. ”Leon Panetta should have spoken up,” he insisted. ”The people at the Pentagon and frankly, the people at the CIA stood back while all of this was unfolding and allowed this narrative to go on longer than they should have.”​

Read more at....New Declassified Docs Expose Obama?s Benghazi Lies | FrontPage Magazine

Whether it was planed or spontaneous - HOW WAS THIS NOT AN ACT OF TERROR???

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I love how the support base, like in every single other instance, can only manage to come back with Iraq and Bush. I mean, if you think that makes your 'kind' any better, you must be far more gone than anyone thought.

and if you want to talk about war crimes, lets talk about the children Obama assassinates, or the illegal proxy wars. You guys are the absolute biggest and boldest, shameless hypocrites on planet earth. Hands down.

I came back with that? Get your head out of your ass.



Talk about the OP or don't - I couldn't care less, just get your facts straight.

 

[Theowl32]

Watch this folks. Behold the double talking liberal......

So, liberals.....

Was it a spontaneous attack due to a video, or was it a planned terror attack? Just answer the question.

You tell us what happened.

Why do you need someone to tell you? You don't know either?

I really don't know, compadre.

If we somehow knew, what does that mean? That Rice is a liar and deserves death by female castration? OK.

And behold the obfuscation.

 

[Theowl32]

New Declassified Docs Expose Obama’s Benghazi Lies
January 14, 2014 by Arnold Ahlert

Newly declassified documents reveal that high-ranking members of the Obama administration were aware that the September 11, 2012 assault on the American consulate in Benghazi was a “terrorist attack” only minutes after the battle began. In classified testimony given on June 26, 2013 to the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation, Gen. Carter Hamm, former head of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) revealed he was the one who broke the news to former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Hamm testified that he learned about the attack only 15 minutes after it began at 9:42 p.m. Libya time. Thus, the administration’s carefully crafted narrative that the attack was based on a video has once again been revealed for the lie it always was.

“My first call was to General Dempsey, General Dempsey’s office, to say, ‘Hey, I am headed down the hall. I need to see him right away,’” the General told lawmakers. ”I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta.” Hamm characterized the ability to meet with both men so soon after the attack occurred as a fortunate ”happenstance” because “they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House.”

That meeting had been pre-scheduled with the president for 5 p.m. EST. A Defense Department (DOD) timeline notes that the meeting occurred one hour and 18 minutes after the attack began, and even as the battle at the consulate was ongoing. The DOD also revealed that an unarmed drone arrived over the battlefield during that time. As both men revealed in subsequent testimony, the meeting with the president lasted approximately 30 minutes — after which they never heard from anyone in the White House again.

Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), an Iraq war veteran and Army reserve officer, pressed the General more forcefully on the nature of his conversation with Panetta and Dempsey. He expressed his concern “that someone in the military would be advising that this was a demonstration” rather than a terrorist attack. Hamm noted their was some “preliminary discussion” of the point, but emphasized that they were aware of what was really going on. “But I think at the command, I personally and I think the command very quickly got to the point that this was not a demonstration, this was a terrorist attack,” he testified. Hamm also reiterated that “with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta, that is the nature of the conversation we had, yes, sir.”

“The American people deserve the truth. They deserve to know what’s going on, and I honestly think that that’s why you have seen — beyond the tragedy that there was a loss of four Americans’ lives – is that the American people feel misled.”

Kim R. Holmes, a former assistant secretary of state under President George W. Bush, echoed that assertion. ”Leon Panetta should have spoken up,” he insisted. ”The people at the Pentagon and frankly, the people at the CIA stood back while all of this was unfolding and allowed this narrative to go on longer than they should have.”​

Read more at....New Declassified Docs Expose Obama?s Benghazi Lies | FrontPage Magazine

Whether it was planed or spontaneous - HOW WAS THIS NOT AN ACT OF TERROR???

And behold the liberal double talk shuffle.

Hey, brainwashed hack. When we refer to ACT OF TERROR it means something that was organized. NOT something spontaneous brought about by some video.

There were repeated requests for more security that went ignored by Hillary and the administration. As though some how the date 911 meant nothing to these towel heads in the middle east.

THAT IS THE ******* DIFFERENCE YOU UNBELIEVABLE GULLIBLE, NAIVE PILE OF CRAP!

They did not give them more security and they did not want more people killed just before the election. So, during the 7 hour period, they made a decision. They turned their back on the 4, cause they did not want to risk more casualties. They decided to sell the bag of SHIT that they sold and continue sell. They count on the pathetic media to insulate them, and they certainly did. Chris Matthews declaring that it was because of a video, fat **** Crowley chiming in during a debate that was totally inappropriate, and the mindless minions like you that get all bent out of shape over bullshit, and ignore the obvious.


You continue to have it both ways, and you either pretend to not know the difference, or you are way too ******* numb in the brain to understand how pathetic this administration is. In your case, I think it is because you are simply too gullible and naive.

Either way, all of you left wing hacks have done a great job of turning this once great country to a cesspool of shit.

The truly annoying part is the notion that you parade around as though we are the ones that are clueless.


I know, I know........

To you, and people like you......

 

[iamwhatiseem]

What proof do you have that the video was not the catalyst for the murderous attack on Benghazi? Your post is not based on your personal experience, it is nothing more than an echo of an effort to discredit the Obama Administration and Sect. Clinton for partisan and scurrilous reasons.

What proof did we have that Venus was hot, before the technology affirmed it?
We knew the planet was blazing hot decades before...because we understood the dynamics of greenhouse gases.
When something is obvious, it is obvious.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

What proof do you have that the video was not the catalyst for the murderous attack on Benghazi? Your post is not based on your personal experience, it is nothing more than an echo of an effort to discredit the Obama Administration and Sect. Clinton for partisan and scurrilous reasons.

What proof did we have that Venus was hot, before the technology affirmed it?
We knew the planet was blazing hot decades before...because we understood the dynamics of greenhouse gases.
When something is obvious, it is obvious.

Dude, you cannot be serious!

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

And behold the liberal double talk shuffle.

Hey, brainwashed hack. When we refer to ACT OF TERROR it means something that was organized. NOT something spontaneous brought about by some video.

There were repeated requests for more security that went ignored by Hillary and the administration. As though some how the date 911 meant nothing to these towel heads in the middle east.

THAT IS THE ******* DIFFERENCE YOU UNBELIEVABLE GULLIBLE, NAIVE PILE OF CRAP!

They did not give them more security and they did not want more people killed just before the election. So, during the 7 hour period, they made a decision. They turned their back on the 4, cause they did not want to risk more casualties. They decided to sell the bag of SHIT that they sold and continue sell. They count on the pathetic media to insulate them, and they certainly did. Chris Matthews declaring that it was because of a video, fat **** Crowley chiming in during a debate that was totally inappropriate, and the mindless minions like you that get all bent out of shape over bullshit, and ignore the obvious.


You continue to have it both ways, and you either pretend to not know the difference, or you are way too ******* numb in the brain to understand how pathetic this administration is. In your case, I think it is because you are simply too gullible and naive.

Either way, all of you left wing hacks have done a great job of turning this once great country to a cesspool of shit.

The truly annoying part is the notion that you parade around as though we are the ones that are clueless.

Not fair! I had no idea that I could curse at you - I would have invoked Hitler and fired off F-bombs like like they were heat-guided missiles!

You ... you ... poopy-head!

/fumes and TRIES to regroup.





Seriously - grow the **** up, already.


Enjoy the neg rep - you earned it. Next time, don't sing it - bring it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Obama supporters entering this thread to say "Bush lied too...Republicans lie.. in 5,4,3,2,1...

Bush lied! Or he was too stupid, or too lazy, or too incompetent. If Obama had done everything Bush had done beginning in January 2001 you would be calling for his head. That makes you - and I'm being nice - a hypocrite.

 

[Meister]

Obama supporters entering this thread to say "Bush lied too...Republicans lie.. in 5,4,3,2,1...

Bush lied! Or he was too stupid, or too lazy, or too incompetent. If Obama had done everything Bush had done beginning in January 2001 you would be calling for his head. That makes you - and I'm being nice - a hypocrite.

Just goes to show you that you don't have a monopoly with being hypocritical, wry.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The comparison to WMD is to point out the hypocrisy of the liberal left.

The question still remains is why did she put out information that wasn't 100 percent true? IF they knew at the time it was not true then why would they say it knowing it would be exposed?

Plus, whenever they do point out the so called "lies" about wmds, they cannot handle the fact that it was democrats that propagated the existence of WMDs before Bush took office.

Like the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs signed by Bill Clinton.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE]Bill Clinton 1998 Iraq Liberation Act - YouTube[/ame]

Of course this was fully supported by Hillary.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc]Democrats, WMD's & The Iraq War - YouTube[/ame]

A person they will gleefully vote for in 2016.

Behold the Clintons folks. Just to reiterate.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrI21UytBhw]Hillary and Bill Clinton were both for the invasion of Iraq +WMDs - YouTube[/ame]


All of this only proves one thing. Liberals stand for absolutely nothing. They just chant BOOOOOOSH!!!!! It was all BOOOOOOOSH!!!!!!


They still believe the Benghazi thing was over a ******* video. Yet, Obama called it a terror attack when that fat blob in the debates said Obama said it was an ORGANIZED terror attack. That was after of course the Obama administration systematically told the country (world) that it was a spontaneous attack. Then, the morons on the left laughed when Crowley pointed out (like the typical left wing fat hack) that Obama indeed said it was a planned terror attack. Only to later on say she was wrong, and Obama never actually said it was a planned attack.

So, where are we with this? Obama still sells that it was a spontaneous attack cause of a video AND he also claims he knew it was an organized terror attack. Both of which the liberals cheer and support. Both of which are juxtaposed opposite claims.


They will always go back to the so called lies of BOOOOSH for WMDs that the democrats propagated before BOOOOOOSH took office.

The worst part is they think they make sense, and they always think they are the smartest ones in the room.

It is pathetic isn't it?

Liberals, always so sure and always so wrong.

Actually, anti liberals seem to be dishonest and (frankly) stupid.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Just because something is untrue, does not automatically make it a lie. Why is that so hard to understand?

I agree and please use that attitude in any discussion of Iraq and WMD.

That said, let's assume Bush knew and lied about WMD. His motive would have been that he wanted to go to war. Of course in the Iraq situation you would have to prove that Bush lied and wasn't just believing what he wanted to believe.

But with her not telling the truth days after the event what was the motive? Why say anything at all if you don't at least believe it to be true? I am not discounting that they all believed what she said was true and it turned out differently. But I am going to say it took a whole long time for them to realize what everyone knew from the beginning. I think they were told a false flag story to cover for what the CIA and Stevens was really doing in Benghazi.

I absolutely DO NOT believe that GW lied about WMD. He has to own that, though, because his being wrong came at an enormous expense.

She offered up a possible reason for the attacks - no one knows or can ever know exactly why; only the terrorist.

I still don't know how we can say with absolution that she was wrong unless WE know; and we certainly can't know.

Spot on!

 

[Theowl32]

Plus, whenever they do point out the so called "lies" about wmds, they cannot handle the fact that it was democrats that propagated the existence of WMDs before Bush took office.

Like the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs signed by Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton 1998 Iraq Liberation Act - YouTube

Of course this was fully supported by Hillary.

Democrats, WMD's & The Iraq War - YouTube

A person they will gleefully vote for in 2016.

Behold the Clintons folks. Just to reiterate.

Hillary and Bill Clinton were both for the invasion of Iraq +WMDs - YouTube


All of this only proves one thing. Liberals stand for absolutely nothing. They just chant BOOOOOOSH!!!!! It was all BOOOOOOOSH!!!!!!


They still believe the Benghazi thing was over a ******* video. Yet, Obama called it a terror attack when that fat blob in the debates said Obama said it was an ORGANIZED terror attack. That was after of course the Obama administration systematically told the country (world) that it was a spontaneous attack. Then, the morons on the left laughed when Crowley pointed out (like the typical left wing fat hack) that Obama indeed said it was a planned terror attack. Only to later on say she was wrong, and Obama never actually said it was a planned attack.

So, where are we with this? Obama still sells that it was a spontaneous attack cause of a video AND he also claims he knew it was an organized terror attack. Both of which the liberals cheer and support. Both of which are juxtaposed opposite claims.


They will always go back to the so called lies of BOOOOSH for WMDs that the democrats propagated before BOOOOOOSH took office.

The worst part is they think they make sense, and they always think they are the smartest ones in the room.

It is pathetic isn't it?

Liberals, always so sure and always so wrong.

Actually, anti liberals seem to be dishonest and (frankly) stupid.

Is this your ******* way to avoid commenting on the facts that the ******* democrats propagated the existence of wmds before Bush took office?

When presented with irrefutable facts, you people go right back to your pathetic hyperbole bullshit.

You think your obfuscation is lost on any of us rational thinkers?

Go ahead and pretend Hillary and the Clintons never said anything about WMDs. Go ahead and avoid the truth.

ALso, keep on thinking you have actual intelligence. It is hilarious watching you squirm in your hypocritical bullshit.

Hey, Gitmo is still open. Don't care? That is what we thought.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I agree and please use that attitude in any discussion of Iraq and WMD.

That said, let's assume Bush knew and lied about WMD. His motive would have been that he wanted to go to war. Of course in the Iraq situation you would have to prove that Bush lied and wasn't just believing what he wanted to believe.

But with her not telling the truth days after the event what was the motive? Why say anything at all if you don't at least believe it to be true? I am not discounting that they all believed what she said was true and it turned out differently. But I am going to say it took a whole long time for them to realize what everyone knew from the beginning. I think they were told a false flag story to cover for what the CIA and Stevens was really doing in Benghazi.

I absolutely DO NOT believe that GW lied about WMD. He has to own that, though, because his being wrong came at an enormous expense.

She offered up a possible reason for the attacks - no one knows or can ever know exactly why; only the terrorist.

I still don't know how we can say with absolution that she was wrong unless WE know; and we certainly can't know.

The war in Iraq was not totally or to my belief mainly concerned with WMD. Yes that was a big selling point but so too was Saddam and his depraved sons and their treatment of their own people. Go ask a Kurd what they think of Bush, they love him. The reason that WMD keep coming up is that it is easy. We went in to remove Saddam, establish a free vote and establish democracy in the ME. All objectives met.

She and Obama said with assuredly it was over the video. I don't remember her or him saying it was because of an organized attack until much later.

We know she was wrong because she said she was wrong. There were videos of the live action and none show a protest they show an attack. There is a huge difference.

Planning to invade Iraq began well before GWB became POTUS!

See:

Project for the New American Century - SourceWatch

Yes Stephanie, there really is a vast right wing conspiracy and the names of those conspirators are well known and posted in the link above.

Anyone curious will notice that the original documents have been "suspended" (whatever that means; in reality it means the neo conservatives who signed the "Statement of Principles" of June 3, 1997 want to cover their collective asses after seeing the results of the Iraq fiasco. Please see in the link above who signed the Statement of Principles, one of them is being hyped for the GOP nomination in 2016 (hint, his brother and father were both Presidents of the United States).

 

[Dante]

David Gregory had Susan Rice as a guest on Meet The Press yesterday morning and asked her if she had any regrets about telling everyone that Benghazi was caused by a video.

Her response was no of course. She claimed, still, that if there were any thoughts that the administration misled anyone on Benghazi, it is patently false.

NBC must be their favorite news program because she didn't repeat this lie anywhere else. Back then she repeated those dishonest talking points on every Sunday morning talk show before it was known that it was totally false, but not this time. Only on NBC, to avoid any tough questioning apparently.

She claimed yesterday that her comments were well validated, but then she also said that her comments weren't 100% correct. So which is it lady. Make up your mind!!! Were they untrue or not?

You won't get that kind of answer from the White House.

Like Obama's lie about Obamacare, Susan Rice's comments then and again yesterday were bold-faced lies, and yet she is allowed to keep her job.

What kind of country is this that it's government is allowed to lie to us and get away with it?

This is the kind of thing that happens in 3rd world countries. Not a country that believes in the law and believes that integrity is an important function of government.

On being President Obama's national security adviser, Rice said that "she couldn't ask for anything more" and that "it's the greatest honor in the world to work for the President of the United States and on behalf of the American people."

I guess we can assume that everything that comes from the Obama Administration is automatically a lie and must be proved not to be before it can be taken at face value. Liberals will say they already knew this, yet they still support them. The rest of us feel this is not only wrong but criminal fraud. But hey, they won. So we have to suck it up.

People of USMB Welcome to the USMB Spin Zone

 

[hangover]

Wasted because you say so? Diminish the sacrifice our volunteer army made that is a liberal thing to do. But we achieved the objectives.

The killing of a million civilians that had nothing to do with 9/11 or yellow cake is not a sacrifice it's a war crime. That's what you call achievement. You take stupid to a whole new level.

Killing of one million civilians? You moron.

Hey, why don't you retarded annoying hippies blame the democrats who propagated wmds in Iraq before Booooooosh took office.

You ignorant asshole.

Hillary voted for the war.....

Obama is killing the mythical terrorists with drones....

Gitmo is still open....

3 times as many soldiers have died in Afghan under Obama....

Those are facts you piece of shit. Not left wing lies....

Just truth.

I know you are, but what am I? NA NA NA NA NA! I am Teflon, you are glue, those childish insults slide off me, and stick on you. NA NA NA NA NA! NA NA NA NA NA! NA NA NA NA NA!
Raygun was the one that sold WMD to Saddam. Shrub started Afghanistan. Obama is still cleaning up his mess. Obama was the one that got the 9/11 perp.
If you want any credibility as an adult, try something besides childish insults and fantasy.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The killing of a million civilians that had nothing to do with 9/11 or yellow cake is not a sacrifice it's a war crime. That's what you call achievement. You take stupid to a whole new level.

Killing of one million civilians? You moron.

Hey, why don't you retarded annoying hippies blame the democrats who propagated wmds in Iraq before Booooooosh took office.

You ignorant asshole.

Hillary voted for the war.....

Obama is killing the mythical terrorists with drones....

Gitmo is still open....

3 times as many soldiers have died in Afghan under Obama....

Those are facts you piece of shit. Not left wing lies....

Just truth.

I know you are, but what am I? NA NA NA NA NA! I am Teflon, you are glue, those childish insults slide off me, and stick on you. NA NA NA NA NA! NA NA NA NA NA! NA NA NA NA NA!
Raygun was the one that sold WMD to Saddam. Shrub started Afghanistan. Obama is still cleaning up his mess. Obama was the one that got the 9/11 perp.
If you want any credibility as an adult, try something besides childish insults and fantasy.

More evidence that liberals are retarded. Straight up. It's actually sad. They're like rabid dogs

 

[birddog]

Obama supporters entering this thread to say "Bush lied too...Republicans lie.. in 5,4,3,2,1...

Bush lied! Or he was too stupid, or too lazy, or too incompetent. If Obama had done everything Bush had done beginning in January 2001 you would be calling for his head. That makes you - and I'm being nice - a hypocrite.

PKB ALERT!

Obama is clearly the biggest and most damaging liar in the history of the presidency! Bush was not perfect in his decisions, but he was a good man, and was usually honest.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Obama supporters entering this thread to say "Bush lied too...Republicans lie.. in 5,4,3,2,1...

Bush lied! Or he was too stupid, or too lazy, or too incompetent. If Obama had done everything Bush had done beginning in January 2001 you would be calling for his head. That makes you - and I'm being nice - a hypocrite.

PKB ALERT!

Obama is clearly the biggest and most damaging liar in the history of the presidency! Bush was not perfect in his decisions, but he was a good man, and was usually honest.

Spoken like you just turned off your car radio.