Jump to content

Another BenGhazi Bombshell


Proud Tiger

Recommended Posts

I have said it before and I will say it again......the BIG unanswered question(s) need to a asked d Leon Panetta. We know he went to the WH late nigh on 9/11/12. Yet NO group, committee, etc., has called or subpoenaed him to answer anything. WHY?

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

There have been no answers except the constant parade of lies and bs that has been spread by this administration.

Are the investigations and their conclusions part of a broader conspiracy? Does it go beyond the administration?

Dude lighten up on the black helicopter questions. What conspiracy? I think the American people have a right to know where Hillary Clinton and BHO were that night and why were they, seemingly, so eager to support a false narrative? These questions haven't been answered nor has it been disclosed who gave the stand down order to the defense contractors that night who were hired to protect the American consulate in Benghazi?

There are significant questions that have still not been answered. The left wants to make it all about politics but dont seem to realize it has always been all about politics. The event occurred in the home stretch of the Presidential election year. The false narrative was political and it has been exposed for what it is. Saying its just about politics for the republicans is quite ironic and laughable.

Sounds like we agree. So why is it "ironic and laughable" if I say it?

Because you weren't saying it was all about politics when BHO was trotting out State Dept minions with a false narrative that wouldn't upset his Bin Ladin is dead and Al Qaeda has been decimated propaganda

What false narrative?

And I don't recall any "Al Qaeda has been decimated" statements made in conjunction with this incident.

Are you being intentionally obtuse again? The whole 'spontaneous reaction to a video" narrative that was used to hide the failures of this admin in their handling of the Benghazi disaster. THAT false narrative,obviously, was a political ploy used to create a scenario that minimized the truth and concealed from clearer view the broader policy failures of BHO foreign policy as a whole. He was trying to win re-election and that whole assessment was precious little more than damage control to that reelection bid.

Did they not abandon that narrative as more information was accumulated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have said it before and I will say it again......the BIG unanswered question(s) need to a asked d Leon Panetta. We know he went to the WH late nigh on 9/11/12. Yet NO group, committee, etc., has called or subpoenaed him to answer anything. WHY?

It's classified. You don't have the clearance or the need to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. 'No unanswered questions'. Then why all the lies and hiding of evidence?

I guess it's just asking too much to actually read the article:

"And a cover up? Give me a break. After extensive congressional investigation, dark suspicions and conspiracy theories of nefarious orders given (or not given) by senior administration officials have been dispelled. Susan Rice’s comments on national television after the attack were uninformed and mired in the narrative the Obama administration had been peddling about al-Qaeda’s so-called strategic defeat (more on that below). In the days that followed, the president also equivocated on whether or not it was a terrorist attack. The incident was a coordinated attack by militant groups, America was unprepared to respond to such a contingency with appropriate military force, and the White House’s initial characterization of the events was misleading. But senior officials did not issue any “stand down” orders. All of this was clear within a few months, if not earlier, and did not necessitate the cacophony of committee investigations now entering their third year.

So what should the U.S. Congress be investigating that could actually have a positive impact on the American foreign and defense policy processes? Here is one suggestion that would also show the American people that the Republican Party is truly interested in leadership: the Obama Administration’s failure to understand the jihadist threat."

I read the article, but here is the struggle: We all know we can keep our insurance, we can all keep our doctor, a dozen IRS computers did actually crash simultaneously, the IRS did not target conservative groups, the Obama administrations talking points changed on Benghazi as evidence became available even though it was available day one, and of course we should all discount eye witness accounts from the soldiers who disobeyed "stand down orders" and deployed to save further lives from being lost in the battle. I will stop here as I am tired of writing, but we all know there is much, much more. I am not going to lie, I am very skeptical of this administration as they've been caught in lie upon lie upon lie. So help me out and convince me why I should believe Ryan Evans and his opinion piece?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN......some in Congress do have the neccessary clearance and I assume ADM Mullin does. FYI, I held a top secret clearance for many years so I think I know v well what that involves.

But in any event, what does Panetta have to hide and do you think only he and Obama have the right to keep it between the two of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. 'No unanswered questions'. Then why all the lies and hiding of evidence?

I guess it's just asking too much to actually read the article:

"And a cover up? Give me a break. After extensive congressional investigation, dark suspicions and conspiracy theories of nefarious orders given (or not given) by senior administration officials have been dispelled. Susan Rice’s comments on national television after the attack were uninformed and mired in the narrative the Obama administration had been peddling about al-Qaeda’s so-called strategic defeat (more on that below). In the days that followed, the president also equivocated on whether or not it was a terrorist attack. The incident was a coordinated attack by militant groups, America was unprepared to respond to such a contingency with appropriate military force, and the White House’s initial characterization of the events was misleading. But senior officials did not issue any “stand down” orders. All of this was clear within a few months, if not earlier, and did not necessitate the cacophony of committee investigations now entering their third year.

So what should the U.S. Congress be investigating that could actually have a positive impact on the American foreign and defense policy processes? Here is one suggestion that would also show the American people that the Republican Party is truly interested in leadership: the Obama Administration’s failure to understand the jihadist threat."

I read the article, but here is the struggle: We all know we can keep our insurance, we can all keep our doctor, a dozen IRS computers did actually crash simultaneously, the IRS did not target conservative groups, the Obama administrations talking points changed on Benghazi as evidence became available even though it was available day one, and of course we should all discount eye witness accounts from the soldiers who disobeyed "stand down orders" and deployed to save further lives from being lost in the battle. I will stop here as I am tired of writing, but we all know there is much, much more. I am not going to lie, I am very skeptical of this administration as they've been caught in lie upon lie upon lie. So help me out and convince me why I should believe Ryan Evans and his opinion piece?

I don't care if you believe the article or not. I posted in an effort to get people to move on and attack the issues at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN......some in Congress do have the neccessary clearance and I assume ADM Mullin does. FYI, I held a top secret clearance for many years so I think I know v well what that involves.

But in any event, what does Panetta have to hide and do you think only he and Obama have the right to keep it between the two of them?

And congress has received a classified briefing on the incident to include why Ambassador Stevens was in Libya. Panetta I assume must abide by his non-disclosure agreement. Since you say you had a TS, I assume you know what that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. 'No unanswered questions'. Then why all the lies and hiding of evidence?

I guess it's just asking too much to actually read the article:

"And a cover up? Give me a break. After extensive congressional investigation, dark suspicions and conspiracy theories of nefarious orders given (or not given) by senior administration officials have been dispelled. Susan Rice’s comments on national television after the attack were uninformed and mired in the narrative the Obama administration had been peddling about al-Qaeda’s so-called strategic defeat (more on that below). In the days that followed, the president also equivocated on whether or not it was a terrorist attack. The incident was a coordinated attack by militant groups, America was unprepared to respond to such a contingency with appropriate military force, and the White House’s initial characterization of the events was misleading. But senior officials did not issue any “stand down” orders. All of this was clear within a few months, if not earlier, and did not necessitate the cacophony of committee investigations now entering their third year.

So what should the U.S. Congress be investigating that could actually have a positive impact on the American foreign and defense policy processes? Here is one suggestion that would also show the American people that the Republican Party is truly interested in leadership: the Obama Administration’s failure to understand the jihadist threat."

I read the article, but here is the struggle: We all know we can keep our insurance, we can all keep our doctor, a dozen IRS computers did actually crash simultaneously, the IRS did not target conservative groups, the Obama administrations talking points changed on Benghazi as evidence became available even though it was available day one, and of course we should all discount eye witness accounts from the soldiers who disobeyed "stand down orders" and deployed to save further lives from being lost in the battle. I will stop here as I am tired of writing, but we all know there is much, much more. I am not going to lie, I am very skeptical of this administration as they've been caught in lie upon lie upon lie. So help me out and convince me why I should believe Ryan Evans and his opinion piece?

I don't care if you believe the article or not. I posted in an effort to get people to move on and attack the issues at hand.

News Flash! There is more than one issue at hand and Benghazi remains in the cross hairs.

A Quinnipiac University poll, found a majority of 52 percent believe the administration deliberately misled the public about Benghazi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. 'No unanswered questions'. Then why all the lies and hiding of evidence?

I guess it's just asking too much to actually read the article:

"And a cover up? Give me a break. After extensive congressional investigation, dark suspicions and conspiracy theories of nefarious orders given (or not given) by senior administration officials have been dispelled. Susan Rice’s comments on national television after the attack were uninformed and mired in the narrative the Obama administration had been peddling about al-Qaeda’s so-called strategic defeat (more on that below). In the days that followed, the president also equivocated on whether or not it was a terrorist attack. The incident was a coordinated attack by militant groups, America was unprepared to respond to such a contingency with appropriate military force, and the White House’s initial characterization of the events was misleading. But senior officials did not issue any “stand down” orders. All of this was clear within a few months, if not earlier, and did not necessitate the cacophony of committee investigations now entering their third year.

So what should the U.S. Congress be investigating that could actually have a positive impact on the American foreign and defense policy processes? Here is one suggestion that would also show the American people that the Republican Party is truly interested in leadership: the Obama Administration’s failure to understand the jihadist threat."

I read the article, but here is the struggle: We all know we can keep our insurance, we can all keep our doctor, a dozen IRS computers did actually crash simultaneously, the IRS did not target conservative groups, the Obama administrations talking points changed on Benghazi as evidence became available even though it was available day one, and of course we should all discount eye witness accounts from the soldiers who disobeyed "stand down orders" and deployed to save further lives from being lost in the battle. I will stop here as I am tired of writing, but we all know there is much, much more. I am not going to lie, I am very skeptical of this administration as they've been caught in lie upon lie upon lie. So help me out and convince me why I should believe Ryan Evans and his opinion piece?

I don't care if you believe the article or not. I posted in an effort to get people to move on and attack the issues at hand.

News Flash! There is more than one issue at hand and Benghazi remains in the cross hairs.

If you say so. I'm moving on the aligator closest to the boat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN....

Can you state for a fact that anyone in congress knows what Panetta told Obama? I do know what a non-disclosure agreement is but don't think that applies to congressional oversight of national security.One person I have heard make the point about Panetta several times is Col. Oliver North and I think he has forgotten more about this than you or I ever knew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN....

Can you state for a fact that anyone in congress knows what Panetta told Obama? I do know what a non-disclosure agreement is but don't think that applies to congressional oversight of national security.One person I have heard make the point about Panetta several times is Col. Oliver North and I think he has forgotten more about this than you or I ever knew.

LtCol North I would imagine knows a lot about clandestine gun running schemes. See where I'm going with this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure......all the more reason he understands what he is talking about. He has fully admitted his wrongdoing. And I note you didn't answer my question about what anyone in congess knows for a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any of you are looking for that magical perp walk, you are going to be disappointed. Even House leader Boehner has "guilty knowledge" on this operation. I'm as sickened as anyone on the attack at Bengazi but that doesnt mean i'm going to go into full "truther" mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN....

Can you state for a fact that anyone in congress knows what Panetta told Obama? I do know what a non-disclosure agreement is but don't think that applies to congressional oversight of national security.One person I have heard make the point about Panetta several times is Col. Oliver North and I think he has forgotten more about this than you or I ever knew.

LtCol North I would imagine knows a lot about clandestine gun running schemes. See where I'm going with this?

Lt. Col. North did lie to congress, but given today's liberal interpretation of lies by the current administration, what difference does it make?

Maybe we should get back to the thread topic of Benghazi aye?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that is required is the TRUTH. Even a lib can stumble across the truth sometime. You know, all those documents they were shredding in the state dept .......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN......You still avoid my question.......do you know for a fact that anyone besides Obama and Panetta know what they talked about? And don't forget that besides the four guys killed, there is till a poor guy jail that the Obama crowd blamed his film for starting ii all.We know that is BS so is he still in jail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AUUSN......You still avoid my question.......do you know for a fact that anyone besides Obama and Panetta know what they talked about? And don't forget that besides the four guys killed, there is till a poor guy jail that the Obama crowd blamed his film for starting ii all.We know that is BS so is he still in jail?

I don't have "A" level access to the White House so the answer is no..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any of you are looking for that magical perp walk, you are going to be disappointed. Even House leader Boehner has "guilty knowledge" on this operation. I'm as sickened as anyone on the attack at Bengazi but that doesnt mean i'm going to go into full "truther" mode.

Got any more than blind suspicions on that one ?

And btw , where WAS Obama that night ? He wasn't in the Sitch-room, per Tommy 'Dude' Vitor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any of you are looking for that magical perp walk, you are going to be disappointed. Even House leader Boehner has "guilty knowledge" on this operation. I'm as sickened as anyone on the attack at Bengazi but that doesnt mean i'm going to go into full "truther" mode.

Got any more than blind suspicions on that one ?

And btw , where WAS Obama that night ? He wasn't in the Sitch-room, per Tommy 'Dude' Vitor.

Nope and dont know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what does 'full truther mode' even mean ?

We're talking at the very least sheer and utter incompetence w/ this administration. ( Hillary to Obama )

Running guns , which would answer as to why a lightly protected US Ambassador was even IN Libya in the first place, when every other of our allies had pulled out well ahead of 9/11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been no answers except the constant parade of lies and bs that has been spread by this administration.

Are the investigations and their conclusions part of a broader conspiracy? Does it go beyond the administration?

Dude lighten up on the black helicopter questions. What conspiracy? I think the American people have a right to know where Hillary Clinton and BHO were that night and why were they, seemingly, so eager to support a false narrative? These questions haven't been answered nor has it been disclosed who gave the stand down order to the defense contractors that night who were hired to protect the American consulate in Benghazi?

There are significant questions that have still not been answered. The left wants to make it all about politics but dont seem to realize it has always been all about politics. The event occurred in the home stretch of the Presidential election year. The false narrative was political and it has been exposed for what it is. Saying its just about politics for the republicans is quite ironic and laughable.

Sounds like we agree. So why is it "ironic and laughable" if I say it?

Because you weren't saying it was all about politics when BHO was trotting out State Dept minions with a false narrative that wouldn't upset his Bin Ladin is dead and Al Qaeda has been decimated propaganda

What false narrative?

And I don't recall any "Al Qaeda has been decimated" statements made in conjunction with this incident.

Are you being intentionally obtuse again? The whole 'spontaneous reaction to a video" narrative that was used to hide the failures of this admin in their handling of the Benghazi disaster. THAT false narrative,obviously, was a political ploy used to create a scenario that minimized the truth and concealed from clearer view the broader policy failures of BHO foreign policy as a whole. He was trying to win re-election and that whole assessment was precious little more than damage control to that reelection bid.

Did they not abandon that narrative as more information was accumulated?

After the election was won? LOL...yeah since it no longer served their purposes they eventually eased up on the blatant lying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two bits:

1) Whether Susan Rice knew she was lying or not at the time we will never know. She has a ruined name wherever she goes from here. She went on 5 shows and laid out a meme that was clearly about one and only one thing: Saving the election in 2012. I dont care what anyone else thinks, she should not have gone out there and with "all certainty" said what was later clearly shown to be complete BS.

2) We had assets exposed where we could not protect them. This shows a lack of good leadership. You do not put assets like an Ambassador out in harm's way and not expect bad things to happen.

3) Looking back, we can all see that the Obama Administration, White House and State Department, were and are completely lost on EVALUATING the threat of jihadi terrorism.

Terrorism is not on the run.

It is more powerful than ever.

It is better financed than ever.

It has better weaponry than ever.

It is better organized than ever.

It is a bigger threat than ever.

That is not winning the War on Terror.

Only the Carter Admin will be remembered for doing a worse job in the ME.

Truth hurts.

We should never have gone into Iraq.

We should have been using the Dept of Energy to get off of imported oil far more vigorously since 1973. THAT was its mission. It has failed dramatically.

We should be going all out on Energy Independence right now and we arent. DC's leadership on this has been an EPIC FAILURE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two bits:

1) Whether Susan Rice knew she was lying or not at the time we will never know. She has a ruined name wherever she goes from here. She went on 5 shows and laid out a meme that was clearly about one and only one thing: Saving the election in 2012. I dont care what anyone else thinks, she should not have gone out there and with "all certainty" said what was later clearly shown to be complete BS.

2) We had assets exposed where we could not protect them. This shows a lack of good leadership. You do not put assets like an Ambassador out in harm's way and not expect bad things to happen.

3) Looking back, we can all see that the Obama Administration, White House and State Department, were and are completely lost on EVALUATING the threat of jihadi terrorism.

Terrorism is not on the run.

It is more powerful than ever.

It is better financed than ever.

It has better weaponry than ever.

It is better organized than ever.

It is a bigger threat than ever.

That is not winning the War on Terror.

Only the Carter Admin will be remembered for doing a worse job in the ME.

Truth hurts.

We should never have gone into Iraq.

We should have been using the Dept of Energy to get off of imported oil far more vigorously since 1973. THAT was its mission. It has failed dramatically.

We should be going all out on Energy Independence right now and we arent. DC's leadership on this has been an EPIC FAILURE.

Boom!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...