homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 @ homer - Bush didn't lie, and Obama did mean exactly what he said. And no, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave is not HIS house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 http://www.newsweek....outrages-385853 I had already predicted the Republicans will overplay their hand. I now predict the Benghazi senate hearings will be key to Hillary Clinton's election as POTUS. (As a Bernie Sanders fan, gee thanks GOP! :-\/> ) How would you have felt if you had a son lying in one of those 4 caskets at Dover AFB with Obama and Hillary standing in front saying they died because of a video that made the Moslems riot? Not as bad as I would watching the Republicans use the whole incident as a political weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don't fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government—one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment—has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party's leading candidate for president. Comparisons from America's past are rare. Richard Nixon's attempts to use the IRS to investigate his perceived enemies come to mind. So does Senator Joseph McCarthy's red-baiting during the 1950s, with reckless accusations of treason leveled at members of the State Department, military generals and even the secretary of the Army. But the modern McCarthys of the Benghazi committee cannot perform this political theater on their own—they depend on reporters to aid in the attempts to use government for the purpose of destroying others with bogus "scoops" ladled out by members of Congress and their staffs. These journalists will almost certainly join the legions of shamed reporters of the McCarthy era as it becomes increasingly clear they are enablers of an obscene attempt to undermine the electoral process. Lois Lerner says hi... So, Lois Lerner justifies what the Republicans are doing? (Nice diversion though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFTiger 282 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Hillary failed to provide adequate security for her ambassador to Libya. Hillary failed to ensure a clear means of communications for her ambassadors land instead set up a blocking device so as not to be bothered with such mundane subjects as security. Hillary failed to take responsibility for her actions or lack thereof by laying blame to others. Hillary knew the facts of the attack yet chose to tell lies to the us by blaming a video that no one had seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 http://www.newsweek....outrages-385853 I had already predicted the Republicans will overplay their hand. I now predict the Benghazi senate hearings will be key to Hillary Clinton's election as POTUS. (As a Bernie Sanders fan, gee thanks GOP! :-\/> ) How would you have felt if you had a son lying in one of those 4 caskets at Dover AFB with Obama and Hillary standing in front saying they died because of a video that made the Moslems riot? Then you find out later that The video excuse was a lie and that Obama and Hillary knew it was a lie. That they always knew it was a terrorist group that killed them in a military attack. Obama lied to save his reelection and Mrs Bill Clinton's lied to save her political career in a staged photo op in front of caskets and grieving relatives. Today we found out that she even emailed Chelsea just after the attack to tell her it was caused by a terrorist attack. (Using her private email server to discuss a national security event) I guess she's not willing to lie to her own daughter. http://blogs.wsj.com...nghazi-hearing/ At about the 7:15 minute mark she starts lying at Dover AFB. I agree with you. For fourteen/fifteen days, the White House played politics with this tragedy. IMO, the willingness to do so indicates a serious lack of character. However, to continue to politicize the tragedy for another four years is exactly the same. There is no crime. There is plenty of hypocrisy. There is plenty of partisanship. There is the disingenuous playing of politics while pretending to be motivated by the "search for truth". What a joke. In the end, we have one side attempting to downplay the human failure and resulting deaths. We have one side attempting to exaggerate and exploit the human failure and resulting deaths. We have two factions disingenuously playing politics, nothing more. Anyone who cannot or, will not see the simple truth is a hypocrite, a partisan, and a fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Hillary failed to provide adequate security for her ambassador to Libya. Hillary failed to ensure a clear means of communications for her ambassadors land instead set up a blocking device so as not to be bothered with such mundane subjects as security. Hillary failed to take responsibility for her actions or lack thereof by laying blame to others. Hillary knew the facts of the attack yet chose to tell lies to the us by blaming a video that no one had seen. Wasn't her direct responsibility. But she accepted overall responsibility as SOS. False False Feasible, but not proven. But hardly the major sin it's made out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 All anyone has to know is that at 10:30pm, the night of the attack, Hillary told the world that a video caused an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi . By 11:00, she sent email to her daughter saying it was a terrorist attack by group so much Al Qaeda. Despite knowing at the moment of the attack, on 9-11-12, Hillary & the Obama administration continued to lie that a video was the spark for the attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 All anyone has to know is that at 10:30pm, the night of the attack, Hillary told the world that a video caused an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi . By 11:00, she sent email to her daughter saying it was a terrorist attack by group so much Al Qaeda. Despite knowing at the moment of the attack, on 9-11-12, Hillary & the Obama administration continued to lie that a video was the spark for the attack. She couldn't have possibly known at the moment of the attack who caused it. Regardless, the worst she - and Obama - are guilty of is clinging to the story they felt was the most advantageous politically - which IMO was vastly overrated to begin with. Overall, considering history, this is not a huge deal. Certainly not as bad as Nixon claiming the mass bombing of Vietnam was having positive results or Bush claiming Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs (just to cite two examples). I think it's revealing that this is the only potential transgression her political enemies keep coming back to. The phrase "what does it matter?" is a lot more relevant than you all are willing to admit. As a generalization, I don't think the American people really care if the attacks were from video demonstrators or from terrorists. In the final analysis it's a distinction without a lot of difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 She said she knew. You want to tell us that you know more about what she knew than she knew? Wow. Double special crassic. You don't care that she lied ? Very telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Only thirteen more months of this to go. Unless HRC is elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgr4lfe 220 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don't fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government—one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment—has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party's leading candidate for president. Comparisons from America's past are rare. Richard Nixon's attempts to use the IRS to investigate his perceived enemies come to mind. So does Senator Joseph McCarthy's red-baiting during the 1950s, with reckless accusations of treason leveled at members of the State Department, military generals and even the secretary of the Army. But the modern McCarthys of the Benghazi committee cannot perform this political theater on their own—they depend on reporters to aid in the attempts to use government for the purpose of destroying others with bogus "scoops" ladled out by members of Congress and their staffs. These journalists will almost certainly join the legions of shamed reporters of the McCarthy era as it becomes increasingly clear they are enablers of an obscene attempt to undermine the electoral process. Lois Lerner says hi... LOL, I was thinking the same thing........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgr4lfe 220 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 All anyone has to know is that at 10:30pm, the night of the attack, Hillary told the world that a video caused an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi . By 11:00, she sent email to her daughter saying it was a terrorist attack by group so much Al Qaeda. Despite knowing at the moment of the attack, on 9-11-12, Hillary & the Obama administration continued to lie that a video was the spark for the attack. She couldn't have possibly known at the moment of the attack who caused it. Regardless, the worst she - and Obama - are guilty of is clinging to the story they felt was the most advantageous politically - which IMO was vastly overrated to begin with. Overall, considering history, this is not a huge deal. Certainly not as bad as Nixon claiming the mass bombing of Vietnam was having positive results or Bush claiming Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs just to cite two examples. I think it's revealing that this is the only potential transgression her political enemies keep coming back to. The phrase "what does it matter?" is a lot more relevant than you all are willing to admit. I don't think the American people as a generalization really care if the attacks were from video demonstrators or from terrorists. In the final analysis it's a distinction without a lot of difference. Then why lie about it?? Why the need for HC and the WH to perpetuate a false narrative surrounding the "cause" of the attack?? B/c of HC run DoS failure to approve adequate security measures at a time when the embassy personnel apparently had high concerns about attack. Wasn't there even intel of possible 9/11 attack?? B/c HC and the WH were engage in funneling weapons and didn't want info to get out and are still CYA to protect some things that might have been going on there, and thus part of that was to let the Ambassador go down in the flames?? Why lie about that narrative?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 All anyone has to know is that at 10:30pm, the night of the attack, Hillary told the world that a video caused an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi . By 11:00, she sent email to her daughter saying it was a terrorist attack by group so much Al Qaeda. Despite knowing at the moment of the attack, on 9-11-12, Hillary & the Obama administration continued to lie that a video was the spark for the attack. She couldn't have possibly known at the moment of the attack who caused it. Regardless, the worst she - and Obama - are guilty of is clinging to the story they felt was the most advantageous politically - which IMO was vastly overrated to begin with. Overall, considering history, this is not a huge deal. Certainly not as bad as Nixon claiming the mass bombing of Vietnam was having positive results or Bush claiming Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs just to cite two examples. I think it's revealing that this is the only potential transgression her political enemies keep coming back to. The phrase "what does it matter?" is a lot more relevant than you all are willing to admit. I don't think the American people as a generalization really care if the attacks were from video demonstrators or from terrorists. In the final analysis it's a distinction without a lot of difference. Then why lie about it?? Why the need for HC and the WH to perpetuate a false narrative surrounding the "cause" of the attack?? B/c of HC run DoS failure to approve adequate security measures at a time when the embassy personnel apparently had high concerns about attack. Wasn't there even intel of possible 9/11 attack?? B/c HC and the WH were engage in funneling weapons and didn't want info to get out and are still CYA to protect some things that might have been going on there, and thus part of that was to let the Ambassador go down in the flames?? Why lie about that narrative?? Two months before a major election? Why won't either side admit that, behind closed doors, their meetings include (if not absolutely focused on) the political implications. This is political theatre. This is the "theatre of the absurd". This is partisan politics at it's worst. This is what we have come to accept from ALL politicians. This is the reflection of a populous who, in general, have surrendered critical thought, the ability think in an ethical manner, the ability to be objective, the desire to be sincere. However, let's not stop. The teams are set. Let's play for blood, hypocrisy, and the destruction of the United States. One Party Rule! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Why lie about this? Because it was less than two months before Obama's re-election, and he had already stated that Al Qaeda was dead and GM was alive. Libya was supposed to be a feather in Hillary's Sec/State cap & the narrative of Amb. Stevens ( and 3 more Americans) getting killed in a planned ,premeditated attack on 9/11 was real bad for the campaign narrative. I find it incredulous that some here are getting upset over the fact that Hillary and Obama are being called out for lying , and are not upset over the fact that they DID lie!!! If your friend tells you that your wife is cheating on you, do you get mad at the friend? Or do you get mad at the wife who actually did the cheating. The Democrats & the left are getting mad at the people not responsible for the cheating at all. There are attacking the messenger and ignoring the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Why lie about this? Because it was less than two months before Obama's re-election, and he had already stated that Al Qaeda was dead and GM was alive. Libya was supposed to be a feather in Hillary's Sec/State cap & the narrative of Amb. Stevens ( and 3 more Americans) getting killed in a planned ,premeditated attack on 9/11 was real bad for the campaign narrative. I find it incredulous that some here are getting upset over the fact that Hillary and Obama are being called out for lying , and are not upset over the fact that they DID lie!!! If your friend tells you that your wife is cheating on you, do you get mad at the friend? Or do you get mad at the wife who actually did the cheating. The Democrats & the left are getting mad at the people not responsible for the cheating at all. There are attacking the messenger and ignoring the crime. Very true. However, now turn that critical eye toward "your team". If you are able, you will not like reality. You cannot be better by being worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 It doesn't seem to me that anyone in here who identifies as a liberal is declaring HRC completely innocent, but rather they are pointing out the fact that this committee is nothing more than a witch hunt against Clinton which even the House Majority Leader Senator McCarthy admitted. McCarthy bragged to Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-benghazi-kevin-mccarthy-214325#ixzz3pPtUggvk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 It doesn't seem to me that anyone in here who identifies as a liberal is declaring HRC completely innocent, but rather they are pointing out the fact that this committee is nothing more than a witch hunt against Clinton which even the House Majority Leader Senator McCarthy admitted. McCarthy bragged to Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” Read more: http://www.politico....5#ixzz3pPtUggvk If her numbers appear to rise, will the plot take a twist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 It doesn't seem to me that anyone in here who identifies as a liberal is declaring HRC completely innocent, but rather they are pointing out the fact that this committee is nothing more than a witch hunt against Clinton which even the House Majority Leader Senator McCarthy admitted. McCarthy bragged to Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” Read more: http://www.politico....5#ixzz3pPtUggvk If her numbers appear to rise, will the plot take a twist? Power plays only work when they work. And sometimes they backfire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 She said she knew. You want to tell us that you know more about what she knew than she knew? Wow. Double special crassic. You don't care that she lied ? Very telling. 1) She couldn't possibly have known at the moment of the attack, by definition. Are you suggesting she knew about the attack before it happened? 2) I didn't say that. What's telling is your habit of misscharacterizing other's posts - it's weasel lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 All anyone has to know is that at 10:30pm, the night of the attack, Hillary told the world that a video caused an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi . By 11:00, she sent email to her daughter saying it was a terrorist attack by group so much Al Qaeda. Despite knowing at the moment of the attack, on 9-11-12, Hillary & the Obama administration continued to lie that a video was the spark for the attack. She couldn't have possibly known at the moment of the attack who caused it. Regardless, the worst she - and Obama - are guilty of is clinging to the story they felt was the most advantageous politically - which IMO was vastly overrated to begin with. Overall, considering history, this is not a huge deal. Certainly not as bad as Nixon claiming the mass bombing of Vietnam was having positive results or Bush claiming Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs just to cite two examples. I think it's revealing that this is the only potential transgression her political enemies keep coming back to. The phrase "what does it matter?" is a lot more relevant than you all are willing to admit. I don't think the American people as a generalization really care if the attacks were from video demonstrators or from terrorists. In the final analysis it's a distinction without a lot of difference. Then why lie about it?? Why the need for HC and the WH to perpetuate a false narrative surrounding the "cause" of the attack?? B/c of HC run DoS failure to approve adequate security measures at a time when the embassy personnel apparently had high concerns about attack. Wasn't there even intel of possible 9/11 attack?? B/c HC and the WH were engage in funneling weapons and didn't want info to get out and are still CYA to protect some things that might have been going on there, and thus part of that was to let the Ambassador go down in the flames?? Why lie about that narrative?? I don't know why they clung to that story. I think it was stupid. Like I said, I think they were way over-thinking the politics of it. But the proposition they deliberately set the ambassador and others up to protect a secret is ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 I find it incredulous that some here are getting upset over the fact that Hillary and Obama are being called out for lying , and are not upset over the fact that they DID lie!!! This coming from the guy who insists that McCarthy didn't actually say the Benghazi investigations were politically motivated. :-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 It doesn't seem to me that anyone in here who identifies as a liberal is declaring HRC completely innocent, but rather they are pointing out the fact that this committee is nothing more than a witch hunt against Clinton which even the House Majority Leader Senator McCarthy admitted. McCarthy bragged to Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” Read more: http://www.politico....5#ixzz3pPtUggvk If her numbers appear to rise, will the plot take a twist? Power plays only work when they work. And sometimes they backfire. This is not new. Remember the whitewater special prosecutor? It will backfire. Already has in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 It doesn't seem to me that anyone in here who identifies as a liberal is declaring HRC completely innocent, but rather they are pointing out the fact that this committee is nothing more than a witch hunt against Clinton which even the House Majority Leader Senator McCarthy admitted. McCarthy bragged to Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” Read more: http://www.politico....5#ixzz3pPtUggvk If her numbers appear to rise, will the plot take a twist? Power plays only work when they work. And sometimes they backfire. This is not new. Remember the whitewater special prosecutor? It will backfire. Already has in fact. You should be the Republican strategist. The GOP should not attempt to demonize her and risk energizing the Democratic base by making her some sort of martyr. Apathetic Democrats do NOT vote. The GOP path to victory is by making her the "establishment", an opportunist, disingenuous, not by making her the liberal devil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,415 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 It doesn't seem to me that anyone in here who identifies as a liberal is declaring HRC completely innocent, but rather they are pointing out the fact that this committee is nothing more than a witch hunt against Clinton which even the House Majority Leader Senator McCarthy admitted. McCarthy bragged to Fox News’ Sean Hannity that “everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” Read more: http://www.politico....5#ixzz3pPtUggvk If her numbers appear to rise, will the plot take a twist? Power plays only work when they work. And sometimes they backfire. This is not new. Remember the whitewater special prosecutor? It will backfire. Already has in fact. You should be the Republican strategist. The GOP should not attempt to demonize her and risk energizing the Democratic base by making her some sort of martyr. Apathetic Democrats do NOT vote. The GOP path to victory is by making her the "establishment", an opportunist, disingenuous, not by making her the liberal devil. “She’s had the kind of couple of weeks that you pray for in presidential politics,” says Bob Shrum, the veteran Democratic consultant who has not shrunk in recent months from noting Clinton’s political vulnerabilities. When they originally scheduled Thursday’s hearing, House Republicans had hoped to turn the Benghazi investigation into a Soviet show trial, knocking Clinton further down after a summer that’s seen her consistently playing defense. But by the time she actually sat down on Capitol Hill Thursday, Clinton didn’t have to make any real effort to paint the Benghazi inquiry as partisan. In all-too-honest statements, Republicans from House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy on down had already done that for her—and it was left largely to the committee’s ranking member, Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, to attack the motives of the Republican Chairman Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, while Clinton pleaded for statesmanship and a bipartisan approach to diplomacy in a dangerous world. “She’s very fortunate the committee did not grant her request to let her do this earlier,” Shrum says. “The Republicans always overplay their hand, especially when it comes to the Clintons—and they’re doing it again.” Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-2016-debate-biden-benghazi-best-week-213285#ixzz3pQAcjkU6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 She said she knew. You want to tell us that you know more about what she knew than she knew? Wow. Double special crassic. You don't care that she lied ? Very telling. 1) She couldn't possibly have known at the moment of the attack, by definition. Are you suggesting she knew about the attack before it happened? Actually, she could, because there were warnings ( the compound had already been attacked ) , and oh yeah, it was the anniversary of 9-11. But that's never a position I offered. I said she heard about the attack, told the world it was because of the video, told her daughter and heads of other countries it was an attack, but then turned right around and told Americans and the rest of the world that it was because of the video. 2) I didn't say that. Well, you seem to think she knew less than she ADMITTED she knew, so I have no clue what else you were trying to say if not that. What's telling is your habit of misscharacterizing other's posts - it's weasel lying. And now you're trying to cast what you do onto others. Maybe you're ignorant of what Hillary said, and that's why you rush to her defense so hard. Or maybe you're just such a blind Leftist partisan, it doesn't matter what she says, you'll gleefully and fiercely defend her and attack anyone who tries to hold her accountable. Really, I don't care. It's up to you to deal w/ your dishonesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.