Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched

[rightwinger]

What help should have been sent?
What help could have been sent
Why did Republicans cut funding to embassy security?

What’s sad about all this, in addition to partisan conservatives using the tragic deaths of Americans for some perceived political gain, is that the ‘stand down’ lie contrived and nurtured by the right was proven false months ago:

“The officers on the ground in Benghazi responded to the situation on the night of 11 and 12 September as quickly and as effectively as possible,” one of the senior intelligence officials told reporters.

Thursday’s briefing for reporters was intended to refute reports, including one by Fox News last Friday, that the C.I.A.’s chain of command had blocked the officers on the ground from responding to the mission’s calls for help.

“There were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of continuing investigations by the State Department and the F.B.I.

At a time when the circumstances surrounding the attack on the Benghazi compound have emerged as a major political issue, with Republicans criticizing the Obama administration’s handling of the episode, the senior official also sought to rebut reports that C.I.A. requests for support from the Pentagon that night had gone unheeded.

In fact, the official said, the military diverted a Predator drone from a reconnaissance mission in Darnah, 90 miles away, in time to oversee the mission’s evacuation. The two commandos, based at the embassy in Tripoli, joined the reinforcements. And a military transport plane flew the wounded Americans and Mr. Stevens’s body out of Libya.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/w...sive-role-in-libya-attack.html?ref=world&_r=0

Then you have no objection to the testimony of next week of those who were there and who will testify that their orders were to stand down when they requested clearance to go? People who will provide their names, show their faces, and whose credentials will be open to complete scrutiny? You're absolutely certain that the 'anonymous' official's testimony will discredit any different testimony?

If the administration has clean hands, let's get it all out in the open and show that to the world.

Is that okay with you?

And the right will give up on their witch hunt if there is nothing there

correct?

 

[MondoBongo]

.

Listening to rightwing radio today, they're doing a freakin' victory lap about the "whistle blowers" coming forward, sounds like they're sure the shit's gonna hit the fan.

Of course, they were also sure about the 2012 election.

Break out the crows, one side or the other will be dining soon. Again.

.

My money says dud

It would be more credible if the person leading the charge, Darrell Issa, hasn't been known to be gunning for Obama since 2009.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

.

Listening to rightwing radio today, they're doing a freakin' victory lap about the "whistle blowers" coming forward, sounds like they're sure the shit's gonna hit the fan.

Of course, they were also sure about the 2012 election.

Break out the crows, one side or the other will be dining soon. Again.

.

And before that fast and furious.

And before that the birth certificate.

No, there’ll be no ‘crow eating,’ when proved wrong the new fad is to double down and ignore the facts. There are still rightists claiming the 2012 election was ‘stolen’ by Obama as a consequence of ‘voter fraud.’

 

[Foxfyre]

What’s sad about all this, in addition to partisan conservatives using the tragic deaths of Americans for some perceived political gain, is that the ‘stand down’ lie contrived and nurtured by the right was proven false months ago:

Then you have no objection to the testimony of next week of those who were there and who will testify that their orders were to stand down when they requested clearance to go? People who will provide their names, show their faces, and whose credentials will be open to complete scrutiny? You're absolutely certain that the 'anonymous' official's testimony will discredit any different testimony?

If the administration has clean hands, let's get it all out in the open and show that to the world.

Is that okay with you?

And the right will give up on their witch hunt if there is nothing there

correct?

I don't speak for the right. I speak for myself.

A demand for the truth from our government should be the policy of all of us no matter who is in charge and no matter whether we consider ourselves left or right or have a D or R or I or L or G after our names.

 

[Trajan]

Bush essentially used all this to continue his war in Iraq.

Which had absolutely zero to do with Terrorism.

The author of 9/11 was essentially forgotten by the Bush administration.

And exactly zero Conservatives showed any concern about that whatsoever.

You fail in your attempt at diversion. Want to try to answer the questions? Didn't think so.

What questions?

They've been pretty much answered.

Did Bush have any understanding about the root cause of the attacks? Nope. Not only that, he didn't really care.

Did Bush hold back military assistance to the many people that died in terrorism abroad?

You betcha!

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Did Bush hold back military assistance to the many people that died in terrorism abroad?

You betcha!

links please?



someone told that SF team in Tripoli to stand down, who was that and who told that person to deny that assistance?


follow the $$$? No, in this case its follow the politics....

WHO told whomever that did the dirty work, to the delete references of AQ and "terrorism" from the talking points?

Why did Obama 2 weeks later ( well 13 days actually) after the event go to the UN and use the 'video' as a proverbial primogeniture for the event?

 

[Trajan]

Benghazi returning as big scandal - Salon.com

Watch for the shifting of blame from Obama to Hillary. She's a real threat in 2016 with her popularity of 65%.

that link was posted 6 posts above you....

 

[EriktheRed]

Benghazi returning as big scandal - Salon.com

Watch for the shifting of blame from Obama to Hillary. She's a real threat in 2016 with her popularity of 65%.

Seems like great news for President Romney.

 

[EriktheRed]

I wouldn't say it's impossible today's gop would try impeachment over a pol sitting on a story to cover his ass before an election. Of course they could also turn into rabid banshees and rip the faces off one another. Stay tuned.

This is about a sitting president purposely misinforming the American citizenry concerning a matter of national defense for political gain.

If I were you, I'd start talking up Joe Biden. There's no defending what Obama and Clinton did.

There will be no impeachment, Sparky.

 

[Trajan]

of course not.....they'd never get to him, thats why god created 'buffers'...

 

[LoneLaugher]

Rabid mother fuckers.

How many of you try to slip in blame for the deaths of the 4 men on the Obama administration. You just slide it in in the middle of your rant as though it has some truth.

Pathetic nutters.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

I wouldn't say it's impossible today's gop would try impeachment over a pol sitting on a story to cover his ass before an election. Of course they could also turn into rabid banshees and rip the faces off one another. Stay tuned.

This is about a sitting president purposely misinforming the American citizenry concerning a matter of national defense for political gain.

If I were you, I'd start talking up Joe Biden. There's no defending what Obama and Clinton did.

There will be no impeachment, Sparky.

No one will be overly concerned with swapping idiots, junior.

 

[EriktheRed]

This is about a sitting president purposely misinforming the American citizenry concerning a matter of national defense for political gain.

If I were you, I'd start talking up Joe Biden. There's no defending what Obama and Clinton did.

There will be no impeachment, Sparky.

No one will be overly concerned with swapping idiots, junior.

There will be no impeachment.

 

[9thIDdoc]

There will be no impeachment, Sparky.

No one will be overly concerned with swapping idiots, junior.

There will be no impeachment.

Dream on it's just a shame we can't go for impalement.

 

[georgephillip]

Why not prosecution for war crimes AFTER impeachment FOLLOWED by IMPALEMENT?

"In Yemen, they roam over Muslim houses, terrorizing children, women and the weak. Moreover they bombard 'suspected' targets in villages, towns and cities. Why? Because far from Yemen, in the Whitehouse [sic], Obama took a decision.

"He decided to start a new chapter, a chapter more savage and barbaric than the previous chapters of the crusade on Yemeni Muslims. A chapter which relies on the strategy of the unmanned drones, 'the strategy of signature strikes'."

Drone Strikes and the Boston Marathon Bombing - Robert Wright - The Atlantic

 

[Wildman]

Hey......Republicans impeached over a blowjob, they could impeach over this

that is a fucking lie !!

Clinton was impeached on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice !!!

 

[rightwinger]

Hey......Republicans impeached over a blowjob, they could impeach over this

that is a fucking lie !!

Clinton was impeached on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice !!!

LOL....keep telling yourselves that

"Clinton was not impeached for getting a blow job, he was impeached for denying he got one"

 

[georgephillip]

Clinton deserved impeachment for much worse crimes:

"On June 26, 1993, Clinton bombed Baghdad in retaliation for an alleged but unproven Iraq plot to assassinate former President George Bush. Eight Iraqi civilians, including the distinguished Iraqi artist Layla al-Attar were killed in the raid, and 12 more were wounded. This kind of unilateral action in response to an unproven charge is a violation of international law."

War Crimes Clinton Is The WorId's Leading Active War Criminal

 

[bodecea]

No one will be overly concerned with swapping idiots, junior.

There will be no impeachment.

Dream on it's just a shame we can't go for impalement.

Today's Republican Party. Dan Rather was right.

 

[hazlnut]

This should get all the turds in here to start foaming at the mouth:

On October 27th, 2012, only days before the presidential election, I wrote:

If Barack Obama is reelected, will he face impeachment over Benghazi — a yet more unpleasant and far more wrenching result than to lose an election?

It could happen — and in my estimation should happen — the way revelations are playing out over the bloody terror attack that took four American lives and has led to weeks of prevarication and obfuscation.

The scandal thus far has at least tarnished and quite possibly implicated everyone from the CIA director, to the secretaries of State and Defense, to the UN ambassador and, of course, the president himself — with no end in sight, because Obama, normally loath to expose himself and even less so in an election season, refuses to answer questions on the subject.

It’s not the crime, but the cover-up, we learned in an earlier impeachment, only in this case the crime may be just as bad or worse.”

Roger L. Simon » Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched

Is Breitbart's cum salty or sweet?

 

[yidnar]

This should get all the turds in here to start foaming at the mouth:

On October 27th, 2012, only days before the presidential election, I wrote:

If Barack Obama is reelected, will he face impeachment over Benghazi — a yet more unpleasant and far more wrenching result than to lose an election?

It could happen — and in my estimation should happen — the way revelations are playing out over the bloody terror attack that took four American lives and has led to weeks of prevarication and obfuscation.

The scandal thus far has at least tarnished and quite possibly implicated everyone from the CIA director, to the secretaries of State and Defense, to the UN ambassador and, of course, the president himself — with no end in sight, because Obama, normally loath to expose himself and even less so in an election season, refuses to answer questions on the subject.

It’s not the crime, but the cover-up, we learned in an earlier impeachment, only in this case the crime may be just as bad or worse.”

Roger L. Simon » Benghazi Impeachment Suddenly Not So Far-Fetched

Is Breitbart's cum salty or sweet?

I SHALL CALL YOU HAZNONUTS !!