CNN on Benghazi committee: Immediate headline "GOP committee finds no wrongdoing by Clinton"

[IsaacNewton]

Perhaps the conspiracy theorists among cons have missed the fact that the Republicans have exonerated Hillary Clinton publicly in the Ben Gassy frame-up a few months before the election and a month before the Republican convention when they could have held on to this for another six months. Do they secretly want Clinton to win or are they trying to lend fire to the dump trump movement.

What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. And as that is the first practice of Republicans trump followers have to wonder.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Walter Reed was scheduled to be closed down and that was the source of most of its problems. The Bush administration didn't want to know about it and was more concerned about terror than soldiers and they paid for that.

But, but, but BBBBBOOOOOOSSSSSHHHHHH! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

 

[Juan de Fuca]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

 

[jillian]

Walter Reed was scheduled to be closed down and that was the source of most of its problems. The Bush administration didn't want to know about it and was more concerned about terror than soldiers and they paid for that.

But, but, but BBBBBOOOOOOSSSSSHHHHHH! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

quiet nutter. we know that you only want to focus on the supposed faults of democrats. but heck, you don't get to do that.

poor baby.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

I like less abortion rather than more abortion and I am comfortable with my position. I think Republicans are gross hypocrites on the subject when they push to allow for thousands of more births but make sure that once the child is born they have nothing to eat or sustenance to make them whole, reducing their educational choices and ensuring they will grow up third rate citizens.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

lol, dimwit.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

lol, dimwit.

Funny, that's what I think of you too.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I like less abortion rather than more abortion and I am comfortable with my position. I think Republicans are gross hypocrites on the subject when they push to allow for thousands of more births but make sure that once the child is born they have nothing to eat or sustenance to make them whole, reducing their educational choices and ensuring they will grow up third rate citizens.

Yeah, I am sure every apparatchik that ever aided a dictator in their genocide thought the same thing and was as comfortable as you are with a million slaughtered innocents each year.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

lol, dimwit.

Funny, that's what I think of you too.

Well, at least I didnt mangle my quotes, fool.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

I like less abortion rather than more abortion and I am comfortable with my position. I think Republicans are gross hypocrites on the subject when they push to allow for thousands of more births but make sure that once the child is born they have nothing to eat or sustenance to make them whole, reducing their educational choices and ensuring they will grow up third rate citizens.

Yeah, I am sure every apparatchik that ever aided a dictator in their genocide thought the same thing and was as comfortable as you are with a million slaughtered innocents each year.

LOL, wrong thread Bozo, this is Benghazi.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

If they had an ounce of truth they would have paraded it in front of the press and waved it in front of everyone's eyes. They didn't because they have nothing and never did. This was nothing more than a attempt to influence the election and if Democrats had not presented their report yesterday, you wouldn't have seen the Republican version for two or three more months.

Only liberal idiots consider gross incompetence that leads to multiple deaths nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Why?

Because that is how they think, being quite comfortable with the deaths of millions of innocents each year via abortion.

lol, dimwit.

Funny, that's what I think of you too.

Well, at least I didnt mangle my quotes, fool.

Ahh, I see. You just mangle your words.

 

[g5000]

How many Benghazi investigations have there been? And not one has revealed any new information.

These carefully spaced apart "reports" are the political equivalent of bumping a topic that has fallen off the front page of the forum. It's hackery intended to keep the subject alive for political reasons, not out of any desire to learn the truth or new truths.

I bet most people reading this right now who shed crocodile tears over the Four Dead Americans™ can't even name them. They might remember the Ambassador's last name, but that's it.

If you can't name them, you're just a parroting rube. Yeah, that's right.


And I would bet real money not one of you hacks can name the Americans, many more Americans, who were killed during the many more attacks on our diplomatic missions between 2001 through 2008.

I bet you can't even name the diplomat who was killed during that period, much less when and where.

You can go on and on and on about the events which occurred during the night of September 11, 2012, but can't name the diplomat who was killed on Bush's watch. You don't even know when or where. In fact, you probably didn't know one was killed until just now.

You might want to ask yourself why that is, hacks.

Nothing new?

Really?

Nothing you would acknowledge you mean.

Nothing new.

Go ahead and tell us what is new in this one.

"They blamed a video!" Nothing new.

"Four Dead Americans!™" Nothing new.

This report is the political equivalent of bumping a topic on a forum because it hasn't had any traffic in a while, and the topic starter is feeling neglected and wants attention.

Bumpity!

 

[Rambunctious]

You must smoke crack to think anyone would consider Donald Trump a Son of Liberty he doesn't pay taxes and still won't show his tax returns

I wouldn't show my returns either and there is no law that requires him to do so.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

You must smoke crack to think anyone would consider Donald Trump a Son of Liberty he doesn't pay taxes and still won't show his tax returns

I wouldn't show my returns either and there is no law that requires him to do so.

I can agree with you that he does not have to show his returns, but it should also disqualify him as a presidential candidate.

 

[chikenwing]

From today's report. No, we did not learn anything new. Of course the same unreal stupid ignorant left wingers will say that means she is "innocent."

Here is what the report states. Again, all stuff we already knew.

• Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141)

• With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]

• 
  
  
  • The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]

• 
  
  
  • A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]

• 
  
  
  • None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 15]

• 
  
  
  • Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place. The State Department senior officials at the meeting had access to eyewitness accounts to the attack in real time. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was in direct contact with the Diplomatic Security Agents on the ground in Benghazi and sent out multiple updates about the situation, including a “Terrorism Event Notification.” The State Department Watch Center had also notified Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills that it had set up a direct telephone line to Tripoli. There was no mention of the video from the agents on the ground. Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks. [pg. 28]

• 
  
  
  • The morning after the attacks, the National Security Council’s Deputy Spokesperson sent an email to nearly two dozen people from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and intelligence community, stating: “Both the President and Secretary Clinton released statements this morning. … Please refer to those for any comments for the time being. To ensure we are all in sync on messaging for the rest of the day, Ben Rhodes will host a conference call for USG communicators on this chain at 9:15 ET today.” [pg. 39]

• 
  
  
  • Minutes before the President delivered his speech in the Rose Garden, Jake Sullivan wrote in an email to Ben Rhodes and others: “There was not really much violence in Egypt. And we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.'” [pg. 44]

• 
  
  
  • According to Susan Rice, both Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe prepared her for her appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows following the attacks. Nobody from the FBI, Department of Defense, or CIA participated in her prep call. While Rhodes testified Plouffe would “normally” appear on the Sunday show prep calls, Rice testified she did not recall Plouffe being on prior calls and did not understand why he was on the call in this instance. [pg.98]

• 
  
  
  • On the Sunday shows, Susan Rice stated the FBI had “already begun looking at all sorts of evidence” and “FBI has a lead in this investigation.” But on Monday, the Deputy Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs sent an email stating: “McDonough apparently told the SVTS [Secure Video Teleconference] group today that everyone was required to ‘shut their pieholes’ about the Benghazi attack in light of the FBI investigation, due to start tomorrow.” [pg. 135]

• 
  
  
  • After Susan Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Jake Sullivan assured the Secretary of the State that Rice “wasn’t asked about whether we had any intel. But she did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” [pg. 128]

• 
  
  
  • Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows were met with shock and disbelief by State Department employees in Washington. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.” The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!” The Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications, Bureau of Near East Affairs, State Department, wrote: “WH [White House] very worried about the politics. This was all their doing.” [pg. 132]

• 
  
  
  • The CIA’s September 13, 2012, intelligence assessment was rife with errors. On the first page, there is a single mention of “the early stages of the protest” buried in one of the bullet points. The article cited to support the mention of a protest in this instance was actually from September 4. In other words, the analysts used an article from a full week before the attacks to support the premise that a protest had occurred just prior to the attack on September 11. [pg. 47]

• 
  
  
  • A headline on the following page of the CIA’s September 13 intelligence assessment stated “Extremists Capitalized on Benghazi Protests,” but nothing in the actual text box supports that title. As it turns out, the title of the text box was supposed to be “Extremists Capitalized on Cairo Protests.” That small but vital difference — from Cairo to Benghazi — had major implications in how people in the administration were able to message the attacks. [pg. 52]

• 
  
  
  • During deliberations within the State Department about whether and how to intervene in Libya in March 2011, Jake Sullivan listed the first goal as “avoid[ing] a failed state, particularly one in which al-Qaeda and other extremists might take safe haven.” [pg. 9]

• 
  
  
  • The administration’s policy of no boots on the ground shaped the type of military assistance provided to State Department personnel in Libya. The Executive Secretariats for both the Defense Department and State Department exchanged communications outlining the diplomatic capacity in which the Defense Department SST security team members would serve, which included wearing civilian clothes so as not to offend the Libyans. [pg. 60]

• 
  
  
  • When the State Department’s presence in Benghazi was extended in December 2012, senior officials from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security were excluded from the discussion. [pg. 74]

• 
  
  
  • In February 2012, the lead Diplomatic Security Agent at Embassy Tripoli informed his counterpart in Benghazi that more DS agents would not be provided by decision makers, because “substantive reporting” was not Benghazi’s purpose. [pg. 77]

• 
  
  
  • Emails indicate senior State Department officials, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and Huma Abedin were preparing for a trip by the Secretary of State to Libya in October 2012. According to testimony, Chris Stevens wanted to have a “deliverable” for the Secretary for her trip to Libya, and that “deliverable” would be making the Mission in Benghazi a permanent Consulate. [pg. 96]

• 
  
  
  • In August 2012 — roughly a month before the Benghazi attacks — security on the ground worsened significantly. Ambassador Stevens initially planned to travel to Benghazi in early August, but cancelled the trip “primarily for Ramadan/security reasons.” [pg. 99]

• 
  
  
  • Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta bluntly told the committee “an intelligence failure” occurred with respect to Benghazi. Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell also acknowledged multiple times an intelligence failure did in fact occur prior to the Benghazi attacks. [pg. 129]

The Most Interesting Findings From Trey Gowdy's Benghazi Committee Report


That is of course for those who have an ability to think for yourselves. Which of course means no one on the left.

Yeah, the obama administration sure were innocent.

Very impressive list, and many things have already been noted in the previous right wing led investigations that could have been done differently, but which of those points shows that Hillary was guilty of any wrong doing?

Not illegal,but totally incompetent.

 

[chikenwing]

You must smoke crack to think anyone would consider Donald Trump a Son of Liberty he doesn't pay taxes and still won't show his tax returns

I wouldn't show my returns either and there is no law that requires him to do so.

I can agree with you that he does not have to show his returns, but it should also disqualify him as a presidential candidate.

Why?

 

[Juan de Fuca]

You must smoke crack to think anyone would consider Donald Trump a Son of Liberty he doesn't pay taxes and still won't show his tax returns

I wouldn't show my returns either and there is no law that requires him to do so.

I can agree with you that he does not have to show his returns, but it should also disqualify him as a presidential candidate.

Why?

For the last forty years tax returns have been used to verify candidate's trustworthiness and veracity. People do not want to vote for tax cheats or liars and no candidate has tried to get out of showing their returns except Donald Trump.

 

[chikenwing]

You must smoke crack to think anyone would consider Donald Trump a Son of Liberty he doesn't pay taxes and still won't show his tax returns

I wouldn't show my returns either and there is no law that requires him to do so.

I can agree with you that he does not have to show his returns, but it should also disqualify him as a presidential candidate.

Why?

For the last forty years tax returns have been used to verify candidate's trustworthiness and veracity. People do not want to vote for tax cheats or liars and no candidate has tried to get out of showing their returns except Donald Trump.

That's the IRS's job,not mine not yours,its a 40 year old wedge ,and servers no good purpose, other than the shit pot stick holders something to do

 

[chikenwing]

Trump has tipped the establishment apple cart,its incredible how they flame.