GOP Benghazi report is badly flawed ... doesn't fault the re-election environment..

[healthmyths]

The far right's own guys did the investigation.

Far right losers, get the fuck over you have been exposed again.

Most of America knows you are the enemy.

Well we know ONE thing for sure! There will NEVER be any reports coming from liberals/progressives exposing any "flaws"!
After all liberal/progressive are way way too smart to tell anyone the truth.

Hey now that Benghazi's dead maybe you can go back to whining about Obama's birth certificate

Now the following isn't meant for "stupid American voters" such as yourself but others that still wonder what is the truth and what is a lie coming from Obama's mouth?

Just to set the record straight...Obama's birth certificate that was released is NOT the original birth certificate.

Obama’s supporters will tell everyone who will listen that Barack Obama produced his real birth certificate in 2011.
A single reporter – Savannah Guthrie of NBC news — was allowed to see the “real” document, and then it was scanned as a PDF file and loaded into the internet for everyone to see. As far as the Obama crowd is concerned, that’s the end of the story.

The only problem for Obama is that numerous electronic document experts have shown,
using steps that anyone can repeat with if they have the proper software, that the document the White House so proudly uploaded is not simply a scanned version of an original paper document.
Instead, it’s what’s called a “layered” document.
A document that’s scanned will have only one layer, which is the image itself.
A “layered,” electronically manipulated document will show one electronic addition after another.
The White House’s birth certificate PDF has nine layers. This was an assembled electronic document, not a scanned paper document.

Once Obama left college and started trying to build a career as a writer, he got himself a literary agent named Acton & Dystel. This company put together a little booklet describing its stable of writers. For Barack Obama’s bio, the agency boasted that Obama was “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

It has been revealed that when Obama started at Occidental College (before he supposedly transferred to Columbia) he used the name Barry Sotero and, quite possibly, was already claiming then to be of Kenyan birth. Obama was either lying then or he’s lying now. Both cannot be true.
10 Facts That Suggest Obama 8217 s Birth Certificate Is Fake Mr. Conservative
Will the real person stand up?? IS it Barack Hussein Obama OR Barry Sotero?
Remember this is the same guy that brags in his book...
"Dreams of My Father"

"It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned.

People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves.

They were more than satisfied. They were revealed. Such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered

young black man who didn't seem angry all the time."

 

[NYcarbineer]

The only politicizing that was done was done by the RWnuts trying get political advantage by portraying the administration as having politicized the event.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right wing wuckfits like the birfers are, as 95% of thinking America knows, are the ones playing political games.

 

[healthmyths]

The only politicizing that was done was done by the RWnuts trying get political advantage by portraying the administration as having politicized the event.

Well explain to me WHY Rice came out IMMEDIATELY blaming the video ? Why at least be honest and say they weren't sure what the causes were?
NO they had to get ahead of the POLITICS of this as it was imperative to the re-election campaign. After all killing Bin Laden was a touchstone for
emphasis that terrorism was defeated by Obama! We could NOT have on the day of 9/11 another terrorist attack but one that was motivated by a phony video? That's what this inept administration first put out as the cause?
See you can't have it both ways!
Either it was a truly political maneuver to show Obama being fully in charge of war on terrorism OR
it was a genuine f..kup by his administration.
If Rice doesn't blame the video then how come there were 4 Americans dead?
If it was competency of Obama's administration there wouldn't be any deaths!
Either way Obama's administration looks stupid ...just like the voters the Obama administration depended for elections!
Remember YOU and your ilk are considered part of the "stupidity of the American Voter" that the Obama administration depended on to keep them in power another 4 years and for you to really think ...hmmm why are they blaming the video... oh yea Obama's in charge...yea that's the ticket!!!
See how your stupidity is what they counted on???

 

[JakeStarkey]

hm, you don't get to argue it just once more. It's over, the House committee said so

Walk away. It's over.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

HM is writing big, long posts, why? Because there is nothing left to say and when that happens, people will invariably start rambling in an effort to try and convince people, that there is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ That

 

[healthmyths]

HM is writing big, long posts, why? Because there is nothing left to say and when that happens, people will invariably start rambling in an effort to try and convince people, that there is.

YOU are right about long involved posts because obviously you being part of the group that makes up the "stupidity of American voters" can't grasp anything unless it is less then 30 words or 30 seconds. It's called attention deficit disorder and it is what people that Gruber called "stupidity of American voters" represent. Obviously they made the Benghazi issue political! Why else would they come out less the 3 days after it happened to explain it to the
voting community that you make up, i.e. "stupidity American voter" bloc!
That's why this stupid idiotic group of people that support Obama and his obfuscation efforts be it Obamacare, Benghazi, IRS, you name it they have counted on fooling people like you and the first time it is "shame on Obama" ...but the 2nd time YOU people that voted for Obama... yes you definitely make up the crowd Gruber describes as "stupid American voter"... totally uninformed. Totally incapable of simply asking questions rather then blindly follow
Obama who sincerely believes what he said about himself..." This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal."

You people are truly fools and Obama, Gruber, Rice they are ALL laughing at you because you never read for example this from Obama's book:
"Dreams of My Father"
"It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned.
People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves.
They were more than satisfied. They were revealed. Such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered
young black man who didn't seem angry all the time."

And you stupid American voters bought it! HOOK LINE and Sinker!

 

[JakeStarkey]

hm writes long posts about this, about health costs, about other things, and never has ever proved a point,

 

[healthmyths]

hm writes long posts about this, about health costs, about other things, and never has ever proved a point,

Thank you again JakeStarkey... YOU've proved my point about the the Obama voters fit Gruber's description as having "stupidity"... in that not only can you obviously NOT comprehend statements made in 30 words OR MORE... But you can't even complete a sentence!
Proof? Your words exactly:"hm writes long posts about this, about health costs, about other things, and never has ever proved a point,"
Is there an end to your sentence or did you just forgot how to put a period? Did you forget something or as people of YOUR ilk are prone to do just don't care to finish a thought...the few that you have!

 

[Syriusly]

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/hous...acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698

Yes I am strongly suggesting that the GOP Benghazi report badly flawed for the following reason:
The Republican-led House intelligence committee flaw is NOT taking the TIMING of the below statements.
Mrs. Clinton, as well as on Susan Rice , then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and now the White House national security adviser. Ms. Rice, appearing on television news programs a week after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, described the events in ways later found to be inaccurate.

Rice has been roundly criticized for those comments. The new report says the performance wasn’t her fault, however, because her talking points came from bad intelligence from multiple agencies — not from a politically motivated directive from higher-ups to mislead the public.

The House panel found that analysts received 21 reports saying a protest had occurred, including 14 from public reports and others from the CIA, the Defense Department and the National Security Agency.

The CIA changed its initial assessment nearly a week after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows.

Report No Cover-Up Intelligence Failure in Benghazi Attacks

Seems fairly straightforward to me- Rice was given bad information- according to the report by Republicans and Democrats of the House.

 

[Syriusly]

[

And you stupid American voters bought it! HOOK LINE and Sinker!

LOL....I was thinking of you stupid people who bought the GOP propaganda hook line and sinker.

When the Marine barracks were bombed and almost 300 marines were killed, Democrats didn't immediately attempt to blame that on Reagan- instead they worked with the administration.

Contrast that to Issah and company- the dust had not even settled when the Republican oppo machine was in action to blame everything on Obama.....because that was their only goal.

 

[Listening]

Guy-on-internet says the report is flawed.

Flawed because it didn't point out the political motivation taking precedence! That is the flaw in all MSM reporting also.
Constantly ignoring the number one motivation for Obama is "how does this affect us politically?" which is always the first question asked!
But obviously the "Non-stupid American voter" (which obviously you are NOT one!!) is becoming aware of this first consideration by Obama and that Obama considers what is good for the country is several notches lower! Hence the large dismissal of Democrats in this last election by the "NON-Stupid American Voters"!

I've seen several criticisms of the report along this line already.

The report appears to have put several myths to bed. Not that I paid that much attention to any of it except to listen to the flap around Rice hitting the airwaves unloading bullshit five times in one day.

Benghazi is going to come to the surface again when Hillary goes for the White House in 2016. The fact that some Michigan Republican signed off on a sad piece of work will have little consequence.

I would imagine someone has a lot of dirt saved up for the right moment.

 

[Listening]

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/hous...acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698

Yes I am strongly suggesting that the GOP Benghazi report badly flawed for the following reason:
The Republican-led House intelligence committee flaw is NOT taking the TIMING of the below statements.
Mrs. Clinton, as well as on Susan Rice , then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and now the White House national security adviser. Ms. Rice, appearing on television news programs a week after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, described the events in ways later found to be inaccurate.

Rice has been roundly criticized for those comments. The new report says the performance wasn’t her fault, however, because her talking points came from bad intelligence from multiple agencies — not from a politically motivated directive from higher-ups to mislead the public.

The House panel found that analysts received 21 reports saying a protest had occurred, including 14 from public reports and others from the CIA, the Defense Department and the National Security Agency.

The CIA changed its initial assessment nearly a week after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows.

Report No Cover-Up Intelligence Failure in Benghazi Attacks

Seems fairly straightforward to me- Rice was given bad information- according to the report by Republicans and Democrats of the House.

Everyone knows she was given bad information.

And she spouted it long and hard.

All the while the administration is sending out this woman to flavor the conversation all the while saying we needed "more time" to get the facts.

It wasn't the information as much as it was the evidence of another white wash by the white house.

That was the issue at hand.

 

[Syriusly]

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/hous...acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698

Yes I am strongly suggesting that the GOP Benghazi report badly flawed for the following reason:
The Republican-led House intelligence committee flaw is NOT taking the TIMING of the below statements.
Mrs. Clinton, as well as on Susan Rice , then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and now the White House national security adviser. Ms. Rice, appearing on television news programs a week after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, described the events in ways later found to be inaccurate.

Rice has been roundly criticized for those comments. The new report says the performance wasn’t her fault, however, because her talking points came from bad intelligence from multiple agencies — not from a politically motivated directive from higher-ups to mislead the public.

The House panel found that analysts received 21 reports saying a protest had occurred, including 14 from public reports and others from the CIA, the Defense Department and the National Security Agency.

The CIA changed its initial assessment nearly a week after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows.

Report No Cover-Up Intelligence Failure in Benghazi Attacks

Seems fairly straightforward to me- Rice was given bad information- according to the report by Republicans and Democrats of the House.

Everyone knows she was given bad information.

And she spouted it long and hard.

All the while the administration is sending out this woman to flavor the conversation all the while saying we needed "more time" to get the facts.

It wasn't the information as much as it was the evidence of another white wash by the white house.

That was the issue at hand.

And of course the House Report finds no evidence of that either.

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.

 

[Listening]

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/hous...acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698

Yes I am strongly suggesting that the GOP Benghazi report badly flawed for the following reason:
The Republican-led House intelligence committee flaw is NOT taking the TIMING of the below statements.
Mrs. Clinton, as well as on Susan Rice , then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and now the White House national security adviser. Ms. Rice, appearing on television news programs a week after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, described the events in ways later found to be inaccurate.

Rice has been roundly criticized for those comments. The new report says the performance wasn’t her fault, however, because her talking points came from bad intelligence from multiple agencies — not from a politically motivated directive from higher-ups to mislead the public.

The House panel found that analysts received 21 reports saying a protest had occurred, including 14 from public reports and others from the CIA, the Defense Department and the National Security Agency.

The CIA changed its initial assessment nearly a week after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows.

Report No Cover-Up Intelligence Failure in Benghazi Attacks

Seems fairly straightforward to me- Rice was given bad information- according to the report by Republicans and Democrats of the House.

Everyone knows she was given bad information.

And she spouted it long and hard.

All the while the administration is sending out this woman to flavor the conversation all the while saying we needed "more time" to get the facts.

It wasn't the information as much as it was the evidence of another white wash by the white house.

That was the issue at hand.

And of course the House Report finds no evidence of that either.

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.

Never said she tried to mislead......on purpose.

Someone gave her bad information. And the White House sent her out to tell us what they thought they knew all the while saying we need more time to get the facts.

I realize the disconnect is lost on you.

 

[Syriusly]

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/hous...acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698

Yes I am strongly suggesting that the GOP Benghazi report badly flawed for the following reason:
The Republican-led House intelligence committee flaw is NOT taking the TIMING of the below statements.
Mrs. Clinton, as well as on Susan Rice , then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and now the White House national security adviser. Ms. Rice, appearing on television news programs a week after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, described the events in ways later found to be inaccurate.

Rice has been roundly criticized for those comments. The new report says the performance wasn’t her fault, however, because her talking points came from bad intelligence from multiple agencies — not from a politically motivated directive from higher-ups to mislead the public.

The House panel found that analysts received 21 reports saying a protest had occurred, including 14 from public reports and others from the CIA, the Defense Department and the National Security Agency.

The CIA changed its initial assessment nearly a week after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows.

Report No Cover-Up Intelligence Failure in Benghazi Attacks

Seems fairly straightforward to me- Rice was given bad information- according to the report by Republicans and Democrats of the House.

Everyone knows she was given bad information.

And she spouted it long and hard.

All the while the administration is sending out this woman to flavor the conversation all the while saying we needed "more time" to get the facts.

It wasn't the information as much as it was the evidence of another white wash by the white house.

That was the issue at hand.

And of course the House Report finds no evidence of that either.

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.

Never said she tried to mislead......on purpose.

Someone gave her bad information. And the White House sent her out to tell us what they thought they knew all the while saying we need more time to get the facts.

I realize the disconnect is lost on you.

yeah- I have no idea what your point is supposed to be
.
A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Listening]

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/hous...acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698

Yes I am strongly suggesting that the GOP Benghazi report badly flawed for the following reason:
The Republican-led House intelligence committee flaw is NOT taking the TIMING of the below statements.
Mrs. Clinton, as well as on Susan Rice , then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and now the White House national security adviser. Ms. Rice, appearing on television news programs a week after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, described the events in ways later found to be inaccurate.

Rice has been roundly criticized for those comments. The new report says the performance wasn’t her fault, however, because her talking points came from bad intelligence from multiple agencies — not from a politically motivated directive from higher-ups to mislead the public.

The House panel found that analysts received 21 reports saying a protest had occurred, including 14 from public reports and others from the CIA, the Defense Department and the National Security Agency.

The CIA changed its initial assessment nearly a week after Rice appeared on the Sunday shows.

Report No Cover-Up Intelligence Failure in Benghazi Attacks

Seems fairly straightforward to me- Rice was given bad information- according to the report by Republicans and Democrats of the House.

Everyone knows she was given bad information.

And she spouted it long and hard.

All the while the administration is sending out this woman to flavor the conversation all the while saying we needed "more time" to get the facts.

It wasn't the information as much as it was the evidence of another white wash by the white house.

That was the issue at hand.

And of course the House Report finds no evidence of that either.

A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public.

Never said she tried to mislead......on purpose.

Someone gave her bad information. And the White House sent her out to tell us what they thought they knew all the while saying we need more time to get the facts.

I realize the disconnect is lost on you.

yeah- I have no idea what your point is supposed to be
.
A House report on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military responded properly and that Obama administration “talking points” were flawed, but didn’t find that administration officials attempted to mislead the public

Yes...you really do have no idea.

 

[JakeStarkey]

healthmyths, all you do is spin conspiracy with stats and analysis that leads to false conclusions.