May 8th set for Benghazi survivor testimony

So if nothing new will come from this, why are you concerned?

I like to know what the CIA was doing, and why did Stevens travel to Benghazi on 9-11 when, according to the Ben-gaters, he had been asking for more security for months. Did someone order him to go?

His gay lover, Barack Hussein Obama, ordered him to go. Stevens had been threatening for months to provide "The Mother of All October Surprises" to the media about his covert love affair with the big strapping mountain of Mandigo from Chicago.

Obama got on the wire with the Muslim Brotherhood and ordered a hit to prevent this information from getting out. He watched the whole thing live through the lens of an Iranian drone. Then he smoked some weed and some cigarettes and forgot the post-assassination sooper sekrit script on Air Force One after his golf trip/Colorado campaign fundraiser, and completely bungled his lines the next day in front of the cameras.

Glenn Beck has all the documents proving this.

But you don't need to see any evidence. You know this is all FACT because you want it to be.

You're really becoming quite the liberal troll. You used to be at least fairly relevant with your posts.

What's got the burr up your ass that you have to now slag any and all posts that are even the least bit conservative?

Your continual mocking is becoming more than tedious and I don't want to turn on you, but I will.

Pity. Used to like you.
 
Watch what happens. Instead of a search for the truth the hearing will turn into a partisan rant with democrats actually trying to cover up the truth and impeach the witnesses.
 
Finally we get to hear the voices of those that witnessed what happened in Benghazi.

:clap2:

As the White House denies Benghazi survivors sought clearance to testify about what they saw, House Republicans schedule a hearing to listen to their stories


From the article:

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced earlier in the day that it will convene a hearing on May 8 aimed at 'exposing failure' in the Obama administration to respond o security threats to that diplomatic mission, and to present to the public and to Congress an accurate version of the attack that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.

'This Administration has offered the American people only a carefully selected and sanitized version of events from before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attacks, committee chairman Darrell Issa, a Republican congressman from California, said in a statement Wednesday.

'Not surprisingly, this version of events casts senior officials in the most favorable light possible.'



As the White House denies Benghazi survivors sought clearance to testify about what they saw, House Republicans schedule a hearing to listen to their stories | Mail Online
This is just a test...
https://soundcloud.com/mike-in-raleigh/right-wing-troll-notification
 
Finally we get to hear the voices of those that witnessed what happened in Benghazi.

:clap2:

As the White House denies Benghazi survivors sought clearance to testify about what they saw, House Republicans schedule a hearing to listen to their stories


From the article:

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced earlier in the day that it will convene a hearing on May 8 aimed at 'exposing failure' in the Obama administration to respond o security threats to that diplomatic mission, and to present to the public and to Congress an accurate version of the attack that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.

'This Administration has offered the American people only a carefully selected and sanitized version of events from before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attacks, committee chairman Darrell Issa, a Republican congressman from California, said in a statement Wednesday.

'Not surprisingly, this version of events casts senior officials in the most favorable light possible.'



As the White House denies Benghazi survivors sought clearance to testify about what they saw, House Republicans schedule a hearing to listen to their stories | Mail Online
This is just a test...
https://soundcloud.com/mike-in-raleigh/right-wing-troll-notification

Left wing troll notification:

Bush did it.
 
I'd like to hear the version from the folks who were repeatedly ordered to "stand down".

I agree with you. The fact that they did not have enough security can be just labeled stupid. The fact that the available help was told to stand down is just criminal and even Obama or Hillary won't be able to withstand that heat if the order came from one of them.

There was no order to stand down.
 
Finally we get to hear the voices of those that witnessed what happened in Benghazi.

:clap2:

As the White House denies Benghazi survivors sought clearance to testify about what they saw, House Republicans schedule a hearing to listen to their stories


From the article:

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced earlier in the day that it will convene a hearing on May 8 aimed at 'exposing failure' in the Obama administration to respond o security threats to that diplomatic mission, and to present to the public and to Congress an accurate version of the attack that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead.

'This Administration has offered the American people only a carefully selected and sanitized version of events from before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attacks, committee chairman Darrell Issa, a Republican congressman from California, said in a statement Wednesday.

'Not surprisingly, this version of events casts senior officials in the most favorable light possible.'



As the White House denies Benghazi survivors sought clearance to testify about what they saw, House Republicans schedule a hearing to listen to their stories | Mail Online

I look forward to hearing what the Survivors have to say.

Moi aussi; me too my friend.

How liberals could ever believe that a true autopsy of a situation where Americans died on foreign soil only involved individuals from the government and not one eyewitness on the ground means they are ready to swallow anything from their government.

I find it outrageous and unacceptable. And sadly so true of progressives these days.
 
I like to know what the CIA was doing, and why did Stevens travel to Benghazi on 9-11 when, according to the Ben-gaters, he had been asking for more security for months. Did someone order him to go?

His gay lover, Barack Hussein Obama, ordered him to go. Stevens had been threatening for months to provide "The Mother of All October Surprises" to the media about his covert love affair with the big strapping mountain of Mandigo from Chicago.

Obama got on the wire with the Muslim Brotherhood and ordered a hit to prevent this information from getting out. He watched the whole thing live through the lens of an Iranian drone. Then he smoked some weed and some cigarettes and forgot the post-assassination sooper sekrit script on Air Force One after his golf trip/Colorado campaign fundraiser, and completely bungled his lines the next day in front of the cameras.

Glenn Beck has all the documents proving this.

But you don't need to see any evidence. You know this is all FACT because you want it to be.

You're really becoming quite the liberal troll. You used to be at least fairly relevant with your posts.

What's got the burr up your ass that you have to now slag any and all posts that are even the least bit conservative?

Your continual mocking is becoming more than tedious and I don't want to turn on you, but I will.

Pity. Used to like you.

We are plagued, positively overwhelmed, by idiots who fill the space between their ears with no end of manufactured bullshit in the absence of immediately available facts. They then invest themselves wholly in fantastical fantasies based on the bullshit spoon fed to them by partisan hacks.

When the facts eventually make their way to light, if any of those fact conflict with the manufactured bullshit that had the advantage of being first to write on the blank slates of their alleged minds, then they deny the facts and stick with the fantasy.

This is the sad state of affairs today.

The rubes have already made up their minds about Benghazi, and nothing is going to sway them from the carefully constructed maniacal fantasies created by their masters.

Critical thinking has become an alien technology around here.
 
Well G. Just who's version of the truth do you believe??

The administration has lied their asses off about Benghazi from the get go.

Just who should anyone believe??
 
Remember all the conspiracy theories about Hillary when she fell and got a concussion?

It was immediately accepted as fact that she was being taken out of the picture to avoid her testifying about Benghazi.

But as we all know, she DID testify about Benghazi as soon as she recovered, and you rubes erased your asinine memores quickly of your credulousness. You do this over and over and over and over and over. It is like a new form of mental retardation!

You people attack just for the sake of attacking. All the manufactured bullshit is solid evidence you are not the slighest bit interested in actual truth. You have utterly given yourselves away.

Anything you millions of idiot rubes have to say has ZERO integrity because of that.

The sooner you figure that out, the better our country will be. Keep your powder dry and STOP PISSING ALL OVER IT!!!
 
Hell. The only conspiracy I can see is the one the administration threw out there about the video.

They lied and continued to lie for weeks.

So. Once again. Which story should one believe??
 
Last edited:
Well G. Just who's version of the truth do you believe??

The administration has lied their asses off about Benghazi from the get go.

A mistaken statement about the video being the reason the attack occured is not "lying their asses off from the get go". Not even close.

The lies manufactured by the metric ton by partisan hacks dwarfs the video thing. Completely dwarfs it.

And by the way, even Fox News initially blamed the video for the attack.

What you think are "lies" are actually facts which contradict the manufactured bullshit being piled on day after day after day.

"Obama watched as they died". An unbelievably callous and evil lie made up by hacks.

All kinds of shit was made up. For instance, the meme is still going around that the attack lasted seven hours.

No, it did not.

The attack on the consulate lasted just minutes. And the CIA annex responded as soon as they heard about it. There was no repeated stand down orders. That's another lie.

The second attack occured at the CIA annex, seven hours later.

Two separate locations, two separate attacks, seven hours apart.

The asshole rubes can't even get the simplest facts right. And EVERY investigation of a terror attack takes many months. But the fucking idiots can't wait that long. They feel a need to make shit up to explain what happened, and that just complicates matters in their simple minds when the real facts finally arrive.

Probably 95 percent of what you think you "know" about Benghazi is made up. Guesses. Lies. Bullshit.

"A lie is halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on."
 
Last edited:
Well G. Just who's version of the truth do you believe??

The administration has lied their asses off about Benghazi from the get go.

A mistaken statement about the video being the reason the attack occured is not "lying their asses off from the get go". Not even close.

The lies manufactured by the metric ton by partisan hacks dwarfs the video thing. Completely dwarfs it.

And by the way, even Fox News initially blamed the video for the attack.

What you think are "lies" are actually facts which contradict the manufactured bullshit being piled on day after day after day.

"Obama watched as they died". An unbelievably callous and evil lie made up by hacks.

All kinds of shit was made up. For instance, the meme is still going around that the attack lasted seven hours.

No, it did not.

The attack on the consulate lasted just minutes. And the CIA annex responded as soon as they heard about it. There was no repeated stand down orders. That's another lie.

The second attack occured at the CIA annex, seven hours later.

Two separate locations, two separate attacks, seven hours apart.

The asshole rubes can't even get the simplest facts right. And EVERY investigation of a terror attack takes many months. But the fucking idiots can't wait that long. They feel a need to make shit up to explain what happened, and that just complicates matters in their simple minds when the real facts finally arrive.

Probably 95 percent of what you think you "know" about Benghazi is made up. Guesses. Lies. Bullshit.

"A lie is halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on."

"what difference does it make" Sorry, hillary but lying to the american people does make a difference.
 
Sorry champ, but Watergate was not just about the break in and attempt at bugging the Democrats National Headquaters. The ensuing investigation uncovered massive illegal activity the Nixon Administration was engaged in. In contrast the Whitewater investigation found no widespread illegal activity by the Clinton adminstration and it's real goal was to somehow get some dirt on Bill.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was President Bushes decision, not Congresses. However I feel that everyone in congress who voted to give him the deciding power should have resigned in desgrace for abdicating their constitutional reaponsibility.

You don't remember the first cat calls at President Obama being "It's his Waterloo"? I do. It wasn't. Just like now.

you really do not have much of a grasp on history. watergate was about the cover up, not the act.

I did not bring up whitewater, I brought up blowjobs in the oval office with a 19 year old intern and then lying under oath about it.

Bush could not have invaded Iraq without congressional authorization and funding------it was a huge stupid mistake, but they are all culpable.

Arguably the scandal began in 1971 with the publication of the Pentagon Papers, a classified 7,000-page Defense Department document on the origins and conduct of the Vietnam War that had been obtained by The New York Times. Nixon saw the publication as evidence of a great liberal Democratic Establishment plot against him. And his inability to do anything about it triggered a towering rage.

''We're up against an enemy, a conspiracy,'' he thunders to Haldeman and Henry Kissinger on July 1, 1971, in a newly published transcript. ''They're using any means. We are going to use any means. Is that clear?'' This included dispatching a secret White House team, ''the Plumbers,'' to dig up dirt on Daniel Ellsberg, the former Kissinger aide who said he was the one who had leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press. A few months later the Plumbers broke into the Los Angeles office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist to photograph Ellsberg's records, but found nothing, and left behind a messy crime scene. Since some of the Plumbers were caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel a year later, Nixon was understandably frightened that the Watergate investigation would reveal other illegalities, so a cover-up was vital, even if it meant paying the burglars hush money or trying to get the C.I.A. to obstruct the F.B.I.'s investigation using the pretext of national security.

Call the Plumbers

Without the endless Whitewater investigation President Clinton would never have been asked about his affair with Monica.

you just confirmed what I said---watergate was about the cover up. are you so thick that you thought we were saying different things?
 
From what I've read they were aware of the attack almost immediately.

There was no demonstraion. They knew that immediately as well.

Yet they continued to blame it all on that video.

They also had those repeated requests for added security which they ignored.

Well guess what. The warning were for real.

This was a fuck up by the State Department. Plain and simple. To bad it cost the lives of four good men.
 
you really do not have much of a grasp on history. watergate was about the cover up, not the act.

I did not bring up whitewater, I brought up blowjobs in the oval office with a 19 year old intern and then lying under oath about it.

Bush could not have invaded Iraq without congressional authorization and funding------it was a huge stupid mistake, but they are all culpable.

Arguably the scandal began in 1971 with the publication of the Pentagon Papers, a classified 7,000-page Defense Department document on the origins and conduct of the Vietnam War that had been obtained by The New York Times. Nixon saw the publication as evidence of a great liberal Democratic Establishment plot against him. And his inability to do anything about it triggered a towering rage.

''We're up against an enemy, a conspiracy,'' he thunders to Haldeman and Henry Kissinger on July 1, 1971, in a newly published transcript. ''They're using any means. We are going to use any means. Is that clear?'' This included dispatching a secret White House team, ''the Plumbers,'' to dig up dirt on Daniel Ellsberg, the former Kissinger aide who said he was the one who had leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press. A few months later the Plumbers broke into the Los Angeles office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist to photograph Ellsberg's records, but found nothing, and left behind a messy crime scene. Since some of the Plumbers were caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel a year later, Nixon was understandably frightened that the Watergate investigation would reveal other illegalities, so a cover-up was vital, even if it meant paying the burglars hush money or trying to get the C.I.A. to obstruct the F.B.I.'s investigation using the pretext of national security.

Call the Plumbers

Without the endless Whitewater investigation President Clinton would never have been asked about his affair with Monica.

you just confirmed what I said---watergate was about the cover up. are you so thick that you thought we were saying different things?

Yeah a cover up of all the illegal activity Presidengt Nixon was involved in, not just a bungled buglery at the Watergate Hotel.
 
His gay lover, Barack Hussein Obama, ordered him to go. Stevens had been threatening for months to provide "The Mother of All October Surprises" to the media about his covert love affair with the big strapping mountain of Mandigo from Chicago.

Obama got on the wire with the Muslim Brotherhood and ordered a hit to prevent this information from getting out. He watched the whole thing live through the lens of an Iranian drone. Then he smoked some weed and some cigarettes and forgot the post-assassination sooper sekrit script on Air Force One after his golf trip/Colorado campaign fundraiser, and completely bungled his lines the next day in front of the cameras.

Glenn Beck has all the documents proving this.

But you don't need to see any evidence. You know this is all FACT because you want it to be.

You're really becoming quite the liberal troll. You used to be at least fairly relevant with your posts.

What's got the burr up your ass that you have to now slag any and all posts that are even the least bit conservative?

Your continual mocking is becoming more than tedious and I don't want to turn on you, but I will.

Pity. Used to like you.

We are plagued, positively overwhelmed, by idiots who fill the space between their ears with no end of manufactured bullshit in the absence of immediately available facts. They then invest themselves wholly in fantastical fantasies based on the bullshit spoon fed to them by partisan hacks.

When the facts eventually make their way to light, if any of those fact conflict with the manufactured bullshit that had the advantage of being first to write on the blank slates of their alleged minds, then they deny the facts and stick with the fantasy.

This is the sad state of affairs today.

The rubes have already made up their minds about Benghazi, and nothing is going to sway them from the carefully constructed maniacal fantasies created by their masters.

Critical thinking has become an alien technology around here.

Fuck off . Not kidding you have been faux conservative long enough.

I've had it with your bullshit. Liar.
 
Well G. Just who's version of the truth do you believe??

The administration has lied their asses off about Benghazi from the get go.

A mistaken statement about the video being the reason the attack occured is not "lying their asses off from the get go". Not even close.

The lies manufactured by the metric ton by partisan hacks dwarfs the video thing. Completely dwarfs it.

And by the way, even Fox News initially blamed the video for the attack.

What you think are "lies" are actually facts which contradict the manufactured bullshit being piled on day after day after day.

"Obama watched as they died". An unbelievably callous and evil lie made up by hacks.

All kinds of shit was made up. For instance, the meme is still going around that the attack lasted seven hours.

No, it did not.

The attack on the consulate lasted just minutes. And the CIA annex responded as soon as they heard about it. There was no repeated stand down orders. That's another lie.

The second attack occured at the CIA annex, seven hours later.

Two separate locations, two separate attacks, seven hours apart.

The asshole rubes can't even get the simplest facts right. And EVERY investigation of a terror attack takes many months. But the fucking idiots can't wait that long. They feel a need to make shit up to explain what happened, and that just complicates matters in their simple minds when the real facts finally arrive.

Probably 95 percent of what you think you "know" about Benghazi is made up. Guesses. Lies. Bullshit.

"A lie is halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on."

Look liar. Big wanna pretend to be with conservative liar... you pig. You have been a lib all the way thru and thru.

Now the fun part of this is here to come.
 
Arguably the scandal began in 1971 with the publication of the Pentagon Papers, a classified 7,000-page Defense Department document on the origins and conduct of the Vietnam War that had been obtained by The New York Times. Nixon saw the publication as evidence of a great liberal Democratic Establishment plot against him. And his inability to do anything about it triggered a towering rage.

''We're up against an enemy, a conspiracy,'' he thunders to Haldeman and Henry Kissinger on July 1, 1971, in a newly published transcript. ''They're using any means. We are going to use any means. Is that clear?'' This included dispatching a secret White House team, ''the Plumbers,'' to dig up dirt on Daniel Ellsberg, the former Kissinger aide who said he was the one who had leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press. A few months later the Plumbers broke into the Los Angeles office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist to photograph Ellsberg's records, but found nothing, and left behind a messy crime scene. Since some of the Plumbers were caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel a year later, Nixon was understandably frightened that the Watergate investigation would reveal other illegalities, so a cover-up was vital, even if it meant paying the burglars hush money or trying to get the C.I.A. to obstruct the F.B.I.'s investigation using the pretext of national security.

Call the Plumbers

Without the endless Whitewater investigation President Clinton would never have been asked about his affair with Monica.

you just confirmed what I said---watergate was about the cover up. are you so thick that you thought we were saying different things?

Yeah a cover up of all the illegal activity Presidengt Nixon was involved in, not just a bungled buglery at the Watergate Hotel.

right, it was about a cover up and lying about it.

the difference between Nixon and Clinton is that Clinton lied under oath, Nixon just lied.


Big big difference.
 
Arguably the scandal began in 1971 with the publication of the Pentagon Papers, a classified 7,000-page Defense Department document on the origins and conduct of the Vietnam War that had been obtained by The New York Times. Nixon saw the publication as evidence of a great liberal Democratic Establishment plot against him. And his inability to do anything about it triggered a towering rage.

''We're up against an enemy, a conspiracy,'' he thunders to Haldeman and Henry Kissinger on July 1, 1971, in a newly published transcript. ''They're using any means. We are going to use any means. Is that clear?'' This included dispatching a secret White House team, ''the Plumbers,'' to dig up dirt on Daniel Ellsberg, the former Kissinger aide who said he was the one who had leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press. A few months later the Plumbers broke into the Los Angeles office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist to photograph Ellsberg's records, but found nothing, and left behind a messy crime scene. Since some of the Plumbers were caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel a year later, Nixon was understandably frightened that the Watergate investigation would reveal other illegalities, so a cover-up was vital, even if it meant paying the burglars hush money or trying to get the C.I.A. to obstruct the F.B.I.'s investigation using the pretext of national security.

Call the Plumbers

Without the endless Whitewater investigation President Clinton would never have been asked about his affair with Monica.

you just confirmed what I said---watergate was about the cover up. are you so thick that you thought we were saying different things?

Yeah a cover up of all the illegal activity Presidengt Nixon was involved in, not just a bungled buglery at the Watergate Hotel.

Boo this thread is not about Nixon. Get out of the way.
 
Arguably the scandal began in 1971 with the publication of the Pentagon Papers, a classified 7,000-page Defense Department document on the origins and conduct of the Vietnam War that had been obtained by The New York Times. Nixon saw the publication as evidence of a great liberal Democratic Establishment plot against him. And his inability to do anything about it triggered a towering rage.

''We're up against an enemy, a conspiracy,'' he thunders to Haldeman and Henry Kissinger on July 1, 1971, in a newly published transcript. ''They're using any means. We are going to use any means. Is that clear?'' This included dispatching a secret White House team, ''the Plumbers,'' to dig up dirt on Daniel Ellsberg, the former Kissinger aide who said he was the one who had leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press. A few months later the Plumbers broke into the Los Angeles office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist to photograph Ellsberg's records, but found nothing, and left behind a messy crime scene. Since some of the Plumbers were caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel a year later, Nixon was understandably frightened that the Watergate investigation would reveal other illegalities, so a cover-up was vital, even if it meant paying the burglars hush money or trying to get the C.I.A. to obstruct the F.B.I.'s investigation using the pretext of national security.

Call the Plumbers

Without the endless Whitewater investigation President Clinton would never have been asked about his affair with Monica.

you just confirmed what I said---watergate was about the cover up. are you so thick that you thought we were saying different things?

Yeah a cover up of all the illegal activity Presidengt Nixon was involved in, not just a bungled buglery at the Watergate Hotel.

I just want anyone on the planet to be a true democrat and go holy toledo we let those guys fry over there. lets get to the bottom of this.

It appears anyone who used to be a democrat has been taken over by the maniacs called progressives in their party.
 

Forum List

Back
Top