Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
4 americans died so that obama did not have to admit to a terrorist attack two months before the election---------its clear.
"...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
IT was a LIE...a cover up regardless. NO amount of parsing will hide it. Nice try BlindBoob.
What wins you elections is illegal votes and uninformed voters on welfare. Smart voters know better because we saw what obamaturd is about from the get go, nothing more then a big fat un american failure.Yes! The ODS kooks are still going full throttle on their whackoloon conspiracies! And that means more votes for the Democrats!
Thanks, ODS kooks! We count on your insanity to win elections. And we know you won't fail us.
Truth scares the HELL out of them...and why the denial. Truth can hold out longer than they can."...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
Horseshit ! There were only a handful of people in the entire world who knew about the video, much less actually viewed it.
Its a huge lie and you fools insist on displaying your ignorance by blindly believing the lies and the liars.
there were no mass protests over that stupid video.
Rice was sent out by the whitehouse to lie for political reasons, the e-mails prove it. 4 americans died so that obama did not have to admit to a terrorist attack two months before the election---------its clear.
come out from under your liberal rock and view the truth.
Not buying the spin. Stow it."...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
IT was a LIE...a cover up regardless. NO amount of parsing will hide it. Nice try BlindBoob.
Not one person who was involved with creating the talking points was a witness to what occurred outside the consulate building. From the General who knew in his gut immediately that it was a terrorist attack to the lowest pencil pusher who had a say. Everyone was engaging in speculation. Which is exactly why Ambassador Rice always qualified her statements (the Talking Points) with the fact that an investigation was ongoing and that we would look to the results of that investigation to learn the truth of what went on that night.
The same lying rice that pushed the lie, no creds there from her fat lying lips."...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
IT was a LIE...a cover up regardless. NO amount of parsing will hide it. Nice try BlindBoob.
Not one person who was involved with creating the talking points was a witness to what occurred outside the consulate building. From the General who knew in his gut immediately that it was a terrorist attack to the lowest pencil pusher who had a say. Everyone was engaging in speculation. Which is exactly why Ambassador Rice always qualified her statements (the Talking Points) with the fact that an investigation was ongoing and that we would look to the results of that investigation to learn the truth of what went on that night.
Gee.....I wonder why it took a legal challenge for that email to be released. The White House allowed congress to have hearings regarding HOW he talking points were developed....yet refused to release the one email that showed EXACTLY how they were developed.
Kinda like Bush refused to turn over all the WH documents on Tillman.
I'm NOT saying it's OK in either case. I think BOTH cases suck to high heavens.
Actually, there is no evidence that the people died because of politics.
There is evidence that the truth about the deaths may have been covered up because of politics.
EXACTLY like the Pat Tillman case.
And there is no evidence of the WH involved in a "cover up," which is what this is really about; hence a phony "scandal" and no articles of impeachment.
I haven't seen any direct evidence in either case of WH involvement. But I assume the man at the top was calling the shots in both cases. Can I prove it in a court of law? Nope. But even so, I'm not sure lying (when you are not under oath) is an impeachable offense. Their should be (imho) consequences, but impeachment is a stretch.
"...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
IT was a LIE...a cover up regardless. NO amount of parsing will hide it. Nice try BlindBoob.
Not one person who was involved with creating the talking points was a witness to what occurred outside the consulate building. From the General who knew in his gut immediately that it was a terrorist attack to the lowest pencil pusher who had a say. Everyone was engaging in speculation. Which is exactly why Ambassador Rice always qualified her statements (the Talking Points) with the fact that an investigation was ongoing and that we would look to the results of that investigation to learn the truth of what went on that night.
"...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
Are you really so stupid? Why did they need to prep Rice at all? She has appeared hundreds of times on TV. She hardly needed prep. The prep was to make sure she had the WH talking points down. Those points were a deliberate deception. The White House lied, pure and simple, to improve Obama's re-election. Which part of that are you missing?
"...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
Are you really so stupid? Why did they need to prep Rice at all? She has appeared hundreds of times on TV. She hardly needed prep. The prep was to make sure she had the WH talking points down. Those points were a deliberate deception. The White House lied, pure and simple, to improve Obama's re-election. Which part of that are you missing?
Why do professional athletes ever practice at all, they played hundreds of games, they hardly need to practice.
Mitt Romney was making an ass out of himself just fine to improve the Presidents chances of re-election. I've often wondered if the whole phony Benghazi "Cover-up" meme isn't just to deflect away from the unprecedented and unpatriotic way Mitt denigrated himself during the whole anti-Mohammad video crisis.
They will claim that without video evidence of Obama saying he was going to engage in cover up then there is no evidence. They will claim they all do it. They will claim what difference does it make.Gee.....I wonder why it took a legal challenge for that email to be released. The White House allowed congress to have hearings regarding HOW he talking points were developed....yet refused to release the one email that showed EXACTLY how they were developed.
Kinda like Bush refused to turn over all the WH documents on Tillman.
I'm NOT saying it's OK in either case. I think BOTH cases suck to high heavens.
Bush was beat up by the press over Tillman...and he should have been.
All evidence is showing that Obama covered this up for "re-election" purposes....and all I am hearing about it in the media is how the GOP is making ANOTHER effort to try to prove there was a cover-up.
And then you have folks like blindboo who look at evidence in the eye and say "it doesn't prove anything"
How about a YouTube video of Obama and Jarrett saying "OK, we need to cover up these facts on Benghazi so I can get re-elected"? Would that satisfy your desire for evidence? Or would you jsut claim they all do it?The evidence is now out there. A complete White House cover up. Those are the facts. No amount of left wing spin or bullshit will change that.
There is no evidence of a cover up.
(Miss lollipop is hot.)
How would you know? you are a libtard, you wouldn't know the truth if it hit you upside your fat head.The evidence is now out there. A complete White House cover up. Those are the facts. No amount of left wing spin or bullshit will change that.
There is no evidence of a cover up.
(Miss lollipop is hot.)
Whom but YOU said anything about FOX NEWS? Try Judicial Watch.How would you know? you are a libtard, you wouldn't know the truth if it hit you upside your fat head.There is no evidence of a cover up.
(Miss lollipop is hot.)
How? (I just think she's hot, or are you trying to tell me that's a guy?)
Turn Off Fox
It's bad News for America.
"...suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video."
Two things. One. OMFG, they prepped her for a TV appearance? Two. There were protest in several nations across the world over news of that video. I think more than 4 dozen people were killed in those protests. The talking points were accurate. The only thing the talking points got wrong was that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi that the extremest, who attacked the place, used as cover or joined in prior to launching their attack.
Horseshit ! There were only a handful of people in the entire world who knew about the video, much less actually viewed it.
Its a huge lie and you fools insist on displaying your ignorance by blindly believing the lies and the liars.
there were no mass protests over that stupid video.
Rice was sent out by the whitehouse to lie for political reasons, the e-mails prove it. 4 americans died so that obama did not have to admit to a terrorist attack two months before the election---------its clear.
come out from under your liberal rock and view the truth.
