On the contrary, it is not proven the GOP altered any emails

Is that the same Blaze that broke the big scandal about the Boston Bombing that would bring down Obama? After that I would be embarrassed to link to anything associated with the Blaze.

actually a member of Congress from the Oversight Committee stated just that a couple of days ago. All I remember is it wasn't Issa.

and this -

November 13, 2012, 5:00 PM

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said that the documents being shared are "really specific to the requests as they come in." The State Department did screen these documents for sensitive information before choosing which items to share. Members are allowed to view the documents and take notes but cannot make copies or remove them from the secure location.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57549294/congressional-leaders-view-secure-benghazi-documents/

and the same person stated many of these are not even classified documents.
 
Last edited:
The White House has only released 94 pages of approx. 25,000 documents. And there is a gap in the ones that have been released. Unless you want to believe that there was no communication about Benghazi for the first 67 hours from the attack.
 
Last edited:


Keith Olbermann can’t find another job:



“One of the cards his people played was hardship,” the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told POLITICO. “He spent last fall talking to all the major networks, and he couldn’t get a job. The idea was, this could be the last money he ever earned.”

Yo, Keith! You're just the guy I'm looking for to spread that pile of manure around the plant beds for the Mrs.
 


Keith Olbermann can’t find another job:



“One of the cards his people played was hardship,” the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told POLITICO. “He spent last fall talking to all the major networks, and he couldn’t get a job. The idea was, this could be the last money he ever earned.”

He is working on getting Democrats elected. Job Well Done !

C-Obama-victory.jpg
 
The White House has only released 94 pages of approx. 25,000 documents. And there is a gap in the ones that have been released. Unless you want to believe that there was no communication about Benghazi for the first 67 hours from the attack.

:eusa_silenced:
 
here are the facts:

1. liberals claim the gop altered the emails, however (assuming the gop leaked the emails) they gave oral versions of written emails because they did not have copies.

2. the oral versions has some apparent discrepancies that did not --> pay attention --> change the context of what was said.
 
So the point of this is what?

That we should apply the same standard of proof to the email issue as we apply to the President's culpability in any of these 'scandals'?

lol, Okay.
 
So the point of this is what?

That we should apply the same standard of proof to the email issue as we apply to the President's culpability in any of these 'scandals'?

lol, Okay.

what?

the point is quite simple, i laid it out in the OP and in subsequent posts.

the so called altered emails do not change the context of what was actually said.

i don't know what the president's culpability is in this. i do know that he is the CIC and in charge. something you wish us to forget.
 
I think it's stupid to call them "Republican" talking points - I don't see what the Republican party has to do with them at all - but the context was changed.

The emails supposedly "read" to the reporter:
“The penultimate point is a paragraph talking about all the previous warnings provided by the Agency (CIA) about al-Qaeda’s presence and activities of al-Qaeda.“

The actual email:
“The penultimate point could be abused by members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings.“

Adding references to al-Qaeda to make it scarier changes the context. There was no mention of al-Qaeda in the actual email.
 
If the emails were altered, the context of the email was altered. As night follows day.

What have you idiots done?
 
I think it's stupid to call them "Republican" talking points - I don't see what the Republican party has to do with them at all - but the context was changed.

The emails supposedly "read" to the reporter:
“The penultimate point is a paragraph talking about all the previous warnings provided by the Agency (CIA) about al-Qaeda’s presence and activities of al-Qaeda.“

The actual email:
“The penultimate point could be abused by members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings.“

Adding references to al-Qaeda to make it scarier changes the context. There was no mention of al-Qaeda in the actual email.

who do you think they were talking about? orthodox christians?
 
The left keeps saying the Republicans altered the E-mails so simple question who was it ? Unless you have a name and some proof that the person did this then your really just guessing aren't you?
 
The left keeps saying the Republicans altered the E-mails so simple question who was it ? Unless you have a name and some proof that the person did this then your really just guessing aren't you?

We do have a problem. If two different sets exist, somebody altered them. The question is who? And could it have been a Democrat?
 

Forum List

Back
Top