Special forces ordered to stand down in Benghazi?

[Jackson]

Okay, it was the state department's error, not necessarily Obama. For Christ's sakes, Obama can't micromanage every crisis that happens under his watch.

Especially when he's in Las Vegas on a campaign tour which takes priority over emergencies like terror attacks, don't ya know. And that my friend, is the God's truth.

Are you saying that he shouldn't have been in Las Vegas because he should have expected there would be a random overseas attack?

He went anyway. After the attack.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

To this day, it is not known what role President Richard Nixon played in the break-in at the Watergate Hotel, but the tape recordings from the White House confirm he and Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman discussed using the CIA to slow down the FBI investigation.

It was the cover-up, as history records, that eventually brought about Nixon’s resignation in disgrace.

Now, Congress is investigating an alleged cover-up of the terrorist attack Sept. 11, 2012, on the U.S. foreign service facility in Benghazi, Libya, amid predictions from prominent voices that the scandal will bring down the Obama administration.

Former Arkansas governor and onetime presidential candidate Mike Huckabee made the bold prediction this week, ahead of a House hearing Wednesday that will feature witnesses of the attack.

“I believe that before it’s all over, this president will not fill out his full term,” he said. “I know that puts me on a limb. But this is not minor. It wasn’t minor when Richard Nixon lied to the American people and worked with those in his administration to cover up what really happened in Watergate.

“But, I remind you – as bad as Watergate was, because it broke the trust between the president and the people, no one died. This is more serious because four Americans did in fact die.”


Benghazi buzz: Obama predicted to leave office

Here's the biggest difference, sparky. Nixon was involved in the coverup of a crime. In this faux-scandal, not only is Obama not involved, but no crime has been committed.

The reason the Constitution states that high crimes and misdemeanors are reasons for impeachment is that a higher level of conduct is expected from those holding high office.

There is no law against lying to the American people, but better conduct than that is expected of the President of the United States.

Your assertion that Obama cannot or will not be be impeached because no "crime" was committed is ludicrous.

 

[Caroljo]

13 Benghazis happened under Bush in which over 100 people were killed at US embassies and consulates, but Republicans weren't interested in even looking at those.

I'm still trying to understand what the grand conspiracy is.

Just seems like the Clinton and Obama haters are out in full force with their vitriol, but still can't explain what the fuck the controversy is all about.

How many of those 100 people were Americans?
I only know of one.

How many times did our people at those Embassy's and Consulates ask for extra security because it was so dangerous and there were threats....and they were denied?

And how many times did you hear Bush make excuses for any of it? Did he make up stories so he didn't look bad?

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

and what if the GOP takes both house and senate in 2014, they will take him out easily!

 

[bripat9643]

Here's the biggest difference, sparky. Nixon was involved in the coverup of a crime. In this faux-scandal, not only is Obama not involved, but no crime has been committed.

Anyone who believe Obama isn't involved is suffering from terminal cluelessness.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Sorry to say.......he wont be going anywhere. One finger in the air will catch the wind on the policital realities........we have limpwristed people in Congress like McCain and the rest of the Rhino assholes.


Anyway......expect some event to be coming.....and soon. Manufactured and engineered, it will blow Benghazi back to page 40 of any paper and right off the TV news.

then why did it come back?

ABC released 12 versions of the administration's "talking points" on Benghazi that appeared to show how various agencies - particularly the State Department and the CIA - shaped what became the Obama administration's initial playbook for explaining how four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the attack

Republican expects more Benghazi 'whistle blowers' when you even have the liberal media questioning this after 8 months you have to do some spining..

 

[chikenwing]

The only fact you've claimed is that Obama, Rice, and Hillary refused to save those people.

That's a hope, not the truth

Pretty sure it was Hillary/Obama/Rice who did not send back-up troops while fighting those terrorists. And it was them who tried to deny that this was a terrorist attack all along. So in other words, you refuse to hold people accountable while lives are lost. That would make you a coward.

Technically, Rice didn't have a role in whether troops were saved. She just sold a phony narrative after the fact.

We know that the embassy sent out various forms of communications and that none of our resources were deployed to help them. We know that they sold a phony story after the fact. We can speculate about the reasons. But those are undeniable facts.

Just like you said we can only speculate about the reasons. And that means there's no way of proving any guilt. Should we review what happened and make changes to prevent such a thing from happening again? Absolutely.

But a witch hunt will only waste our time. As for the phony story; that's still being looked into. But I don't think the administration is stupid enough to think they could cover up a coordinated attack on an American embassy. I do think that immediately after an attack there is a lot of information swirling around and it takes a while to put everything together and find out what happened.

So all they're guilty of is getting information from immediately after an attack wrong. Calling it terrorism from the get-go wouldn't have saved anyone or changed anything. If only 1 plane had flown into the WTC and Al-Qaeda hadn't come out immediately taking credit for it... Bush probably would've thought it was just an accident.

So your ok with bold face lies? personally I don't care who or what party they belong to I detest lairs.

They knew and its now proven fact when they knew what happened,but they still went ahead with the video narrative days later,and a purposefully diluted report. That should be unacceptable for anyone with a shred of integrity.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Obama will serve out his term. A weakened President perhaps, but he will remain President.

Agreed. He is the Left's crowning achievement. First (and probably the last) bi-racial "man" to serve in the office. The history books are already being re-written to appoint him as the "greatest president to have ever lived, served, or supplicated himself before the masses".

Their is NOTHING Barry can do to get himself in trouble with these commie bastards.

He IS the anointed one. in the coming years, minstrels will sing of him, Children will march in Obama Day parades......well, you get the point.

The most incompetent president in history is going nowhere.....

 

[TheOldSchool]

Technically, Rice didn't have a role in whether troops were saved. She just sold a phony narrative after the fact.

We know that the embassy sent out various forms of communications and that none of our resources were deployed to help them. We know that they sold a phony story after the fact. We can speculate about the reasons. But those are undeniable facts.

Just like you said we can only speculate about the reasons. And that means there's no way of proving any guilt. Should we review what happened and make changes to prevent such a thing from happening again? Absolutely.

But a witch hunt will only waste our time. As for the phony story; that's still being looked into. But I don't think the administration is stupid enough to think they could cover up a coordinated attack on an American embassy. I do think that immediately after an attack there is a lot of information swirling around and it takes a while to put everything together and find out what happened.

So all they're guilty of is getting information from immediately after an attack wrong. Calling it terrorism from the get-go wouldn't have saved anyone or changed anything. If only 1 plane had flown into the WTC and Al-Qaeda hadn't come out immediately taking credit for it... Bush probably would've thought it was just an accident.

We know that they were derelict of duty and that they did nothing to aid those in danger. We know that they have oppressed people who sought to bring out the truth. We know that they sold a phony narrative. I didn't say they had no guilt. I said that we would have to speculate as to their precise motives. I think that's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain. So, not to you.

Petty insults. Cornerstone of the Benghazi talking points

 

[Caroljo]

More people are coming forward who want to be heard too. By the time this is over, hopefully, obama will be dragged from the white house in handcuffs and leg irons.

I like that visual. Thank you!

So you're saying Bush should have been dragged from the White House in handcuffs for letting 13 embassies and consulates get attacked while he was in office?

Or is it different now because it's Obama and he's black and that makes you uncomfortable?

Please read my response earlier about Bush....no comparison!

And you really want to know why we're pissed? Guess what, it's not because he BLACK....it's because he LIED TO US. He lied because it was so close to elections, and there was no way he was going to have this black dot on his record!! And to prove the elections were even more important than American's dying, he ran off to Vegas and his adoring crowds!

Yes, Obama makes me uncomfortable, but not because he's black.

 

[deltex1]

Okay, it was the state department's error, not necessarily Obama. For Christ's sakes, Obama can't micromanage every crisis that happens under his watch.

Especially when he's in Las Vegas on a campaign tour which takes priority over emergencies like terror attacks, don't ya know. And that my friend, is the God's truth.

Are you saying that he shouldn't have been in Las Vegas because he should have expected there would be a random overseas attack?

Yo dufus...the attack happened...then the moron went to Vegas...

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

So your ok with bold face lies? personally I don't care who or what party they belong to I detest lairs.

They knew and its now proven fact when they knew what happened,but they still went ahead with the video narrative days later,and a purposefully diluted report. That should be unacceptable for anyone with a shred of integrity.

Unfortunately, 99 percent of leftists and 80ish percent of people who are right, stick with their scoundrels to the bitter end.

I agree that the ideological divides should not trump character defects. But we live in an amoral society now and power is at a premium.

 

[Billy000]

Especially when he's in Las Vegas on a campaign tour which takes priority over emergencies like terror attacks, don't ya know. And that my friend, is the God's truth.

Are you saying that he shouldn't have been in Las Vegas because he should have expected there would be a random overseas attack?

Yo dufus...the attack happened...then the moron went to Vegas...

Okay, so that is good enough reason to step down or get impeached?

 

[Jackson]

The president was not answering to the people when there were questions that need to be answered, not by his press officer, but by him. He chose to have Jay Carney answer thise questions while he continued to campaign for president.

Questions arose where was the president when the people needed him and mostly while the Middle East was see uprising against the US and our own citizens were in harms way. Again, we didn't hear from the president , but from his spokesman while he toured the US to garner votes for the upcoming election.

Four people died and speculation became facts that protection was denied to them while the president failed to have face to face daily intelligence briefings that may have uncovered the need and the requests from Libya for more protection. This came to light during the investigations that followed the murder of four men in Benghazi.

 

[Clementine]

Are you saying that he shouldn't have been in Las Vegas because he should have expected there would be a random overseas attack?

Yo dufus...the attack happened...then the moron went to Vegas...

Okay, so that is good enough reason to step down or get impeached?

It's the cover up. It's the lies that came out of his mouth for days following the attack. Protesters upset over a video, remember? A huge lie that originated with Obama and/or Hillary and both kept repeating it, knowing full well it wasn't true. They also didn't cooperate with the investigation and only handed over edited documents that were worthless and concealed the truth.

 

[bripat9643]

Just like you said we can only speculate about the reasons. And that means there's no way of proving any guilt. Should we review what happened and make changes to prevent such a thing from happening again? Absolutely.

But a witch hunt will only waste our time. As for the phony story; that's still being looked into. But I don't think the administration is stupid enough to think they could cover up a coordinated attack on an American embassy. I do think that immediately after an attack there is a lot of information swirling around and it takes a while to put everything together and find out what happened.

So all they're guilty of is getting information from immediately after an attack wrong. Calling it terrorism from the get-go wouldn't have saved anyone or changed anything. If only 1 plane had flown into the WTC and Al-Qaeda hadn't come out immediately taking credit for it... Bush probably would've thought it was just an accident.

We know that they were derelict of duty and that they did nothing to aid those in danger. We know that they have oppressed people who sought to bring out the truth. We know that they sold a phony narrative. I didn't say they had no guilt. I said that we would have to speculate as to their precise motives. I think that's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain. So, not to you.

Petty insults. Cornerstone of the Benghazi talking points

Truth, in other words.

 

[chikenwing]

Pretty sure it was libyan terrorists and not Hillary who killed those people. But Republicans do love their circuses

You do realize that calling the attackers in Benghazi "terrorists" like you just did means you think the white house was lying about the incident. Right?

I think the White House was going about its business and they used the information they had. It's Republicans who think that translates to murder.

who said anything about murder? Its about lies and why .Its a shame those people were killed,and I think there is some blame to be had for poor response and preparation,but certainly not murder.

 

[Billy000]

The president was not answering to the people when there were questions that need to be answered, not by his press officer, but by him. He chose to have Jay Carney answer thise questions while he continued to campaign for president.

Questions arose where was the president when the people needed him and mostly while the Middle East was see uprising against the US and our own citizens were in harms way. Again, we didn't hear from the president , but from his spokesman while he toured the US to garner votes for the upcoming election.

Four people died and speculation became facts that protection was denied to them while the president failed to have face to face daily intelligence briefings that may have uncovered the need and the requests from Libya for more protection. This came to light during the investigations that followed the murder of four men in Benghazi.

That is the purpose of Jay Carney. That is his job. If Obama had done it, how would the answers have been different?

 

[hazlnut]

 

[Billy000]

Yo dufus...the attack happened...then the moron went to Vegas...

Okay, so that is good enough reason to step down or get impeached?

It's the cover up. It's the lies that came out of his mouth for days following the attack. Protesters upset over a video, remember? A huge lie that originated with Obama and/or Hillary and both kept repeating it, knowing full well it wasn't true. They also didn't cooperate with the investigation and only handed over edited documents that were worthless and concealed the truth.

Okay, what exactly did Obama say? Straight from Obama's mouth.