Yeah, and I CAN'T BELIEVE not a single republican got knee deep in her shit when the moose twit whore said that! If it were me, I would have stood up, walked to where she was sitting, and about an inch from her fugly face screamed "FOUR AMERICANS DEAD BECAUSE OF YOUR INCOMPETENCE AND YES, YOU AND THIS BROKEN ADMINISTRATION LET THEM DIE BY IGNORING THEIR CRIES FOR HELP DURING AN EIGHT HOUR ATTACK, THEN TRIED TO BLAME IT ON SOME VIDEO, HOPING WE'D BUY THAT KIND OF HORSE SHIT!!! YOU 'MAM' BETRAYED AMERICA!!!!! THAT MAKES A DAMNED DIFFERENCE!!!!" Of course, I would be the new media villain, but popular with those who count: We The People.
Hillary - Butchered Benghazi
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Yeah, and I CAN'T BELIEVE not a single republican got knee deep in her shit when the moose twit whore said that! If it were me, I would have stood up, walked to where she was sitting, and about an inch from her fugly face screamed "FOUR AMERICANS DEAD BECAUSE OF YOUR INCOMPETENCE AND YES, YOU AND THIS BROKEN ADMINISTRATION LET THEM DIE BY IGNORING THEIR CRIES FOR HELP DURING AN EIGHT HOUR ATTACK, THEN TRIED TO BLAME IT ON SOME VIDEO, HOPING WE'D BUY THAT KIND OF HORSE SHIT!!! YOU 'MAM' BETRAYED AMERICA!!!!! THAT MAKES A DAMNED DIFFERENCE!!!!" Of course, I would be the new media villain, but popular with those who count: We The People.
fraudcurrents that is why leftists should not be elected nor should people like you be allowed to vote. You must keep your stupidity out of politics. First off this was high level stuff. She was involved whether she admits it or not.
its very non leftist and non democrat... but when our country was great our leaders earned trust through integrity and accountability (not media hype) .
the 3am call came and so did the 2 am call and the midnight call. Hillary failed to answer.
its very non leftist and non democrat... but when our country was great our leaders earned trust through integrity and accountability (not media hype) .
the 3am call came and so did the 2 am call and the midnight call. Hillary failed to answer.
Care to provide any evidence of these ignored phone calls you fucking ideologically crazed liar and repeater of lies? Guess what? There were no calls. They are a fabrication of the fucked-up right wingers. Half of you idiots have changed the metaphor into your own delusional reality.
For some facts you didn't hear on Faux News. Idiot.
1. No one has been held accountable for Benghazi:
~False. 4 individuals were identified to be at fault in the Accountability Review Boardâs (ARB) report, and have been removed from their jobs.
"â¦all four individuals identified in the ARB have been removed from their job. Secondly, theyâve been placed on administrative leave while we stepped through the personnel process to determine the next steps.
Third, both Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen specifically highlighted the reason why this is complicated, because under federal statute and regulations, unsatisfactory leadership is not grounds for finding a breach of duty. The ARB did not find these four individuals breached their duty.
So I have submitted legislation to this committee, to the Congress, to fix this problem so future ARBs will not face this situation.â -Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
2. Hillary hasnât taken responsibility for Benghazi:
~False.
"As I have said many times since September 11, I take responsibility. Nobody is more committed to getting this right. I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger, and more secure.â -Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
3. Hillary has accepted responsibility with words only:
~False. Hillary launched an Accountability Review Board, removed the 4 individuals identified to be at fault, and implemented the 29 recommendations set forth by the ARB.
"Since 1988, there have been 19 Accountability Review Boards investigating attacks on American diplomats and their facilities. Benghazi joins a long list of tragedies, for our Department and for other agencies: hostages taken in Tehran in 1979, our embassy and Marine barracks bombed in Beirut in 1983, Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996, our embassies in East Africa in 1998, consulate staff murdered in Jeddah in 2004, the Khost attack in 2009, and too many others.
â¦
I have accepted every one of their recommendations â and I asked the Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources to lead a task force to ensure that all 29 of them are implemented quickly and completely.â
-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
4. Hillary Clinton intentionally launched a false narrative about a YouTube video being the cause of Benghazi:
~False. The intelligence community initially thought the YouTube video was related to the Benghazi attack. Hillary Clinton repeated the intelligence communities talking points.
Violent protests had erupted throughout the Middle East simultaneous to Benghazi. Many of the protests throughout the Middle East and in Cairo revolved around the YouTube video, which is why it was initially thought Benghazi was also related to the YouTube video. We now know that although the attackers in Benghazi werenât directly connected to the protests revolving around the YouTube video, the unstable environment provided by the protests gave the Benghazi perpetrators an opportunity to launch their attack successfully.
5. The Obama Administration did not call Benghazi a âterrorist attackâ:
~False.
Senator Joe Lieberman: âLet me begin by asking you whether you would say that Ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans died as a result of a terrorist attack?â
Counterterrorism Director Matthew Olsen: âCertainly on that particular question I would say, yes. They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy.â
6. Hillary personally denied requests for more security in Benghazi:
~False. 1.43 million cables are sent to the State Department each year. Security requests are handled by security professionals in the State Department. No cables requesting more security reached Hillaryâs desk.
7. The Benghazi attacks were âpreventableâ:
~True. Virtually all tragedies are âpreventableâ with 20/20 hindsight â including the Beirut bombings under Reagan, 9/11/2001, and the 13 embassy attacks under George Bushâs Administration.
8. Hillary Clinton said, âWhat difference, at this point, does it makeâ that 4 men died in Benghazi:
~False. Hillary was referring to the Republicanâs obsession with Susan Riceâs talking points, not Benghazi itself.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...ts-against-Hillary-Clinton-regarding-Benghazi
The republican mind is incapable of independent thought which is why they will parrot anything and everything they hear, read and see from right wing "news" sources no matter how misleading, illogical or contradictory to the real facts.
as stated, the leftist drone... comes back with the old dems take no responsibility for their jobs defense.
Has Hillary blame bush yet?
Take it from the next president instead of Hillary...
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-benghazi-91195.html
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa â Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said Friday that he considers Hillary Clinton âabsolutely responsibleâ for failing to stop the chaos and bloodshed at the American diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, last September.
Speaking to reporters ahead of his address to the Iowa GOPâs Lincoln Dinner this evening, Paul accused Clinton of ignoring diplomatic security as secretary of State. He expressed disbelief at suggestions that Clinton should be absolved of blame because diplomatic security-related cables never got to her.
Clinton is âabsolutely responsible,â Paul said. âShe was in charge of the State Department. She was asked repeatedly for increased security for Benghazi. Some of the media have been reporting that because she didnât read them sheâs protected â she wasnât responsible because she didnât read them? I fault her absolutely for not reading the cables.â
Paul added, âPart of being in charge is triaging what comes to your desk and what doesnât come to your desk. And to say that Libya wasnât important enough for her to be reading the cables from the ambassador asking for more security, I think was inexcusable.â
The first-term senator and potential presidential candidate likened the terrorist attack in Benghazi, and the subsequent U.S. response, to the Black Hawk Down catastrophe in Somalia in the 1990s.
âIt was, I think, a tragic lack of leadership, similar to what Les Aspin did in Mogadishu under Bill Clinton. And he ultimately resigned his office,â Paul said.
Drilling ahead, he criticized the State Department for its claim that it didnât have enough money to spend on diplomatic security, and argued that the Benghazi facility should have been under military control in the first place.
âWe spent $300,000 on dog kennels [through the federal government]. There is money out there. A good leader finds that money and puts it in,â Paul said.
The mission in Benghazi, he continued âshould have been under the military. It should have been done the way Baghdad was ⦠There should have been 100 Marines guarding the ambassador.â
Paulâs comments on Benghazi follow hearings in the House of Representatives in which GOP congressman repeatedly cast blame in Clintonâs direction for what they characterized as a flailing response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
In a wide-ranging questi
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-benghazi-91195.html#ixzz2wpg1APnJ
Has Hillary blame bush yet?
Take it from the next president instead of Hillary...
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-benghazi-91195.html
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa â Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said Friday that he considers Hillary Clinton âabsolutely responsibleâ for failing to stop the chaos and bloodshed at the American diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, last September.
Speaking to reporters ahead of his address to the Iowa GOPâs Lincoln Dinner this evening, Paul accused Clinton of ignoring diplomatic security as secretary of State. He expressed disbelief at suggestions that Clinton should be absolved of blame because diplomatic security-related cables never got to her.
Clinton is âabsolutely responsible,â Paul said. âShe was in charge of the State Department. She was asked repeatedly for increased security for Benghazi. Some of the media have been reporting that because she didnât read them sheâs protected â she wasnât responsible because she didnât read them? I fault her absolutely for not reading the cables.â
Paul added, âPart of being in charge is triaging what comes to your desk and what doesnât come to your desk. And to say that Libya wasnât important enough for her to be reading the cables from the ambassador asking for more security, I think was inexcusable.â
The first-term senator and potential presidential candidate likened the terrorist attack in Benghazi, and the subsequent U.S. response, to the Black Hawk Down catastrophe in Somalia in the 1990s.
âIt was, I think, a tragic lack of leadership, similar to what Les Aspin did in Mogadishu under Bill Clinton. And he ultimately resigned his office,â Paul said.
Drilling ahead, he criticized the State Department for its claim that it didnât have enough money to spend on diplomatic security, and argued that the Benghazi facility should have been under military control in the first place.
âWe spent $300,000 on dog kennels [through the federal government]. There is money out there. A good leader finds that money and puts it in,â Paul said.
The mission in Benghazi, he continued âshould have been under the military. It should have been done the way Baghdad was ⦠There should have been 100 Marines guarding the ambassador.â
Paulâs comments on Benghazi follow hearings in the House of Representatives in which GOP congressman repeatedly cast blame in Clintonâs direction for what they characterized as a flailing response to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
In a wide-ranging questi
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-benghazi-91195.html#ixzz2wpg1APnJ
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ecurity-lapses-sheds-light-on-deadly-attacks/
â[A]n April 2012 State Department cable bearing Secretary Hillary Clintonâs signature acknowledged then-Ambassador Cretzâs formal request for additional security assets but ordered the withdrawal of security elements to proceed as planned,â the report reads.
But hereâs the thing: Clinton said in her January 2013 testimony that she was not aware of any security requests for that area.
âThey didnât come to me. I didnât approve them. I didnât deny them,â she said, contrary to the reportâs findings.
âThe report also found that White House and high-ranking officials at the State Department changed CIA talking points following the attacks, which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others, in order to shield the State Department from âcriticism for inadequate security levelsâ on the ground in Benghazi,â the Washington Examinerâs Susan Ferrechio notes.
She continues:
It was released to all House members and comes after many Republicans in the House and Senate have called for a select committee to examine the Benghazi attacks, which the administration first blamed on demonstrators reacting to an anti-Muslim video.
For those who need a Libya refresher, the 46-page report provides a helpful timeline of the attacks and the subsequent federal investigation.
You can read the full report here:
â[A]n April 2012 State Department cable bearing Secretary Hillary Clintonâs signature acknowledged then-Ambassador Cretzâs formal request for additional security assets but ordered the withdrawal of security elements to proceed as planned,â the report reads.
But hereâs the thing: Clinton said in her January 2013 testimony that she was not aware of any security requests for that area.
âThey didnât come to me. I didnât approve them. I didnât deny them,â she said, contrary to the reportâs findings.
âThe report also found that White House and high-ranking officials at the State Department changed CIA talking points following the attacks, which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others, in order to shield the State Department from âcriticism for inadequate security levelsâ on the ground in Benghazi,â the Washington Examinerâs Susan Ferrechio notes.
She continues:
It was released to all House members and comes after many Republicans in the House and Senate have called for a select committee to examine the Benghazi attacks, which the administration first blamed on demonstrators reacting to an anti-Muslim video.
For those who need a Libya refresher, the 46-page report provides a helpful timeline of the attacks and the subsequent federal investigation.
You can read the full report here:
Some Context for CNNâs Shocking Report on Benghazi
CNN thinks the CIA might have been smuggling out of Libya, hence Benghazi.
By Max Ehrenfreund
FacebookTwitterDiggRedditStumbleUponDelicious
CNNâs Drew Griffin reported earlier this week that the Central Intelligence Agency might have been running guns from Libya to Syria out of its station in Benghazi, and that might be why the administration has gone to great lengths to cover up what happened there the night Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed. Or something like that?
The entire report reduces to this single finding:
Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agencyâs missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agencyâs workings.
The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.
It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career. â¦
âAgency employees typically are polygraphed every three to four years. Never more than that,â said former CIA operative and CNN analyst Robert Baer.
(Journalism school seminar: The only named sources in this report are Baer, who is apparently on CNNâs payroll, and Frank Wolf, a Republican congressman from Virginia. Neither are likely to be unbiased. Additionally, beginning one sentence with âAmong the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi missionâ was unjustified and weakens the readerâs confidence in Griffinâs objectivity.)
The frequency of the polygraphs perhaps suggests that something was happening at the compound that the CIA and the administration doesnât want anyone else to know about.
That is Conor Friedersdorfâs question:
If CNNâs report is correct, the CIA is at minimum trying to hide something huge from Congress, something that CIA agents might otherwise want to reveal â itself a reason for Congress to press hard for information. And if speculation about moving weapons is grounded in anything substantive, that would be an additional reason to investigate what the CIA is doing in Libya. Dozens of CIA agents were apparently on the ground in Benghazi, Libya last September. What I want to know is why.
I am not persuaded that there was anything happening at the Benghazi annex significantly different from, well, whatever it is the CIA is doing in any of the place around the world where its personnel are stationed.
A much simpler explanation for the frequency of the polygraphs is that this administration is panicky. They have gone to absurd lengths to keep personnel from talking. As McClatchy reported, the administrationâs âInsider Threatâ program, launched in response to Pfc. Bradley Manningâs leaks, requires all federal employees, not just those working with sensitive information, to keep a careful eye on one another. Personnel are encouraged to report not just unauthorized disclosures, but any signs of psychological stress, including divorce, debt, or frustrations with colleagues. The logic is that these conditions can be what pushes a person like Manning to take information outside of an agency.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2013_08/some_context_for_cnns_shocking046197.php
CNN thinks the CIA might have been smuggling out of Libya, hence Benghazi.
By Max Ehrenfreund
FacebookTwitterDiggRedditStumbleUponDelicious
CNNâs Drew Griffin reported earlier this week that the Central Intelligence Agency might have been running guns from Libya to Syria out of its station in Benghazi, and that might be why the administration has gone to great lengths to cover up what happened there the night Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed. Or something like that?
The entire report reduces to this single finding:
Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agencyâs missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agencyâs workings.
The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.
It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career. â¦
âAgency employees typically are polygraphed every three to four years. Never more than that,â said former CIA operative and CNN analyst Robert Baer.
(Journalism school seminar: The only named sources in this report are Baer, who is apparently on CNNâs payroll, and Frank Wolf, a Republican congressman from Virginia. Neither are likely to be unbiased. Additionally, beginning one sentence with âAmong the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi missionâ was unjustified and weakens the readerâs confidence in Griffinâs objectivity.)
The frequency of the polygraphs perhaps suggests that something was happening at the compound that the CIA and the administration doesnât want anyone else to know about.
That is Conor Friedersdorfâs question:
If CNNâs report is correct, the CIA is at minimum trying to hide something huge from Congress, something that CIA agents might otherwise want to reveal â itself a reason for Congress to press hard for information. And if speculation about moving weapons is grounded in anything substantive, that would be an additional reason to investigate what the CIA is doing in Libya. Dozens of CIA agents were apparently on the ground in Benghazi, Libya last September. What I want to know is why.
I am not persuaded that there was anything happening at the Benghazi annex significantly different from, well, whatever it is the CIA is doing in any of the place around the world where its personnel are stationed.
A much simpler explanation for the frequency of the polygraphs is that this administration is panicky. They have gone to absurd lengths to keep personnel from talking. As McClatchy reported, the administrationâs âInsider Threatâ program, launched in response to Pfc. Bradley Manningâs leaks, requires all federal employees, not just those working with sensitive information, to keep a careful eye on one another. Personnel are encouraged to report not just unauthorized disclosures, but any signs of psychological stress, including divorce, debt, or frustrations with colleagues. The logic is that these conditions can be what pushes a person like Manning to take information outside of an agency.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2013_08/some_context_for_cnns_shocking046197.php