Benghazi Hearings

Pro

5761

Bartlett, TN

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

My Race Log

Champion

6056

Menomonee Falls, WI

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 2:55 PM

The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

We don't even know if that's the reason yet. It seems like the State Department-- Hillary Clinton-- went into cover-up mode immediately. That seems suspicious. She may have been playing CYA before it even got to the White House.

Of course, the bogus video explanation also had further ramifications... bad video guy was jailed and there were subsequent protests about the video during which people were killed, I believe. The bogus explanation only fanned the flames of tensions between the West and Arab world. It also led to a spiral of lies in which the White House and Hillary Clinton personally lied to the families of the fallen and the American public repeatedly. I'm not sure the public is willing to forget that so easily. Of course, Hillary will be a hero to some, no matter what she has done. For the moment, she's out of office. But Obama still has to deal with the consequences.

My Race Log

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 2:55 PM The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

I would actually give them props for admitting it. But it'll never happen... At least not until Barack's post presidency book "Dreams for My Daughters". I should copyright that...

My Race Log

Master

2701

Salisbury, North Carolina

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 3:55 PM

The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

Agree. They're banking on the fact that it won't be a major deal. If it gets ready to go full blown scandal status then they may come out with some version of this. We are in the managed perception era.... truth is honestly not that important to some people, especially the Clintons.

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 1:55 PM The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

But that line I'm not buying... I mean look, Obama all by himself got Bin Laden... and here we have a terrorist attack by extremists... he could have just as easily order cruise missiles and seal teams to show "how tough on terror" he was. Heck, just like other tin foil hatters say... he could have set the whole thing up to get himself an easy win before election. If you want to play "what if"... you have to play them all.

For what ever reason, they chose to down play it. They hitched their horse to that wagon prematurely, and it backfired. And the right wing going after them day one was most certainly politically motivated exactly because it was close to an election. So it is important for the truth to be told, and find out why 4 American's lost their life in the performance of their duty when help seemed available... but don't kid yourself... it is about political gamesmanship on both sides... it always is.

My Race Log

Pro

4675

Wisconsin near the Twin Cities metro

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

powerman - 2013-05-10 3:50 PM

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 1:55 PM The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

But that line I'm not buying... I mean look, Obama all by himself got Bin Laden... and here we have a terrorist attack by extremists... he could have just as easily order cruise missiles and seal teams to show "how tough on terror" he was. Heck, just like other tin foil hatters say... he could have set the whole thing up to get himself an easy win before election. If you want to play "what if"... you have to play them all.

For what ever reason, they chose to down play it. They hitched their horse to that wagon prematurely, and it backfired. And the right wing going after them day one was most certainly politically motivated exactly because it was close to an election. So it is important for the truth to be told, and find out why 4 American's lost their life in the performance of their duty when help seemed available... but don't kid yourself... it is about political gamesmanship on both sides... it always is.

The message of the campaign was: Obama got OBL...Bush couldn't do it.... but Obama did and now AQ is on the run...nothing to see here, everyone go home. If he started firing off cruise missiles then that would mean AQ was still a threat and that wouldn't fit with the campaign narrative. They didn't choose to "down play it"....they (and we don't know who "they" includes yet) chose to lie about it in the heat of a campaign. Just because political gamesmanship is involved (on both sides) it is still possible that someone didn't like the truth and tried to give another story in its place.

Edited by Birkierunner 2013-05-10 4:08 PM

My Race Log

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

Birkierunner - 2013-05-10 4:07 PM

powerman - 2013-05-10 3:50 PM

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 1:55 PM The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

But that line I'm not buying... I mean look, Obama all by himself got Bin Laden... and here we have a terrorist attack by extremists... he could have just as easily order cruise missiles and seal teams to show "how tough on terror" he was. Heck, just like other tin foil hatters say... he could have set the whole thing up to get himself an easy win before election. If you want to play "what if"... you have to play them all.

For what ever reason, they chose to down play it. They hitched their horse to that wagon prematurely, and it backfired. And the right wing going after them day one was most certainly politically motivated exactly because it was close to an election. So it is important for the truth to be told, and find out why 4 American's lost their life in the performance of their duty when help seemed available... but don't kid yourself... it is about political gamesmanship on both sides... it always is.

The message of the campaign was: Obama got OBL...Bush couldn't do it.... but Obama did and now AQ is on the run...nothing to see here, everyone go home. If he started firing off cruise missiles then that would mean AQ was still a threat and that wouldn't fit with the campaign narrative. They didn't choose to "down play it"....they (and we don't know who "they" includes yet) chose to lie about it in the heat of a campaign. Just because political gamesmanship is involved (on both sides) it is still possible that someone didn't like the truth and tried to give another story in its place.

Here's the thing. If Patreus was not happy with the revisions, he wouldn't have to let Hillary change them. He had to have been told by the President that those need to be made.

Maybe David Axelrod since during an election, the Campaign Manager pretty much runs the white house decision tree.

But if they were Patreus' talking points to issue and he didn't like the way they were edited, and was told to toe the line, only the President could've made him do so.

Which would explain his eventual demise.

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

Birkierunner - 2013-05-10 3:07 PM

powerman - 2013-05-10 3:50 PM

jford2309 - 2013-05-10 1:55 PM The Administration just needs to come out and say this happened too close to the election. We were trying to win and we did not want a Terrorist attack on our watch so close to the election , so we classified it as something else.

But that line I'm not buying... I mean look, Obama all by himself got Bin Laden... and here we have a terrorist attack by extremists... he could have just as easily order cruise missiles and seal teams to show "how tough on terror" he was. Heck, just like other tin foil hatters say... he could have set the whole thing up to get himself an easy win before election. If you want to play "what if"... you have to play them all.

For what ever reason, they chose to down play it. They hitched their horse to that wagon prematurely, and it backfired. And the right wing going after them day one was most certainly politically motivated exactly because it was close to an election. So it is important for the truth to be told, and find out why 4 American's lost their life in the performance of their duty when help seemed available... but don't kid yourself... it is about political gamesmanship on both sides... it always is.

The message of the campaign was: Obama got OBL...Bush couldn't do it.... but Obama did and now AQ is on the run...nothing to see here, everyone go home. If he started firing off cruise missiles then that would mean AQ was still a threat and that wouldn't fit with the campaign narrative. They didn't choose to "down play it"....they (and we don't know who "they" includes yet) chose to lie about it in the heat of a campaign. Just because political gamesmanship is involved (on both sides) it is still possible that someone didn't like the truth and tried to give another story in its place.

Well of course they did, but you don't think they could have just as easily told a different story?

We have been watching those guys for months, we knew they were mounting an attack, we called for help right away, we killed them all. 4 brave Americans paid the ultimate price defending liberty and freedom.... please... that is just as easy to do.

What I DON'T like is using American lives for political reasons for what ever reason. I don't like leaving American's defenseless and leaving them to die, for what ever reason. We certainly don't have all the answers, but that should never happen, and it most certainly needs to be investigated.

My Race Log

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

powerman - 2013-05-10 4:23 PM

What I DON'T like is using American lives for political reasons for what ever reason. I don't like leaving American's defenseless and leaving them to die, for what ever reason. We certainly don't have all the answers, but that should never happen, and it most certainly needs to be investigated.

Absolutely agree with the above.

I'm lucky I got a wakeup call before I departed for Iraq during a training evolution where I completely screwed-up. When I went into country, I had everything covered. Everyone needs a wakeup call. Trouble is when you deny that it was your screw-up, you're bound to take it again.

This whole thing is exactly like the overarching plot of "Clear and Present Danger". Team left for dead, Ryan wants to do the right thing. Trouble is there was no Jack Ryan around the time that this actually happened so nobody's paying attention.

My Race Log

Champion

6056

Menomonee Falls, WI

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

I think you guys are being far too generous in only focusing on the fact that lives were lost (which obviously is the most tragic event in all this.)

Even if you take away those four lives lost, you still have Watergate left. You have a concerted effort by the highest levels of government to deceive the American public about the root causes of a major international event with significant foreign policy ramifications for the simple purpose of improving the chances of re-election.

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

scoobysdad - 2013-05-10 3:40 PM I think you guys are being far too generous in only focusing on the fact that lives were lost (which obviously is the most tragic event in all this.) Even if you take away those four lives lost, you still have Watergate left. You have a concerted effort by the highest levels of government to deceive the American public about the root causes of a major international event with significant foreign policy ramifications for the simple purpose of improving the chances of re-election.

And you are being far too generous with Romney's chance at being elected. If the truth was told, Obama would still be sitting in the WH. And the other difference is Obama didn't CAUSE the event... Nixon and his team did.

My Race Log

Master

2701

Salisbury, North Carolina

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-08 10:10 PM

tri42 - 2013-05-08 8:53 PM

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-08 8:45 PM

moondawg14 - 2013-05-08 8:12 PM

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-07 7:39 PM

The press makes its dough on building up and tearing down. Always has, always will. If the story's out there, and they find it, they will make $$$ off of it. I find it hard to believe a reporter (from any news organization) is going to come up with incriminating evidence and then not report it. Sorry.

I believe the point that Brock was trying to make (correct me if I'm wrong, Brock) is that the press is so favorable to this administration that they wouldn't even attempt to look for incriminating evidence.

If there is (depends on what the definition of "is" is. Sorry, couldn't resist) a coverup, then the comparison to Watergate is apt. Boiled down, it's the government lying to the people, for no other reason than to CYA. I don't care if it's the POTUS or DOS... it's a bad scene, man.

No, DOS is not the POTUS. If you want to use the comparison of Watergate, you best come with some proof of the POTUS' involvement. I firmly believe the mud's being slung in an effort to get some to stick. I wish the GOP good luck with that.

As for the press not looking into it, yeah right. The "press" includes Fox News, correct? Are there not a ton of right-wing outlets out there as well? btw, to think the mainstream media, or as Sarah Barracuda calls them, the "lame stream media," would sit on information or ignore information, at the expense of a firm story is in my opinion, ridiculous. It would be ratings gold, period.

You completely miss the FACT that the mainstream media does not cover this administration even CLOSE to neutral.... NOT EVEN CLOSE. Why will Benghazi be any different ? NO ONE in Libya thought this was anything but terrorism.... do you agree ? Next, how do we get from that to Rice telling everyone it was a riot/reaction to video ? It really is complete incompetence or a coverup. Pick one.

Thanks for the either/or choice.

Regarding the media, the "mainstream media" can't win in your book unless they are able to sully the POTUS. Getting into that discussion usually doesn't end well, so I'll smile and walk away.

When you've got real info. tying the POTUS to a Benghazi cover-up, get back to me.

LOL..... It ain't gonna be long buddy. How about this ? Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton + protests + video + doctored talking points to American public = LIE. But I'm being political though. Since this was politically motivated it couldn't possibly be truthful, right ?

My Race Log

Pro

9391

Omaha, NE

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

For your entertainment... The sad part is how much truth is in it.

Day in the Life of a Low-Info Voter: Benghazi Scandal!

My Race Log

Champion

6056

Menomonee Falls, WI

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

powerman - 2013-05-10 5:25 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-05-10 3:40 PM I think you guys are being far too generous in only focusing on the fact that lives were lost (which obviously is the most tragic event in all this.) Even if you take away those four lives lost, you still have Watergate left. You have a concerted effort by the highest levels of government to deceive the American public about the root causes of a major international event with significant foreign policy ramifications for the simple purpose of improving the chances of re-election.

And you are being far too generous with Romney's chance at being elected. If the truth was told, Obama would still be sitting in the WH. And the other difference is Obama didn't CAUSE the event... Nixon and his team did.

I didn't say anything about how this affected Romney's chances last year. It probably wouldn't have changed a thing. I do think it may kill Clinton's chances in 2016.

My point is that it's bad enough that this government lied to its own people so blatantly and so willfully and so repeatedly despite all evidence to the contrary.

Judging from the warnings about possible AQ attacks in Libya that were scrubbed from the talking points, I think the jury's still out on how big a role Hillary's State Department played in allowing these attacks to happen. They may not have CAUSED the attacks, but they may have made them a heck of a lot easier.

Edited by scoobysdad 2013-05-10 9:05 PM

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

scoobysdad - 2013-05-10 7:54 PM

powerman - 2013-05-10 5:25 PM

scoobysdad - 2013-05-10 3:40 PM I think you guys are being far too generous in only focusing on the fact that lives were lost (which obviously is the most tragic event in all this.) Even if you take away those four lives lost, you still have Watergate left. You have a concerted effort by the highest levels of government to deceive the American public about the root causes of a major international event with significant foreign policy ramifications for the simple purpose of improving the chances of re-election.

And you are being far too generous with Romney's chance at being elected. If the truth was told, Obama would still be sitting in the WH. And the other difference is Obama didn't CAUSE the event... Nixon and his team did.

I didn't say anything about how this affected Romney's chances last year. It probably wouldn't have changed a thing. I do think it may kill Clinton's chances in 2016. My point is that it's bad enough that this government lied to its own people so blatantly and so willfully and so repeatedly despite all evidence to the contrary. Judging from the warnings about possible AQ attacks in Libya that were scrubbed from the talking points, I think the jury's still out on how big a role Hillary's State Department played in allowing these attacks to happen. They may not have CAUSED the attacks, but they may have made them a heck of a lot easier.

Scoob... there are legitimate questions that need to be answered. And people need to be held accountable for mistakes made. And yes, the American people deserve better than what they are getting.

I also get tired of all the political B.S. Not saying from you, but there is political crap attached to this on both sides. I get tired of playing "gottcha". It's an insult to those that lost their lives in duty to their country. They deserve better than that. Answer the questions, fix the problems. Make sure it does not happen again.

My Race Log

Champion

7347

SRQ, FL

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

tuwood - 2013-05-10 9:02 PM

For your entertainment... The sad part is how much truth is in it.

Day in the Life of a Low-Info Voter: Benghazi Scandal!

Sigh... these are the people who elected Obama in the first (and second) place.

My Race Log

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

I keep hearing on various outlets that the only reason Republicans are pushing Benghazi is because they want to smear Hillary because she's "The Democratic front runner for 2016."

Is there anyone who truly believes Hillary will win the Democratic nomination?

She seems to have led in the past only to lose to people who had more gravitas. I honestly think the Democrats are most successful when they wait until late to introduce the candidate like Castro the Mayor of San Antonio.

My Race Log

Elite

4547

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

Jon Stewart summed it up well:

http://theweek.com/article/index/243931/watch-jon-stewart-rips-fox-news-gop-on-benghazi-obsession

My Training Log My Race Log

Elite

3090

Spokane, WA

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

nm

Edited by zed707 2013-05-11 8:48 PM

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-11 5:05 PM

Jon Stewart summed it up well:

http://theweek.com/article/index/243931/watch-jon-stewart-rips-fox-news-gop-on-benghazi-obsession

Perhaps we should check in with Bill Maher and go with what he thinks.

My Race Log

Champion

7821

Brooklyn, NY

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

powerman - 2013-05-11 9:49 PM

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-11 5:05 PM

Jon Stewart summed it up well:

http://theweek.com/article/index/243931/watch-jon-stewart-rips-fox-news-gop-on-benghazi-obsession

Perhaps we should check in with Bill Maher and go with what he thinks.

At least it would be funny. All this manufactured righteous outrage coming from Fox and the other rw news sources is getting exhausting.

My Race Log

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

Exhausting because it's been correct and the situation is really that nasty.

At this point, if you're paying attention and not schewed by your own political stance, you'd have to admit that FoxNews has had this story right all along.

Maureen Dowd even did a column this morning saying that.

My Race Log

Elite

6387

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-05-12 3:58 AM

powerman - 2013-05-11 9:49 PM

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-11 5:05 PM

Jon Stewart summed it up well:

http://theweek.com/article/index/243931/watch-jon-stewart-rips-fox-news-gop-on-benghazi-obsession

Perhaps we should check in with Bill Maher and go with what he thinks.

At least it would be funny. All this manufactured righteous outrage coming from Fox and the other rw news sources is getting exhausting.

Forgetting the spin like all the manufactured outrage the left likes to throw out when it is useful to their agenda.... the facts still remain. Senior officials chose to put out lies because they did not want to catch flack from the opposing party during an election.

Meaning, there was indeed flack that was legitimate to receive... at least the senior officials thought so, or they would not have said otherwise. So now that their feet are being held to the fire over that... somehow that is wrong?

PS: Stewart is funny, Maher stop being funny long ago.

My Race Log

Master

2701

Salisbury, North Carolina

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-05-12 5:58 AM

powerman - 2013-05-11 9:49 PM

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-11 5:05 PM

Jon Stewart summed it up well:

http://theweek.com/article/index/243931/watch-jon-stewart-rips-fox-news-gop-on-benghazi-obsession

Perhaps we should check in with Bill Maher and go with what he thinks.

At least it would be funny. All this manufactured righteous outrage coming from Fox and the other rw news sources is getting exhausting.

Manufactured outrage ? Because there is a big problem here Because it came from Fox ? Wow.

Truth doesn't make people exhausted.... but inability to handle it does.

My Race Log

Champion

6056

Menomonee Falls, WI

Subject: RE: Benghazi Hearings

ChineseDemocracy - 2013-05-11 6:05 PM

Jon Stewart summed it up well:

http://theweek.com/article/index/243931/watch-jon-stewart-rips-fox-news-gop-on-benghazi-obsession

It's interesting to see how the major media (and yes, I include Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert in that category, considering their ratings as "news" sources) are reacting now that it's becoming clear they both ignored and mocked a major news story. I give ABC credit for finally doing some investigation and at least raising some questions. Meanwhile, other networks and guys like Jon Stewart just further beclown themselves by continuing to ignore the obvious and try to play CYA. Their reactions will be interesting to watch as this scandal snowballs.

My Race Log

Benghazi Hearings (Page 5)

REGISTER TODAY