URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The Forum
  HTML https://thewiforum.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Worldwide topics
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 14901--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: trollslayer Date: August 6, 2014, 6:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1164.msg14897#msg14897
       date=1407299268]
       The investigation says otherwise.  That point is specifically
       addressed.    Not much point in going round and round, if you
       are just going to disregard their findings.
       [/quote]
       This report seems to be the Holy Grail to the liberal bunch.
       Sorry Rapids, there's just too much credible evidence out there
       showing the lengths the White House went to. To think that our
       intelligence got it that wrong (and the Libyan government got it
       spot on) is even scarier than the cover up itself.  But this is
       the narrative this report is trying to push.   Then there's the
       inconsistencies by the White House itself.  I'm not disregarding
       anything.  In fact I'm looking at all the evidence out there,
       not just one report.  For instance, the article below.
       [quote](Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that on
       April 18, 2014, it obtained 41 new Benghazi-related State
       Department documents. They include a newly declassified email
       showing then-White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser
       Ben Rhodes and other Obama administration public relations
       officials attempting to orchestrate a campaign to “reinforce”
       President Obama and to portray the Benghazi consulate terrorist
       attack as being “rooted in an Internet video, and not a failure
       of policy.”  Other documents show that State Department
       officials initially described the incident as an “attack” and a
       possible kidnap attempt.[/quote]
  HTML http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-benghazi-documents-point-white-house-misleading-talking-points/
       #Post#: 14902--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: trollslayer Date: August 6, 2014, 6:35 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=FTB41 link=topic=1164.msg14900#msg14900
       date=1407319199]
       
       Holy crap dude.  You've lost your dang mind over this.  I could
       continue, but at this point its just embarrassing.
       [/quote]
       This is exactly the posting I expected from you.  The only thing
       missing is the name calling.  You said you answered a question.
       I asked you to show me where.  Once again you deflect and
       attack. Nothing on topic.   The primary defense of the low
       information type poster.  Thank you for once again being
       predictable.
       #Post#: 14941--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: rapids_60 Date: August 8, 2014, 12:49 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You found a partisan article from last spring about some desk
       jockey's email.  Right next to an ad for the "National Obama
       Accountability Project" :D
       Is that what you call  "credible evidence"?  If there is "just
       too much" of it, why couldn't the house Republicans couldn't
       find any of it?
       Explain to me TS, why a republican-led investigation would clear
       the Administration if they had a snowballs chance in hell of
       doing otherwise?   They secretly want Hillary to win the next
       election?  Because they probably just helped hand it to her.
       #Post#: 14942--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: rapids_60 Date: August 8, 2014, 12:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=trollslayer link=topic=1164.msg14901#msg14901
       date=1407324627]
       To think that our intelligence got it that wrong[/quote]
       I'd be more surprised if they actually got it right.  They've
       duffed one big thing after another since 2001.
       #Post#: 14943--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: trollslayer Date: August 8, 2014, 7:18 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1164.msg14941#msg14941
       date=1407476985]
       You found a partisan article from last spring about some desk
       jockey's email.  Right next to an ad for the "National Obama
       Accountability Project" :D
       Is that what you call  "credible evidence"?  If there is "just
       too much" of it, why couldn't the house Republicans couldn't
       find any of it?
       Explain to me TS, why a republican-led investigation would clear
       the Administration if they had a snowballs chance in hell of
       doing otherwise?   They secretly want Hillary to win the next
       election?  Because they probably just helped hand it to her.
       [/quote]
       Rapids, if you wish to downplay the evidence that's out there
       that's fine.  Judicial Watch, while being a so called partisan
       group also was a headache to Bush Cheney and other republicans.
       If you wish to discredit them for an ad on their site, well
       that's fine.   If you wish to downplay Ben Rhodes as merely a
       "desk jockey" ( in case you didn't know it  Rhodes has been a
       foreign policy speechwriter for Obama since 2007.  Sounds kinda
       like the IRS defense.  A couple of desk jockies in Cincy caused
       the whole problem) that's fine as well.  The email exists. If
       you wish to think there was no wrongdoing in the bungling
       before, during and after the attack, that's fine.  I just find
       it funny that the very morning Rice made her Sunday morning
       appearance's (using talking points heavily edited by people who
       initially said they didn't edit them) the President of Libya was
       calling this a terrorist attack.  Senior intelligence officials
       are stating they knew this was a terrorist attack right away.
       (NBC link below should be acceptable to you.) Yet almost two
       weeks later Obama is still blaming a video.  If that makes sense
       to you, well that's fine.  If you wish to think there was no
       cover up, no wrong doing, that's fine.  Video protestors always
       bring RPG's and mortars to their protests.
       Not securing the site until weeks after make me wonder if he
       ever really did want to find out what happened.  That in itself
       is unheard of.
       Remember, OJ was innocent too!!
  HTML http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/19/15289104-intelligence-officials-we-knew-attack-in-benghazi-was-terrorist-act-from-beginning?lite<br
       />
       #Post#: 14957--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: rapids_60 Date: August 8, 2014, 4:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       All of that info was available when the investigation was done,
       yet they put very little credence in it.   I waited for the
       investigation, it's now finished and the results are what they
       are.    You don't like them and that's fine.  I see no point in
       paying for any further investigations though if the results are
       going to be ignored.
       #Post#: 14961--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! We DEMAND answers!
       By: trollslayer Date: August 8, 2014, 8:41 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1164.msg14957#msg14957
       date=1407533007]
       All of that info was available when the investigation was done,
       yet they put very little credence in it.   I waited for the
       investigation, it's now finished and the results are what they
       are.    You don't like them and that's fine.  I see no point in
       paying for any further investigations though if the results are
       going to be ignored.
       [/quote]
       Putting little credence in the information of those who know, is
       what's wrong with our country.  Politics takes a front seat to
       intelligence, dating back to our invasion of Iraq. Maybe before.
       BTW, this so called "desk jockey", (your words) Ben Rhodes, is
       going to Martha's Vineyard with the Obamas.  I would think this
       elevates him to slightly higher status than "desk jockey",
       wouldn't you?
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page