Hillary a liar? When? Where? How? Inform us.

Says the guy talking out of his ass about the Senate Benghazi hearings findings.

 

"UM I'm lying" Really? Are you not capable of reading? Surely you're not that lazy? I produced the evidence from the senate bi-partisan committee and the proof from the NY Times. If I'm lying it came from both those sources. And if those sources are lies, may I suggest you ASAP your (*)(*)(*) right quick like and prove those sources are wrong, or you , I, and the rest of this crowd around here are going to know who the real fabricator is on this forum. I'll be waiting for the proof I'm a liar.

 

I'm still waiting hot shot. It's on you now. Or are you all typewriter and no (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) to prove I am wrong?

 

You haven't provided jack (*)(*)(*)(*). I've read page 49, there's nothing about a video. Please provide a text, which mentions a video. I'll wait.

 

Still waiting hot shot? What's keeping you? I haven't all night. Need to do a little research? Lol! That must be tough huh?

 

You can't read. Go back to school. Anyone who reads those two links knows exactly what it says. Your cop out excuse proved you to be the fabricator. Move it on down the line. You've got some wounds to lick. What a joke.

 

Nice dodge. If I could copy and paste pdf, I'd show you for once and all. The only thing mentioned on page 49 are the event in Cairo. It never once states that a video was responsible for Benghazi.nnext page 49,nconsist of emails coming from a CIA official that morning of the 12th, the Senate Findings clearly states that there was no demonstration outside the Annex, or Consulate.

You fail.

 

It's nobody's guess what I'm talking about if you kept up with the real responses to Benghazi. I provided the actual record of the phone conversation on 9/12 between Hillary and the Egyptian PM, provided by the US State Department. Fabrication my azz. It actually took a court order to pry the record for public view, but that's another story.

There was the narrative of the video that was pandered to the American people, and the truth that was discussed both internally and with officials of foreign governments. That's the story that most Democratic sheeple refuse to hear.

Trying to communicate with you is harder than herding cats, or trying to pick up jello with chop sticks. It's exchanges like this that me fear for the intellectual health and future of our country.

 

You know, I'm going to stop at this point because I feel you have humiliated yourself enough with denial of the truth and what has been said. Some people would rather look incredibly (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) than to admit the information is straight in front of them; http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov/question.php?q_id=5 You and fizbo need to take a break. See you later.

 

Yawn, yet another link, and no actual text from the Senate Benghazi findings. You're dishonesty is clearly noted.

 

Your denial is here for all to see. I produce the proof with links, and you feed the denial. You're done here chief. Just let it go. You've humiliated yourself enough for one night. http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov/question.php?q_id=5

Talk about someone totally out of touch with reality. Boss, you take the cake.

 

Ya, you provided nothing but links, and not the actual report. Just sit already, you're embarrassing yourself.
Fact remains that the Senate Benghazi committee never once attributes the attacks on the consulate to a video. Not one time.

But, feel free to keep your lies going.

 

A simple search for "Video" gets exactly zero hits when a search is performed on the Senate Benghazi report. You're on steady ground.

Speaking of the report, it contradicts much of the testimony provided by the CIA Contractors on the ground. Ironically, these guys were the only US assets who were able to give first had knowledge of what actually transpired. As far as I can tell, they had no real reason to lie. On the other hand, there were many who politically had much to lose. All the problems the CIA Contractors had with the report makes a good read. Here is the link:

http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...acies-with-firsthand-account-from-the-ground/

 

Thanks, I'll check it out.

 

Then your Search skills suck. There were 8 hits for video in that report. Most about the surveillance -- but this too --

"...or person exercised overall command and control of the attacks or whether
extremist group leaders directed their members to participate. Some intelligence
suggests the attacks were likely put together in short order, following that day' s
violent protests in Cairo against an inflammatory video, suggesting that these and
other terrorist groups could conduct similar attacks with little advance warning.

The FBI's investigation into the individuals responsible for the Benghazi
attacks has been hampered by inadequate cooperation and a lack of capacity by
foreign governments to hold these perpetrators accountable, making the pursuit of
justice for the attacks slow and insufficient. As a result, key information gaps
remain about the potential foreknowledge and complicity of Libyan militia groups
and security forces, the level of pre-planning for the attacks, the perpetrators and
their involvement in other terrorist activities and the motivation for the attacks."

 

• 
  Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Bipartisan Report
  
  "Some intelligence suggests the attacks were likely put together in short order, following that day’s violent protests in Cairo against an inflammatory video, suggesting that these and other terrorist groups could conduct similar attacks with little advance warning.”
  
  The Majority Views of the report also noted that the early assessment of the motivation for the attacks "was made in the context of approximately 40 protests around the globe against U.S. embassies and consulates in response to an inflammatory film. There were also other violent attacks against U.S. embassies and consulates in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and other cities around the world on or after September 11.”
  Source: Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Jan. 15, 2014
• 
  House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Bipartisan Report
  
  The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence’s "report, and the nearly two years of intensive investigation it reflects, is meant to serve as the definitive House statement on the Intelligence Community’s activities before, during, and after" the Benghazi attacks. That report describes intelligence regarding the possible motivations of the attackers, including "both the anti-Islamic video and Ayman al-Zawahiri’s fatwa to avenge the death of al-Qa’ida deputy Abu Yaha al-Libi."
  
  "On September 15, the CIA assessed that the [Benghazi] attacks were inspired by the September 11 storming of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo," which had been motivated by anger over an offensive video. While the report determined that “the conclusion that the 'protests' [in Benghazi] were fully ‘rooted in a video’ was incorrect, as were the underlying, early intelligence estimates concerning the video," the report explained that the motivation for the attacks remains unclear: "In fact, the intelligence assessments continue to evolve to this day, and the investigations into the motivations of the individual attackers are still ongoing."
  Source: House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Report, Nov. 21, 2014

 

Read the polifact ratings on Trump and Hillary and you will find that Hillary is rated much more honest than Trump. Now admittedly that is a low bar but compared to Hillary Trump is a world class lier.

 

But up events is clearly yours. That is why you can never actually prove what you say. Doesn't it ever get old making silly statements, being called on them and then trying to duck having to prove your silliness.

 

Here is a great list of Trump's lies. Of course it is not totally up to date since new ones appear almost daily but it is a good place to start.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/4834/trumps-101-lies-hank-berrien

 

That is all fine and good but every real Republican knows that the CIA and the FBI are under the Clinton's influence and can't be relied on to do an honest investigation. Just so you all know I am joking although the fruit loop response to,the Email investigation would indicate there is certainly an element of truth in my comment.

 

My search skills are actually quite good, but in this instance, you're right. I found a copy of what I thought was the report:

https://www.congress.gov/113/crpt/srpt134/CRPT-113srpt134.pdf

And when I did a PDF search in the document. I didn't get a hit. I didn't do an intense manual search just to be sure, or check for sure if I even really had the official document. My motivation wasn't there.

This is all because it really didn't matter. The report is littered with "ifs, ands, and buts" no matter how you slice and dice it. It has excuses for why they really couldn't do a complete jobs and that important gaps remain.

What's important is what we actually know. Hillary told the Egyptian PM that it was a planned attack that had absolutely nothing to do with the video. She didn't say that we think it might have been planned, or that events are fluid and more research was needed before making any determinations. Her phone call to the PM was a message of absolute fact. That's the kind of stuff I take to the bank because it's real. It's not referencing a report that apparently not worth the paper it's printed on.

 

After all of the replies to your troll post, do you see that Clinton is a serial liar as evidence presented proves or is your head still stuck in the sand?

 

This below fourth grade level debate with these two got a little old as you can see. Pretending they can't read simple sentences that clearly point to the intelligence that the video may have been a factor in the attack, while not only ignoring those facts, but never producing an ounce of rebuttal themselves, left me realizing i'm dealing with denial and immaturity.

Thanks for picking up where I left off, but between your evidence and mine, they officially got their immature, denial, arses handed to them on a platter. And until they find themselves crawling out of that crib of there's to debate something substantial, like you know, evidence the senate committee didn't include those talking points in their report, they'll need to stay in that crib of there's with that load of (*)(*)(*)(*) they keep carrying around.

 

Also, pay attention to the Politifact meter they posted. Most of the false statements by the meter were generalized statements of opinion, that cannot be taken literally as fact anyway. There is a big difference in broad based comments we all make, and actually quoting an actual fact used to prove a point.

Example, I can say, I'll bet nine out of ten people will do such and such. Then you put a Politifact meter on it and prove the nine out of ten was false. But remember the key words in that statement; "I'll bet". Hardly a reason to put a truth meter to that.

- - - Updated - - -

What evidence?

 

Willful blindness and willful ignorance is not an argument. Watch the video clips of Clinton, the vaunted 13 hour testimony which the FBI discredited and any of her public comments and then try your nonsense.