Unanswered Questions About Benghazi

As usual,Obama the Beer talker boasted that he wouldn't rest until those
guilty for the attack were brought to justice.Just sappy beer talk.
Not a single person has been brought up on charges relating to the Benghazi attack.
Obama also boasted he'd get to the bottom of the IRS targeting scandal.
And that all his agencies would fully comply and aid in whatever investigation
was underway.
We now know that is complete 100% crock.
The IRS Plus the FEC { Federal Election Commission } and the dept. of
Justice were ALL colluding with Lois lerner and even the democrat Party
{ Elijah Cummings,Chuck Schumer and particularly Maryland Senator Sheldon
Whitehouse } in order to both stop Conservatives and the Tea Party from
organizing and then frame-up on charges to be arrested.Exactly as they did to
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and Video Documentarist Dinesh D'Souza
of - 2012 Obama's America -.

 

I was referring to the story about the protest in Benghazi, spiralling out of control to the point it killed four Americans. There was no indication for this story.

Or are you saying he just heard about the protest story from other countries, and then just assumed that this attack was made by the protestors?

Which evidence are you referring to?

So Obama actually believed the story? This means he must have tuned out/ignored input from the CIA, State dept. etc. with his hands on his ears and shutting his eyes. For day after day after day after day..

He wouldn't even look in the newspaper about Benghazi or turn on the TV to find out.. Obama, with access to all channels, didn't have the information, that the general population already had access to? You're basically saying Obama wasn't really interested how those four men died.

Think of it like this:

Beating a dead horse means to go on and on about something you think is pointless, right? And people are going on and an about these benghazigate rightwingers and their pseudo-scandal beating their own dead horse. You see?

I'm actually quite interested in this topic.

It's not really beating a dead horse so much as trying to ask a dead horse a question... Like the same question that they can't give for years because the answer can only be damning to the executives.. So there's a curiosity there about why the president would lie and commit treason.

Meanwhile, the dead horse is the one that has you disgruntled that people are still talking about this.. That's your dead horse. Gotta make sure to remind them that they are beating a dead horse. Every thread.

One side wants answers and accountability from the government, the other wants to make sure those people know they have been at this for a long time. We already know that justice is taking a long time.

 

Plop Plop Fitz Fitz Oh what a relief to know who's on 2nd.
What's on 2nd.
Who is on 1st.

 

Who's on first?

I don't know.

Third base.

Abbott and Costello, one of the funniest routines of all time.

 

What gives you such absolute confidence?

There's no evidence he even did that. And why would he want to be out of the way during an attack against the United States? You'd think the guy who just helped destabalize the country, knowing of escalating violence there, might be interested.



Remember where this picture is from? Apparently he must like to "micromanage" a situation, as you might think a CiC should do.

You don't know why people want to know if their president did his job or not?

You just used these exact same attributes to excuse his lie! How else did they FAIL?

 

And your claim that there were protests all over the world prior to Benghazi is false. There was one protest in Cairo. Then the attack in Benghazi. Then Obama and Clinton repeatedly talking about some video. Then the worldwide protests. A simple google search limiting the date to before Sep 10, 2012, then another before Sep 11, and another before Sep 12, etc., will give you a better picture of how it went down. Additionally, President Megarif told us that the idea that this was a spontaneous demonstration was preposterous, and that it was a coordinated effort to destabilize his govt, with assistance from AQ-affiliated groups. He said this on the same Sunday talk shows in which Rice told us the opposite. That coordinated effort seems to have succeeded, because since Benghazi, Libya's govt appears to have little control, and Libyan oil exports have slowed to a trickle.

 

Oh like Republicans did with Iran Contra, the torture,and invading Iraq. Really lets not get into the accountablitiy of anything

 

where is the lie? post a link to this lie.

what 100k rocket launchers? How much does an RPG cost?
Not to put too fine a point to it, these guys were going around ALWAYS armed. go on Youtube and you can see lots of videos where Islamists and various gangs of thugs run around with RPGs all the time, not to mention all kinds of automatic weapons.

Well, I believe he hasn't been directly asked the question by anyone in a position of authority to ask it. Can you link to him refusing to answer the questions you posed?

I wouldnt' go around bragging about how smart you are when your intelligence is clearly on display.

Yes so intelligent in fact that you have to resort to red herrings in a lame effort to support your completely unsubstantiated innuendos of dereliction of duty about POTUS.

You do not have a shred of evidence to support such a claim and yet you and your pals regurgitate it ad nauseum.

 

So I'm guessing you havent' actually read the bi-partisan report.

And how do you know they aren't working to bring the attackers to justice?

It took nearly three years to kill Zarqawi in Iraq and there were over 100,000 US troops on the ground there conducting combat operations. It took nearly four years to get Al-Masri and Al-Baghdadi. It took over 20 years to nail binnie and in the interim he managed to direct 9/11 amongst a number of other nasty attacks.

 

I am not surprised that a lifelong conservative and libertarian running for Congress as a republican could have written a book full of his own opinions and interpretations. But I am sure it offers a few fascinating insights into the work of the Secret Service.

 

Because any thing would border on dereliction of duty, and there isn't a molecule of evidence to suggest he ever has.
(aside from the partisan unsubstantiated accusations and lame delegitimization attempts that is).

What makes you think for a moment that there is any evidence that he didn't?
Its obvious that you have no chief executive experience. I said "get out of the way" to allow his subordinates to do their jobs.
I did not say he wasn't interested or was removing himself from the equation.

He was an observer at that point having made the tough calls that saw the operation proceed. You think that is micromanaging? You might expand your comprehension by picking up a book about effective executive management techniques and styles.

No, I can't think of any legitimate reason why anyone would think that POTUS would not do his job in the complete absence of evidence to the contrary.

what lie?
Why not read the official bipartisan report.
I know for a fact it points out any number of the failures of inadequate processes/procedures and human error while leaving a big black hole in the center - the CIA post and its activities.

 

A bi-partisan report that is released before all information was known does not have any standing or creditability. Just recently email between Tripoli and the then-Deputy Director CIA showed that he was informed that there had been no protest prior to the attack. Yet, Morrell allowed the Talking Points to be edited to remove actual facts and include the outright lie of the protest. There were no evidence to support a claim of a protest in Benghazi. There was a lot of evidence of a terrorist attack. Yet, the administration chose to put out the story of a protest. Now, why is that?

That is because they were not sitting at a sidewalk café in France being interviewed by CNN. The Benghazi attackers are not hiding. Why should they? No one is out to get them.

Now, let's see if you can answer the question: "Why did the Administration get things so wrong?"

 

I don't need to affirm my intelligence to you. As I said, you know hes a liar but cant say it. Umm link? Are you actuallt serious? Rice was on 5 different networks, I could link them for you but Im a firm believer in making people do their own work. It makes the information retain in their memory better. That's some advice I will give you for free that got me the big corner office.

 

That's not entirely what was said. There were CONFLICTING reports.

Exactly who is responsible for the attack? What are their names? Where are the attackers hanging out? How do you know this?
Since when has this administration NOT gone after known terrorists?

They didn't get things so wrong. Nobody denied it wasn't a terrorist attack. In fact Obama said it was a terrorist attack the morning after.

As to getting things so wrong, that happens with some regularity when there are conflicting reports from the intell community. I recall an entire recent war started on intel that turned out to be based on the wrong side of conflicting intel reports.

 

You don't but thats exactly what you attempted to do.
LIke I said, its on display and sure looks like there's nothing to brag about.

Nice attempt at moving the goal posts.

Please provide a link to OBAMA lying about Benghazi. But of course you can't.

This is ridiculously blown out of all proportion. There were conflicting reports and that is a fact. There were several attacks around the world AT THE SAME TIME that were sparked by the video. It was not unreasonable to connect the two and suggest that it might be the case.

 

Already told you. It was on 5 networks. Rice speaking for obama stated it was caused from a youtube video. It was not it was organized terrorism. If you are too lazy to look it up I can do it for you but I need to get paid to tutor you.

 

It would seem either you havent viewed any of those interviews in toto, or you have a lousy memory.
Rice was not speaking Obama's words, she was reading off the talking points - which it is now know was vetted by the intelligence community.

As for tutoring me, I'll trade lessons with you since you seem incapable of grasping the use of qualification and nuance when listening to others while they make important statements.

 

hilarious. Rice speaks for the president not her own personal views. If she said it then thats what Owebama wanted her to say. Hillary clinton also said it. Of course if you are soooo smart you should have no problem telling us what decisions obama made that night
Why, when and who did he give orders to and waht were they. All very simple things. This is where you break down and tell me Obama doesnt have to tell us anything. Please say that so I can post a nice video for you.

 

Okay, except Rice didn't lie. If you are so smart you can tell us exactly what she lied about and exactly what she said.

I don't know what orders Obama gave, but I presume it would be something like "what do we know, who's on point? what assets do we have to respond? Get our guys outta there. Provide updates asap." He would have given his orders to his direct subordinates.

What do you think he should have done? Donning a helmet and fatigues and parachuting into the fray?

But by all means, continue this scurrilous "obama was incompetent and not doing his job", the "campaigner in chief" instead of "commander in chief" bullcrap. Especially since there isn't a single shred of evidence to support such a lame attempt at denigration.

Please post the video. I eagerly await enlightenment.

 

Uh, no one came. Can you name any US personnel that entered into Libya to assist our people as they sat through "probing attacks" all night until the mortar attacks in the morning that killed our 2 Seals (and injured who knows how many). I mean they booked a Libyan plane that wouldn't depart till dawn to go help! I believe there is a reason that no one came, and that reason is they didn't receive any orders to go help. They left those Americans in that annex all night long, and no one came. Because no American is going to enter another sovereign nation without specific approval from the POTUS. If he didn't give that order to enter Libya, not only would no one come, but no one would even depart (no planes were even in the air).

 

OHhhhh rice didn't lie except for blaming the attack on a stupid youtube video. Where have you been?
Also even more hilarious is that you actually wrote "I presume" then went on to GUESS what Obama did that night and why thus proving in your own words that you have absolutely no clue what Obama did that night either. Welcome to the other side of the argument. The only difference between us now is the fact I care about what Obama did and why, you don't.
Does a liberal mind at any point ask itself why you think both of us have no idea what Obama did and why he refuses to tell us? I find it pathetic liberals think they are so positively correct on this but wont &*(ing dare ask Obama to confirm it by speaking to the nation about it. Some transparent President eh? Id be embarrassed if I swallowed the youtube lie. Obama himself is probably laughing at how gullible half of the nation is for believing his lies.
I presume,.......that was fantastic thanks for that.

 

Right wing..."Hypocrite" is thy name.....


Dear House GOP: We'll take your Benghazi and raise you 13 ...

http://freakoutnation.com/2013/09/1...nd-raise-you-13-attacks-51-deaths-under-bush/

 

The issue wasnt the attack we all know people want to kill Americans the issue was Obama lied about the cause of the attack and to this minute flat out refuses to tell the American people what he did that night and why. Your argument was used and beat down over a year ago....repeatedly until it finally sunk in to the lefties on the forum.

 

Here's an unanswered question: Were weapons that the U.S. provided to the Libyan rebels during the Civil War/ousting of Gaddafi used in the attack on the consulate?

We have, unfortunately, a storied history of giving people weapons who turn around and use them on us at a later date.

 

Obama said we would get to the bottom of it. Well, why did our FBI take 3 weeks to get to the scene? Why is CNN finding evidence like Steven's diary (which ofc wouldn't be released until 6 months later in a heavily redacted version)? Doesn't sound like we wanted to get to the bottom of it to me...