By Allison Brito

5 Biggest Republican Lies About Benghazi

May 9, 2013 4:23 pm Category: Memo Pad, Politics 126 Comments A+ / A-

Darrell Issa, Jason Chaffetz

In case you missed it, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held yet another hearing on Wednesday concerning the September 11, 2012 attacks on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya which resulted in the deaths of four Americans. House Republicans were hoping to find some type of damning evidence that would reveal a scandal or cover-up of information by the White House and State Department.

The terrorist attacks in Benghazi have been highly politicized by Republicans since the day after the attacks took place. Before President Obama was able to make a formal statement on the incident, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney leapt at the opportunity to indulge in a political attack. “I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi,” he said. “It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, vowed from the day he took the gavel to hold over 200 hearings throughout the year to confirm that President Obama is “one of the most corrupt presidents in modern times.” Wednesday’s hearing was just one of Issa’s attempts to try to associate the administration with a right-wing-generated conspiracy theory.

It seems as though the grand inquisition into finding a smoking gun may actually linger for a while longer. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), who up until a weekly press conference on Thursday has remained silent on the issue, called on the White House to release email correspondence related to the attacks, “Last November, the president said he was ‘happy to cooperate in any way Congress wants. This is his chance.” Boehner continued, “The State Department would not allow our committees to keep copies of this email when it was reviewed. I would call on the president to order the State Department to release this email so the American people can see it.”

Republicans are so desperate to find something, anything, that they continue to obsess over the same talking points that have all been previously set straight. Here are five biggest lies expressed by Republicans regarding the Benghazi attacks.

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Pages →  1 2 3 4 5 6

5 Biggest Republican Lies About Benghazi Reviewed by on . In case you missed it, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held yet another hearing on Wednesday concerning the September 11, 2012 attacks on In case you missed it, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held yet another hearing on Wednesday concerning the September 11, 2012 attacks on Rating:

More by Allison Brito

The Hillary Circus Is Coming To A Town Near You

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton launched a book tour on Tuesday to promote the release of her new memoir, Hard Choices, beginning at a Barnes & Noble in New York City. Hundreds of supporters flocked to the first stop in downtown Manhattan, bearing their “Hillary” t-shirts, hats, and stickers — and making the event an all-out

Read more...

Poll Roundup: Is McConnell Safe In Kentucky?

As the 2014 midterm elections draw closer, pollsters across the country will begin releasing masses of data and their predictions of who will control the House of Representatives, the Senate, and statehouses across the country. We’ll put those predictions in focus and provide a brief summary of key polls. Here’s our roundup from the week

Read more...

Controversy Hampers Rising GOP Star Wehby As Primary Approaches

Republicans in Oregon were hopeful that Salem-based pediatric neurosurgeon Monica Wehby could give Democrats a run for their money in the state’s 2014 Senate race. But the spotlight that has shone on the first-time candidate may have them rethinking whether Wehby is the formidable candidate they hoped for. On Friday, Politico reported that Wehby was accused of stalking

Read more...

Tags

Comments

  • Pingback: 5 Biggest Republican Lies About Benghazi | PROGRESSIVE VOICES

  • charleo1

    First let me say, a thorough investigation of the facts leading up to the
    incident, at Benghazi and the incidence itself, was absolutely approiate.
    But, that is not what’s happening here. The investigation had been very
    meticulous, and recommendations have been made, as to measures
    that should be taken so as to prevent similar attacks, in the future. So,
    the emphasis should be on adopting those recommendations. Not
    a demand that the same Congressional oversight committee, return to
    square one. But this time, with the goal of finding any instance where
    the President, or his Secretary of State, were negligent, or didn’t know.
    Or, should have known, or any scrap of evidence, no matter how small,
    that would even remotely suggest, they did in fact know, and did nothing.
    In other words, classic Republican witch hunting, for political gain. A
    quick look back at the Clinton Administration, reveals a prime example
    of what we are seeing here. Clinton served two terms, but had only 2,
    years, in which there were no major investigations being conducted by
    Congress. Or where a special prosecutor, was not investigating some
    matter, at the behest of Congress. The results of which, amounted to
    President Clinton lying under oath, about some oral copulation, he
    wanted to keep his wife from finding out about. And, I’m sure, if there
    was a way to inform the Country, without Hillary hearing about it. He
    wouldn’t have lied to the Country. Humorous, but not worth the over
    100 million dollars Congress had spent on investigations by the end of
    Clinton’s second term. Where he left office with one of the highest
    approval ratings ever, for a U.S. President. So, we shouldn’t have any
    illusions about this rehashing of the Benghazi tragedy. It’s just about
    the show. About, the Republican Party, being the Republican Party.

    • lana ward

      Obama killed Seal Team 6. Families had a press conference today. Obama secretly brought in a muslim cleric to curse the bodies of the slain Seal Team 6

      • BDD1951

        My God you should be in a mental institution.

        • GeoffLeo

          pretty sure Lana was trolling…….

          • http://www.facebook.com/ann.carnes Ann Carnes

            No, that is Lana at her best. She’s always on here with some insane comment.

      • Lynda Groom

        Lady, stop whatever you are doing and seek medical attention. Don’t delay, for every minute counts.

        • BDD1951

          Insane people think they are perfectly sane.

      • charleo1

        I guess the title of the article should have read, The, “Six,”
        Biggest Lies About Benghazi. They left yours out.
        Really Lana, that’s just weird.

        • lana ward

          It’s true. Obama secretly brought in a muslim cleric to curse the bodies of slain Seal Team 6 members, it’s on the news today. I have been telling you for how long that Obama is an America hating muslim. IMPEACH the basta**

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Patricia-Robertson/100000716187181 Patricia Robertson

      Well said!!!

    • montanabill

      Exactly how can you call an investigation ‘thorough’ when none of the people who were in Libya were interviewed or questioned, when Hillary Clinton was not interviewed or questioned and when none of the pertinent questions were answered?

      • ObozoMustGo

        He means they wrote the report thoroughly BEFORE talking to anyone or any witnesses about the event…. clearly! The ARB report is nothing more than the equivalent of letting a criminal do his own crime scene investigation.

        Have a nice day, Montana!

        “All government, of course, is against liberty.” – H.L. Mencken

        • charleo1

          As a side note to you. If the criminals wrote their
          own report, it would be a report submitted by the
          terrorists themselves. Contrary to what one might
          assume from all the Right wing, hyperbole. Barack
          Obama, and Hillary Clinton, did not personally attack
          the embassy. However, I’m quite sure those who did,
          are very pleased with politicians like Darrell Issa.
          Who, by keeping the incident in the news, is making
          celebrities, and raising the profile of the terrorist
          group, that did. I suppose, it’s unavoidable. Because, Issa,
          and the, GOP, hate President Obama. The terrorists hate Obama. The terrorist celebrate successful attacks on America. Republicans use the attacks as welcome props, and opportunities for political gain. And an excuse to keep from doing anything that remotely resembles their job. I
          would expect many more such attacks in the future, given
          the unexpected publicity they’ve garnered out of Benghazi.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Hey stupid…. 2 things:

            1) Benghazi and the lies that followed about a stupid video creating a spontaneous protest was 100% directly related to the White House and the State Department. If, as they say, Benghazi was just a screw-up by the State Department (aka Cankles Clinton), then why have the people that screwed up do an investigation on themselves? Of course they will not find themselves at fault and will NEVER say that they acted wrongly or illegally. Only a moron believes they’d be honest in investigating themselves.

            2) Oversight of government activities is 100% A CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF CONGRESS, you idiot. They are supposed to investigate wrongdoing on the part of the government, especially one as corrupt as Obozo and Cankles Clinton. I suppose Obozo zombies like you just prefer if the Republicans turned a blind eye to corruption, and instead just simply rubber stamped everything that socialist piece of garbage Obozo wanted, correct? Then they’d be working, right? Yeah, right. Sure, sure.

            Have a nice day, Chuckie!

            “Based on information that we — our initial information — we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video.” – Jay Carney on Sept 17th responding to questions about what caused the Benghazi attacks on the mission facility on 9/11, despite email evidence AND TESTIMONY BY MR. HICKS that shows Obozo knew it was a terrorist attack moments after it started.

          • metrognome3830

            Of course Republicans turn a blind eye to corruption. But only when it is Republican corruption. And please don’t embarrass yourself by claiming there is no Republican corruption.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Corruption is corruption, Metro. ALL of it should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. And, of course, it’s on both sides. This has been a main theme of mine for a long time and is the number one reason we need a Constitutionally limited and small government. You see, when government becomes too big and powerful and has it’s grimey fingers in almost every aspect of life, this is where corruption begins. The less intrusive and the less significant government is in the lives of people and businesses, the less likely to have corruption. Look at how Obozo was using the IRS to harrass Tea Party groups. This is no different than Nixon. You cannot turn a blind eye to corruption just because it’s your messiah’s ass on the line. He did it. And he should pay with impeachment and jail time. Just like if a Republican used the IRS to harrass leftist groups like MoveOn, I would say he should go to jail, as well. And don’t tell me for a second that the IRS was acting on their own. They fall under the direction of the Executive Branch, and oh yeah, who’s the head of that branch? Obozo the Chicago Thug. That’s who.

            Have a nice day, my friend!

            “We must once again come together and stand together for the man we can trust to keep moving this great country forward my husband, our president, President Barack Obama.” – Moochelle Obozo

      • charleo1

        Well, actually they have interviewed people who were there.
        Were you aware the FBI was sent to libya the very next day?
        They interviewed the head of CIA, Petraeus. In public, and in
        closed meetings. They’ve interviewed Mike Mullen, head of
        the Joint Chiefs Of Staff, publicly, and in closed meetings.
        They have interviewed Secretary Clinton, in Public, and in a
        closed session. This was, is, and continues to be, a Republican
        run investigation. If they haven’t gotten around to the pertinent
        questions yet. How long do you suppose they need? Six
        months? A year? Or, perhaps a special prosecutor? That would
        come before the cameras, say, oh, every other day or so.
        And comment on some, “troubling inconsistencies,” that he cannot
        get into, because it’s, “an ongoing investigation.” But, promises
        to get to the bottom of things, all in due time. Hey, you’re a bright
        guy. I mean that sincerely. Give it another day or so. A week tops.
        And see if you don’t start feeling like you’re being played, I’ll be
        very surprised. Because, if you squeeze the politics out of it, what have you got? A very sad, unfortunate event. But, not all that unique of an occurrence, if you look back over the last 20/30 years.
        Look, I’ll give you an example. It’s not an embassy, it’s a hotel in Beirut Lebanon, in 1983. Two Hezbillha terrorists detonated a truck bomb in front of the barracks, killing 241 Marines. An investigation
        of the incident found that: One, Barbed wire was not a sufficient
        barrier to truck bombs. And the personnel at the makeshift gate,
        needed to be carrying weapons that were actually loaded.
        Forgive me, but I don’t remember anyone calling for impeachment
        proceeding to begin with President Reagan. Or, an investigation lasting years. A little perspective here, would go a long way towards putting this into the proper context.

        • montanabill

          Do you remember that the FBI was not allowed to inspect the Benghazi site for 17 days because Libya’s President was ticked about Obama’s video lie?
          I watched Hillary’s performance. That is what it was, because she answered no questions. The key questions still remain:
          1. Who refused requested additional security and who reduced it?
          2. Who originated the ‘stand down’ orders?
          3. Who is responsible for the video lie?
          Until those are answered, you can bet the investigation will continue.

        • idamag

          Don’t confuse him with facts, his mind is made up.

      • idamag

        I watched the first hearings. Maybe I was having a dream, but I thought I saw Hilary testifying. Instead of being questioned, she was attacked.

      • plc97477

        I saw Hillary’s questioning.

        • montanabill

          Did you see Hillary’s answering? If so, the rest of us missed it. All we saw was her speech. Pretty good, though. It will be long remembered, unfortunately for her.

          • idamag

            I saw Hilary trying to answer what was not questioning, but attacks.

    • holyreality

      A civilized decent country would not expect their first lady to perform duties Ms Lewinsky did willingly.
      Powerful leaders are expected to have a floozy of some sort, I would tend to distrust a leader who did not.

      • idamag

        You people, who never get your minds off sex, forget there are ten commandments and the Bible says if you break one of them you haven broken them all. Start focusing on the other nine instead of the titillation of adultery. I know bearing false witness doesn’t cause as much thrill as sex.

    • mike

      If you followed the emails(12 versions)you will see the real story of coverup and lies. From the get go it was a terrorist attack not from a video or spontaneous demonstration that Rice used on the Sunday shows.

      Friday Sept. 14 Democrat Dutch Ruppersburger, ranking dem on House Intel. Committee asked for unclassified guidance for public comments. At 11:15 am that day the CIA Office of Terrorism Analysis prepared internal draft with the assertion that the US govt. knows that Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda participated in the attack. From this point the politics take over and the many changes from the original document begins. CIA never mentions mobs or videos, Stevens in his last conversation with Hicks never mentions mobs. Remember he walked the Turkish Amb. to the front gate and all was quiet. Shortly, after the attack took place.

      CIA memos said it was a terrorist attack but by the time State Department and White House got done rewriting it, it was all about a video.

      If you want to be Intellectually Honest go read the memos and find the truth.

      Why is the Congress only allowed to view the documents only and are denied having copies. To me that sounds awfully fishy.

      The testimony was riveting I hope you will take the time to watch if you didn’t.

      This is not about right or left, this is about the basic structure of this country.

      The American people were never told the whole story and it should come out, if it is egg on the face of Republicans fine, but if it shows a cover up then the American people have the right to know.

      No administration should be allowed to mislead the people in election year or not.

      • ObozoMustGo

        Mike, in case you have not figured it out by now, most of these useful idiots floating around in this sewer called ‘The Memo’ would defend and support Obozo even if he was caught on camera performing lewd acts with a minor. I’ve said this 100 times in these comment sections and have never had a single one of them disagree with me. Hmmmmmm…..

        Have a nice day!

        “4 Americans are dead. What difference, at this point, does it make how they were killed?” — Hillary “Wide Load and Cankles” Clinton lying and shilling to change the topic in front of a sham of a Congressional inquiry

        • mike

          Even the Huffington Post is talking about revisions pushed by the WH and State Department. Leaving out words like al-sharia, etc..

          Clinton might regret those words down the pike. Time will tell!!!

          If you feel all is out that is fine, and you are not skeptical of govt. that is also fine, but “just you wait ‘enry ‘iggins, just you wait”. Things could worse before it gets better.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Randy-Grein/1038154190 Randy Grein

          Whoops! Sorry bozo, I don’t follow your every move – but I will disagree vehemently with the above statement. I voted for, supported and campaigned for the President twice but unlike others would NEVER support him in under the conditions you claim.

          Of course, if your past posts are any guide you’ll ignore this and continue to insist that we are all blind to the corruption, that Obama is the antichrist, etc. What I find so funny is that this is exactly what you did and do about George Bush, arguably the worst President in history. The real problem here is that your boy was SO bad you feel the need to drag down a democrat, any democrat so that your choice doesn’t look quite as stupid as it was.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Congratulations, Randy. You’re the first person on this site to have ever displayed disagreement with my assessment of the loyalty of the leftist freaks to their messiah, Obozo, under ANY circumstance, even pedophilia. You are a lone wolf in the wilderness of lefist madness, and are the only one I have heard of that actually does have a line that they would never cross to support Obozo. Hat tip to you.

            BTW… Bush was bad. Obozo is Bush on steroids. Hopefully, he will be impeached for his treason and arms dealing to Al Qaeda in Syria. That’s the real reason for the cover up, and the reason Stevens was in Benghazi in the first place. It will come out. I’ve been saying this since days after the attack, and it is now being discussed. You will see.

            Have a nice day!

            “I have made it clear that the United States government had
            nothing to do with this video,” – Barack Hussein Obozo lying to the world in speech to UN General Assembly following the Benghazi attack

          • plc97477

            I am not sure there is an argument about it.

          • plc97477

            Great post otherwise.

      • charleo1

        See? They’ve gotten you all upset. And there is just no excuse
        for it. Other than politics. For example, the American public, upon
        finding out a faction connected to Al Qaeda attacked the embassy.

        Instead of everyday locals, offended by a video. Would assume
        What? A cover up? Americans would be shocked Al Qaeda attacked
        our embassy? Hardly. They would change their Vote for Romney?
        Not likely. And, if the CIA, knew, or was able to find out, the
        attacks were carried off by a terrorist group. How, did they come by
        this information? Through a confidential informant? Probably. Would
        the public release of this information the following day compromise
        an informant? We don’t know. Is the CIA bound to pass along
        every tid bit of info, straight to the public? If not, why do you think
        they withhold info at times? To help a President win reelection?
        Or, protect the life of a local CI. Seriously, sometimes people act
        like they’ve only just arrived in the U.S., And have been told, there
        are no gov’t secrets here, in the U.S. And, if the people are not
        informed immediately about any and all matters. Well, there has to
        be a conspiracy lurking there somewhere.

        • sigrid28

          Does anyone else find it ironic that leaders in the party that will not be dictated to by fact-checkers are outraged because they MAY not have been made privy to every iota of information pouring into the CIA, State Department, and the Office of the President immediately after and in the aftermath of a crisis–military and diplomatic–that resulted in the death of four Americans. Republicans, if you want to be insiders when something of this scale occurs, you have to win presidential elections. If you are not on the inside, you will–like others in Congress and the media–have to get information when the insiders are good and ready to give it you and not until. Seeing how the GOP steadfastly refuses to accept facts and conflates minutiae into completely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, I don’t blame the insiders for parsing words before releasing information of any kind–even the soup of the day.

          You can scream at the top of your collective lungs that (pick one)–the president! the secretary of state! the CIA! NSA!–is lying when new and better information leads to a more complete concept of what had occurred. THAT’S WHAT WE CALL INVESTIGATION.

          The current level of Republican indignation over not being insiders and over conclusions changing as investigation establishes the facts of a case does not deserve the attention the media is giving it. After all, this current squabble about email exchanged in response to the CIA’s 12-point memo does not implicate the president (his staff changed “embassy” to “outpost” I gather) or Hillary Clinton herself (a lower level representative of the state department recommended a few changes) or even the CIA in anything other than revising unfinished writing before it goes to press. Republicans are angry because a piece of writing was edited. Everyone who gets it will find this silliness below contempt.

          • charleo1

            Well sure. It is ironic that the Party, which in the past
            always prided itself on being measured, thoughtful,
            and prudent, has been taken over by Lunatics, Hot
            Heads, anti-government, Ideologues, It’s leadership,
            decided to concentrate all of the Party’s energy into two goals. The first, was denying Barack Obama a second
            term. The second, imposing austerity on the Country,
            by essentially taking stuff away from people, in a very
            difficult time. Both goals, not entirely separate.
            So, the economic failures, that should result from the
            austerity, would then, accomplish the primary goal.
            Now, with the economy improving, in spite of their best
            efforts. And the reelection of President Obama, they
            are adrift. This week, the House was in session. And,
            with nothing to obstruct, Speaker Boehner decided to
            treat the freshmen class to their chance, to vote to repeal,
            “ObamaCare.” It seems some of the new people were complaining they hadn’t had an opportunity to vote
            aganist it, like the others had. So, for the 37th time, just for the new arrivals, they voted the Affordable Healthcare Act down, one more time. So, we’re subjected to another
            rehashing of Benghazi. Plus, some predictions. Obama
            will not serve out his second term. Says Mike Huckabee.
            It’s going to be bigger than Watergate, Iran-Contra, and Monica Lewenski, all rolled into one, times 10! Says Louie Gomert. Clearly, they would rather do just about anything, than take up immigration reform. Because, they know, they have a real mess on their hands within their own ranks, on immigration. And a failure there, will bury them at the ballot
            box, in the next 10 years.

          • plc97477

            Maybe the fact that their beloved party even outs cia agents makes them more apt to dislike not knowing every detail of other peoples business.

          • http://www.facebook.com/CSHS.1960 Barry Jones

            The Red Cross and the British left Benghazi in June of 2012? Why? Too many attacks and warnings for them to get out! The US Benghazi “compound” had already been attacked twice before 9/11 with one attack leaving a hole blown in the wall that 40 terrorist could fit through! Why weren`t the Americans called home after those 2 attacks? Why were Americans even there , Why? No other democratic country had “diplomats” in Benghazi? For the low information voters ~ The American Embassy is located in Tripoli , and that is where the “protection is! The secret to solving this disaster is to find out why Hillary Clinton assigned anyone to Benghazi in the first place and left them there!

          • sigrid28

            I just read your reply today: 6-24-13. I believe there WAS a CIA presence in Benghazi as well as in Tripoli–both the annex in Benghazi and the annex in Tripoli were CIA headquarters–one reason why the Ambassador may have felt protected in Benghazi and why, I believe, over two or three dozen Americans were rescued from Benghazi on 9/11, the day of the attack. Of course, CIA presence is usually covert, which is why we were not all aware of it during the initial reporting of events. This did come out during Mr. Hicks testimony, which I heard “live” in c-span.

        • lana ward

          Obama and Hillary are murderers. Why did they want Chris Stevens dead?

    • sigrid28

      It’s also about muddying the media waters on a day the president was set to give an ACA roll-out, speaking alongside parents whose disabled children can now be assured of insurance coverage. This great, short speech was also timed for Mother’s Day, a nice touch from the leader of the political party that supports programs that benefit women and children, the very same programs, like Planned Parenthood and Head Start, that the Republican party has vowed to destroy.

      • charleo1

        Well, you are exactly right about that. I missed the President’s
        speech today. So, it wasn’t on my radar. But, very perceptive
        on your part! Hey, what was that Bush line? Fool me once,
        er, and, shame on, er, you! Fool me twice, ah, well, “You ain’t gonna
        fool me again!

        • sigrid28

          Benghazi BS did just about crowd out the president’s speech altogether. The entire speech wasn’t covered because the station turned to Jay Carney’s press conference. But I think you have a second chance to see the president’s speech, because the Benghazi exaggerations will probably fade from the news cycle by tomorrow, while President Obama’s speech will be relevant all weekend because it was tied to Mother’s Day.

        • sigrid28

          How sorry I am to be wrong about the Benghazi controversy fading from the airways. The Sunday news anchors could not be more subservient to Darrel Issa and his like if they were shackled to his height-chair and forced to feed him low-ball questions with a spoon. Even a few fast balls on “Meet the Press” just give Republican time-wasters more media time to waste–just as they are wasting time in the House and Senate, time that cannot be devoted to jobs or anything else that might aid the general public still suffering through a jobless recovery. The media are playing into this strategy of bringing the country to a standstill until Republican obstructionists are driven out of office in 2014.

          • charleo1

            Well, I guess the Cleveland kidnapping story has run
            it’s course, for the time being. And the cable news
            monster must be fed. But if this Benghazi story is to
            have the kind of legs the Right Wingers want it to.
            They are going to need to come with a lot more
            than the Obama Adm. getting the motivation for the
            attack wrong. And since they have had, how long
            now, to find anything else out? This much they had
            pre-election. And it didn’t make any difference.
            Well, except they misinformed their Presidential
            Candidate, and caused him to look like an idiot,
            claiming President Obama didn’t use the word
            terrorists. And the moderator Candy Crowley, I think
            it was, corrected the mistaken Romney. Which if I
            were him, I would have wanted to kill somebody!
            You know those Republican strategist always have
            something cooking. And this is very clearly a stall
            tactic. Because, there is no there, there!. But, the
            entire GOP, is at each other’s throats over immigration.
            Establishment types, trying to talk sense to the T-Party.
            Now led by Jim Demint, new boss, over at the the Heritage
            Foundation. He just stuck a knife in the back of the establishment’s darling, Marco Rubio., and his immigration
            reform attempt. So, maybe they’ll expend a little of that
            copious venom they usually reserve for the President, on
            themselves.

    • montanabill

      So you would call an investigation that asked no questions of those who were on site and no questions of the person they deemed to be in charge, as ‘meticulous’?

  • july860

    Is anyone else as sick of this crap as I am? GET OVER IT ALREADY!!!!! Not that I am down-playing the fact that four people died; I am just pissed that such a big deal is being made of this, while 9/11/01, and all the attacks on embassies on Bush’s watch have been totally ignored.

    • http://www.facebook.com/dominick.vila.1 Dominick Vila

      There is a lesson to be learned from the way the GOP is dissecting the Benghazi terrorist attack against our consulate in that city. It is never too late to conduct investigations on each of the terrorist attacks that took place during the Bush I and Bush II tenures, including members of Congress who had access to classified information before some of those attacks took place.
      The biggest problem for Democrats is that they are reluctant to attack and use distortion and hyperbole to demonize their foes. The only language conservatives understand and respect is the one they use against their opponents. Hang them!

      • angelsinca

        As smart as you Libs think you are, you just don’t understand the reason for these hearings. Just like you probably still believe the Clinton impeachment proceedings were about sex with the WH intern. Wrong. Just like Clinton’s predicament, it is the intentional misdirection of the truth to protect politcal posturing by the president. In layman’s terms, it is about deceit and lies to protect the image.

    • montanabill

      I’ll get over it when three simple questions are answered:
      1. You refused the requested additional security and, if fact, reduced it?
      2. Who originated the ‘stand down’ orders?
      3. Who is responsible for the two week lying to the world about a video being responsible?

      • kidlantern67

        Read the article. There were no stand down orders. None! You want to know who reduced the security? It was the GOP Congressional budget that did that. There were no two weeks of lying. It was fog of war. Everyone knew it was a terrorist attack, what wasn’t known did it have anything to do with a stupid anti-muslim video and was spontaneous or was it organized for the 9/11 anniversary by an existing terror cell like Al Qaeda? To learn that an investigation was needed. To assume it was aprotest over the video was acceptable since there were different protest that sprung up in about 5 countries at the same time.

        • montanabill

          You needed to have watched the actual hearings rather than getting your news second hand. If you had, you would have heard direct testimony about ‘stand down’ orders, that the State Department refuted the budget argument and that absolutely no one, repeat, no one, thought it was a demonstration about anything. They all knew it was an attack by an al qaeda affiliated group.

          • sigrid28

            I watched the hearing this week, but I’m not sure I saw and heard what you did. I saw it on C-Span, so the questions of all representatives were broadcast. If you watched on Fox News, this station cut away to other stories and commentary–even commercials–while Democratic representatives were asking questions. I saw examples of this on other stations once the hearing itself was over. Maybe C-Span will run the hearing in its entirety again, so you can hear all of it and not just the part Fox News wanted you to hear.

            Just in case you don’t have a chance to watch the entire hearing, I can tell you what you might have missed from seeing it through the biased filter of Fox News–with reference to the issues you raise above.

            Mr. Hicks said specifically that he had no idea at the time–no one did–which of several terrorist groups active in the region mounted the attacks, which occurred not only at the Benghazi outpost but also at the embassy in Tripoli, where Mr. Hicks was located throughout the ordeal.

            The first rescue mission to Benghazi was already there when Mr. Hicks and his security adviser requested permission to send a second mission of four. According to Mr. Hicks, DOD (not the president or Hillary Clinton) refused to send a second mission to Benghazi, because doing so would have left the embassy, under attack at the time, without enough coverage. Embassy personnel were being evacuated to its annex, miles away from the embassy, in land transport at dawn, because security and embassy personnel couldn’t handle driving these vehicles in the dark (their usual drivers were Libyan and nowhere to be found). Instead of being sent to Benghazi, the embassy’s nurse was sent to prepare a hospital in Tripoli to receive the wounded from Benghazi, which were already being sent back by the first mission there. She was more valuable on the ground than in a helicopter at the time. This, in fact, saved lives, though the first mission took place, as it happened, after the death of the ambassador himself.

            This week’s testimony was supplemented by questions from Democratic representatives, introducing into the record findings and recommendations from the ARB report. Each time it was relevant to testimony, facts from this report were mentioned and the Benghazi staff appearing at the hearing did not refute or deny the veracity of a single one.

          • montanabill

            The embassy was never under attack. It was only the consulate in Benghazi. Mr. Hicks also said that it was most reasonable to suspect Ansar al-Sharia. However, the overall primary point is that absolutely no one in Libya ever thought it was a demonstration of any kind.

            Here are a few questions I have of my own.

            We have F-16 squadrons in Aviano. An F-16 has a range of about 2000 miles. Aviano is 1044 miles from Benghazi. In fact, most of the potential hot spots in the middle east are beyond the fighting range of these F-16’s. Knowing that, why is there not a refueling squadron with them? If they are incapable of responding to trouble in the area, why do we need the base?

            Our carriers have F-18’s with a range of 1500 miles. Did we not have a carrier in the Mediterranean? If not, why not? It was a 9/11 anniversary when terrorists love to attack.

            It was testified to by two State Dept. people that funding was not an issue. If it is, we can surely cut back on some of the crackpot items our government is funding. Think Solyndra and friends.

            You mention that Democrat members of the committee asked questions. What did they ask and what were the responses? I heard speeches.

          • sigrid28

            You will have to hear the full testimonies and questions on C-Span if there is a rerun. If you bother to listen, you too can hear Gregg Hicks describe the attack on the embassy in Tripoli that caused him and his staff to have to evacuate to the annex in Tripoli.

          • old_blu

            Oh, all the questions have been answered, but because they don’t get the answers they want they’ll just keep asking them, it has come to the point of complete ridiculousness, they aren’t worried one bit what happened there, they are only trying to place blame on the President and the Secretary, if they were all truthful with themselves they don’t give two shits about those people that died. I hope they keep kicking this dead horse until everyone else (except the extremist, thank Fox News for that ) see how stupid it is.

          • montanabill

            Okay, old_blu, give me the name or names of the actual people who denied more security for Benghazi and the name(s) of the people who downgraded that security. Then give me the name of the person who originated the stand-down order (not the person who issued them), then give me the name of the actual people who made the 12 edits to the talking points.

          • old_blu

            I don’t think it’s going to matter if anyone answers your questions. You know as well as I do it’s not about the attack but about who was at the helm.

            Under Bush:

            Jan 22nd, 2002: US Consulate at Kolkata, 5 killed.
            June 14, 2002: US Consulate at Karachi, 12 killed.
            February 28, 2003 US Embassy at Islamabad: 2 killed.
            June 30, 2004 US Embassy at Tashkent, 2 killed.
            December 6, 2004 US Compound at Saudi Arabia, 9 killed.
            March 2, 2006 US Consulate at Karachi (2nd time), 2 killed.
            September 12, 2006: US Embassy at Syria, 4 killed.
            March 18, 2008 US Embassy at Yemen, 2 Killed.
            July 9, 2008 US Consulate at Istanbul, 6 killed.
            September 17th, 2008 US Embassy at Yemen, 16 killed.
            60 total
            Outraged Republicans: Zero.

          • montanabill

            Far different circumstances and you know it. Stick to the here and now or put your head back in the sand.

          • neeceoooo

            You know, I have noticed that every time someone challenges your responses and it does not fit with your agenda you fall back on the same BS (something about head and sand). Why was it acceptable for Bush but not under Obama.

          • montanabill

            Because it was a clear attempt to change the subject and avoid answering a question he couldn’t answer. Wise up.

          • old_blu

            I’ll stick to the here and now truth be told the Republicans don’t give two shits about the attack or they would be working on ways to keep it from happening again, but instead they have politicized it just for their own gain. Tell me that’s not what they are doing and then we will know who’s head is in the sand bill. Even they know they are in trouble in 2014 so this is how they try to fix it instead of trying to do what is good for America.

          • montanabill

            Hey, we tried to do what’s good for America, but you elected people who would rather con you into thinking they were the ‘most transparent’ administration in history and that terrorism was a thing of the past.

          • old_blu

            Now you’re taking what I say wrong I’m not blaming you bill, although I have been blamed for things that the Democrats have done. I know the Republicans tried that was evident by the way they tried to make him a one term president. (their words not mine)

          • idamag

            I also have a feeling they don’t give diddle-dee about the actual attack and the four people killed. It is political fuel. Meet the new Republicans.

          • idamag

            And what makes the previous attacks different? I shall tell you. They were conducted during a time when Americans came together in their outrage at the attacks. Now certain people use everything as political fodder. To hell with a united America.

          • neeceoooo

            Wow, old_blu, thanks for that!

          • idamag

            Old Blu, you are good!

          • idamag

            Ryan cut the diplomatic budget and refused additional money that was asked for.

          • montanabill

            As people from the State Dept. testified, budget was not part of the decision.

          • montanabill

            There was no attack in Tripoli. After hearing of the Benghazi attack, Hicks said he feared an attack and prepared for an evacuation. I have no idea what C-Span you were watching.

          • sigrid28

            Gregory Hicks had his diplomatic staff moved from the embassy in Tripoli to the annex. Once they had moved to the annex, he reports that the embassy in Tripoli was hit by mortars, which constitutes an attack. I heard this testimony at CNN.com. Take thirty minutes or so to listen for yourself.

          • plc97477

            Maybe you need to go back and read the article.

          • idamag

            Maybe he needs to part with some of his millions and go to Benghazi and conduct a through investigation of his own.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1119139551 Beth James Smith

          You need to listen to the entire hearing. There most certainly were stand down orders. Men were ready to board. Pln to Benghazi nd were disallowed. Greg Zhicks testified to this.

      • idamag

        You aren’t really looking for answers so be honest at least. You are looking for a reason to blame.

        • montanabill

          We have the reasons. The questions are ‘who’.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Linda-Sampson-Rotella/1543292125 Linda Sampson Rotella

        And, in addition, why did Congress (GOP) vote down funding for additional Embassy Security requests..Guess you let that one slip your mind?

        • montanabill

          Again, for the umpteenth time, where were you when State Department officials testified that money and budget were of no consequence in the decisions they made.

      • http://www.kidsbeddingstoreonline.com/ Melvin Miller

        The Ambassador himself was asked on two occasions by the military commander whether or not he needed additional security, and on both occasions refused. Do your homework.

        • montanabill

          That story is out there, from anonymous sources. The Generals testified that they didn’t get requests from the State Department.

    • neeceoooo

      I agree, get over and let’s move on!

  • http://www.facebook.com/dominick.vila.1 Dominick Vila

    The Benghazi consulate attack was one in a long list of terrorist attacks against American institutions, our interests, and our way of life. It was not unprecedented, and contrary to all the attempt being made by conspiracy theorists, ostensibly, to undermine the credibility of a political foe they fear, it was no different from all the other attacks we have suffered during the past half century. What is different, is the cynical reaction by those who ignored credible warnings before the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil. What should have been a thorough investigation on what transpired, with special focus on lessons learned to minimize the probability of reccurrences, has turned into a three-ring circus with emphasis on finding a culprit, while ignoring the root causes for the attacks we have endured.

    • montanabill

      If we don’t determine and isolate the political causes of the failures leading up to, during and after the attack, what good will knowing the ‘root causes’ do? Surely you understand that the ‘root cause’ is a philosophy that says if you don’t believe in the radical view of Islam, you must be killed. Those ‘root causes’ will remain, but we can stop trying to pretend they have been eliminated because it doesn’t fit a political agenda. Frankly, any reasonably astute person would have given weight to requests for more security and been prepared for 9/11 attacks at all of our outposts. We don’t need more politics getting in the way of common sense.

  • docb

    This is just the tip of the disgusting lies from repubs between overt racism with the heritage foundation and the tea party…to the salacious overt jabbing of the loss of lives in Libya with not one question about how to fix the problem and prevent future losses!

    Shameless trash of repub BS.

    http://www.juancole.com/2012/10/the-shameful-politicization-of-the-benghazi-consulate-attack.html

    • montanabill

      As someone who obviously doesn’t do their own research, I would suggest that if you read it in the National Memo, you immediately become suspicious and do a little more research.
      By the way, you can’t fix a problem until you know the problem.
      1. Who refused the requested additional security and, if fact, reduced it and why?
      2. Who originated the ‘stand down’ orders?
      3. Who is responsible for the two weeks of lying to the world about a video being responsible?
      Once we find these people, they need to come forward and testify.

      • docb

        Two of those questions should have been ask by the crook issa and bagger buddies but were not! The third is a bagger push out talking point! You seem to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to sell the repub lies at National memo and it does not seem to be working for you, bill!

        • montanabill

          Those are the questions they are asking and will continue to ask until answered. You can call all the names you want, but it won’t change the search for the truth. Even the national networks are joining the quest.

      • Barbara Morgan

        The stand down order was for troops that were headed to the airport not the consultant. Troops were already on their way to Benghazi and rescued 30 people, but that doesn’t matter to the Republicans and people like you, all you see is 4 dead not 30 rescured. Why didn’t the Republicans hold hearings on all the attacks and deaths and woundings that happened on Bush’s watch? Why didn’t they hold hearings to see why there was nothing done to prevent 9-11-01 when Bush and Company had been warned more than once that a terriorst attack was going to happen There 3000 lives lost and many more ruined due to the attack on US soil but not one hearing as to why nothing was done to prevent it. Another question how come the Republicans didn’t hold hearings on Bush helping Bin Loden’s family to fly out of the US on 13 September 2001 when no other civilians were being allowed to fly? I am still waiting for answers to these questions from the Republicans and have been since all this information. But no reply.

        • montanabill

          Here’s a clue. Bush is no longer President. You obviously are getting your news filtered. You should have watched the hearings. Our concern is with the current administration not some ghosts of Presidents past.

          • Barbara Morgan

            Why shouldn’t I be concerned when I see two different standards when it comes to a White President that cost the lives of many not only in his illegal and unfinanced war against Iraq but also his failure do any thing to try and stop 9-11-01 and the way a Black President is being done over the lost of 4 lives compared to the way 7000 American lives being lost, 3000 on American soil and 4000 fighting a war that should have never happened was ignored by both the Republicans and Democrats. Bush and Cheney have been convicted of war crimes in other countries and should have been charged in this Country. I had friends lost in 9-11-01 and have friends whose grandsons were killed or seriously injured in the Iraq war and I want justice for them.

          • montanabill

            Perhaps you need to revisit the run-up to the Irag war. It was an action APPROVED by Congress, including a very vocal HIllary Clinton. You need to revisit President Clinton’s failures regarding bin Laden while allowing the build-up of extremism.

            Other countries can hold whatever kangaroo courts they want.

            If you want justice for those lost, you need to be very vocal about radical muslim extremism. You need to be offended that our current President is trying to sweep that extremism under the rug and that those actions resulted in Benghazi. You need to be offended that you were lied to directly by Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who are doing their best to cover-up malfeasance.

          • plc97477

            The war was not approved by congress. They stupidly did give baby bush the power to make the decision.

          • montanabill

            “I voted for it, before I voted against it.”

          • sigrid28

            Inaccurate again. What Mitt Romney said was, “I was for it, before I was against it.”

          • plc97477

            Thank god. I wish he never had been.

          • montanabill

            We now have a much better look at Mr. Gore. Our original choice among two evils has been upheld.

          • idamag

            What is being pointed out to you, is the difference in which you see incidences according to your party affiliation.

        • montanabill

          Not quite accurate or complete. See Hick’s testimony.

          The man ultimately responsible and who could have done something before 9/11 was out of office when it happened.

          Exactly what part of 9/11 were other members of Bin Laden’s family responsible for?

          • Barbara Morgan

            One of Bin Loden’s son-in-law has been charged with terriorst acts against the US and is in jail now in the US awaiting trial. That son-in-law was probabably one of the family members that Bush 2 helped get out of the Country. They should have been kept in the Country until it was provern that none of them was invovled in 9-11–01. I know Democrats including Mrs. Clinton voted for the war and I also know that they all said they regretted voting for it after they found out about the lies about WMDs. Maybe it is alright with you that Bin Loden’s family was allowed to leave this Country like every one else couldn’t do but it has not been alright with me and millions of other people who thought then and still think to day they shouldn’t have been allowed to fly when no other people could and That they should not been allowed to leave until it was proven no one else in the family was in on the plot for 9-11-01. We will see if any other members of Bin Loden’s family members was invovled in terriorist acts against the US sooner or later and how many of them were included in the group of Bin Loden family members allowed to fly out of the Country when no one else could fly any where. AS for Kangroo courts can you prove they were convicted in so called Kangroo Courts? Bush was informed 4 different times that we were going to be attacked sometime in 2001 yet never authorized any in depth investagation into this information and never ordered up any extra securitry so what happened on 9-11-2001 is squarely on his and his adminstration shoulders..

          • montanabill

            You completely left out Bill Clinton’s role in the bin Laden story, but that’s to be expected.
            A kangaroo court is essentially where the defendant has already been deemed guilty,
            and has little if any opportunities to object or defend himself or
            herself. Any country or person that has convicted Bush or Cheney of anything has conducted a kangaroo court.

        • docb

          New info on the Hicks report and his behavior… Have a friend that did a 16 day project in Tripoli in January [IJD] for usaid..She said the embassy was a mess with no one knowing who was for what and that the rebels that remained were unwilling to give up their weapons….Too many weapons and no leadership! This fits her report.

          http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/05/10/1986251/benghazi-whistleblower-hicks/

        • old_blu

          You know you can’t answer their questions with the truth because it’s not the answers they want, so they just keep asking them trying to get a different response.

          Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

      • sigrid28

        If you will read the ARB report you will see that all of three questions have been answered. Furthermore, it is a report following an exhaustive investigation, and it offers recommendations based on these findings. Your three “who” questions have full answers in this report. There are many actors for each “who” question you ask, not just one. The bipartisan leadership found all of these people and they have testified under oath.

        • montanabill

          That is simply not true. It was neither an ‘exhaustive investigation’ nor were specific people identified.

          • idamag

            Of course we wanted a full investigation. But, you, you would be so unhappy if it proved there was no deliberate cover up. So answer honestly – it would make you sad if there wasn’t wouldn’t it?

          • montanabill

            The deliberate cover up train has already left the station. That is not the question anymore, the question is ‘who’.

      • idamag

        As I said above, take some of those millions you brag about and go there and do a thorough research. Get your questions answered.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ann.carnes Ann Carnes

    In watching Morning Joe today they had Elijah Cummings on. He stated that Mr. Hick’s testimony has changed since his sworn testimony in April. He also stated that the Republicans appear to be trying to put words in Mr. HIck’s mouth. Why it is that none of this surprises me.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Patricia-Robertson/100000716187181 Patricia Robertson

      Ialso watche morning Joe and I proud of Sen Cummings, he didn’t cut any mustard and he talk right up to Joe. Joe didn’t like that one bit, now all we need to do is to get the rest of the democrats to start talking up and taking no for answer we just might get somewhere. And he was right the republicans was trying to get Hicks to admit to something that never took place.

    • montanabill

      Where also watching the hearings when Mr. Cummings tried to make statements that had previously been debunked under direct testimony and had to be corrected by Issa?

  • latebloomingrandma

    $300 million was cut from embassy and consulate security by the austery people in Congress (Republicans) in the midst of widespread turmoil and uprisings in the Middle East. What could possibly go wrong? And they are shocked—shocked I tell you—that someone was caught off guard in the midst of chaos in a country where the dictator had been killed. Is there anything that happens according to plan in that section of the world? I believe most of the questions were asked and answered and the solutions would be to put policies in place to minimize this happening again. It’s probably not possible to completely irradicate attacks against us in the Middle East. That’s the price we pay for sticking our noses in there since the Russians were in Afghanistan. I believe that’s the time when alQaeda’s seeds were sown. What is happening now with these hearings, awaiting the smoking gun, is blatantly, to beat up Hillary. They’re just getting a head start, hoping to spook her from running. I’m sure they have much more planned for her. Since Republicans don’t know how to govern, they have to play dirty ball to get back into power.

    • montanabill

      The funding argument, a Democrat talking point which Cummings tried to use in the whistleblower hearings, has been thoroughly refuted by State Department officials, as Cummings was reminded.

      The Republicans certainly don’t have clean hands from their years of governing, but surely you must be at least bit concerned about all the lying done by this administration.

      Since you are old enough to be grandma, you must be old enough to have followed Hillary’s life from her college days to today. The Democrats will do well to look for a more reputable candidate for 2016.

      • ObozoMustGo

        Hey Montana! How are you? Long time no chat. Just an FYI… I’ve posted a long rebuttle to this article above. And, for the record, the words “DemonRAT” and “reputable canidate” cannot possible work together while being used in the same sentence. That’s like saying “common sense socialist”…. there is no such thing… just sayin :-)

        Have a nice day!

        “Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods.” – H.L. Mencken

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1362702462 Madelaine Ayers Henne

    Fox news doing all the heavy lifting?? ROFL!!

    • montanabill

      ABC has now jumped in.

  • disqus_fsqeoY3FsG

    They are not interested in the truth or learning from our mistakes and correcting them.
    Mr. Hicks stated: “And he relayed the frustration of special forces who were told to stand down in Tripoli – Hicks said he did not know who gave the order – from deploying to Benghazi.” Why wasn’t the Military at the hearings to explain why they were told to stand down and who gave the order?

    “They were furious,” Hicks told lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “I will quote Lt. Col. Gibson.
    He said, ‘This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military.’” Why wasn’t Lt. Col. Gibson at the hearings to testify as to what he know?

    Hicks said that Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, called him “upset” about his
    conversation with the GOP lawmakers. Why wasn’t Cheryl Mills at the hearings so the committee could ask her about this?

    Republican Jason Chaffetz said: It’s one of great mysteries,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, of questions as to why terror response forces were not ordered into action on Sept. 11. “Here we have this expertise, we’ve invested heavily in it, they tabletop it, they understand it, this is exactly what they train for and they were never asked to go into action.”

    If it is such a great mystery Mr. Chaffetz, why did they not have the Military personnel
    involved at the hearings so the committee could ask them and solve Mr.
    Chaffetz’s great mystery?

    If they were interested in the truth – ALL parties would have appeared yesterday to answer questions about their actions or lack there of.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Patricia-Robertson/100000716187181 Patricia Robertson

      To be honesty I don’t think these senators know beans about anything at all. They were told over and over that a team would not have made it in time, that it would be over five hours to get there and have to fuel to fly there. Hicks admitted that would plane did get there to take peopleout basicly what he was saying that it would have taken that long for someone to get there and it would be too late. Five hours here seem like a short time period, but when you flying to a place that is sure to be more dangerous would be like flying ten hours.
      The also was told that they had to get approval from the government overt here before any troops could land there. Who would have known that this place would be attack when there were other places over there that was threathen just as much danger.
      The republicans weren’t and aren’t interested in the truth but any hint that the president did something wrong is what they want. They are only making themselves look bad because of not trying to help create jobs they are busy trying to keep passing laws against women, voters rights and anything that is for the american people. Next week they will vote again on trying repeal the health care reform bill because the newcomers haven’t had a chance to voice their opionion. All the money they spend to get rid of something they could take that time and energy in improving the bill. But that it too much like right. But I an glad that more people are getting informed and started to confront the republicans in town hall meetings about their no votes. That is the only the republicans going to know that the american people mean business. The next step is at the voting polls and getting rid of all the bad apples.

      • montanabill

        You aren’t paying attention to anything but Democrat talking points. You are missing important information. The plane Hicks was talking about would not take 5 hours to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi. A C130 cruises at 336 mph. It is 416 air miles between the cities.

        I would also suggest get more information as to the impact of Obamacare.

        You are the one who is not interested in the truth!

    • plc97477

      Maybe the tealaban doesn’t want to hear what they have to say. Means they would not make the right accusations.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brent.christensen.37 Brent Christensen

    Just wondering what happened with ALL the hearings on the 13 ‘Benghazi’s’ that happened on Bush’s watch ~ how did ALL those screaming on the Right finally come to a resolution of THOSE incidents? Oh, that’s right….. ‘crickets’!
    AND ‘Benghazi happened a month after these same Congresspersons voted to ‘NOT ALLOW’ release of additional Consolute Security Funding to be released from a fund the State Department already had on hand, but which needed their ‘OK’ to release and use! When are we going to hear about!

    http://thedailybanter.com/2013/05/13-benghazis-that-occurred-on-bushs-watch-without-a-peep-from-fox-news/

  • ObozoMustGo

    Allison Brito, just another in the congo line of freaks and useful idiots that call themselves “journalists” here in the sewer that is ‘The Memo’. Case in point… you mention Boehner’s quote about calling on Obozo to give up the documents from State, but you conveniently leave out WHICH documents he is talking about. Those documents are the emails between Susan Rice and others BEFORE she went on the Sunday shows to perpetuate what we all know are 100% COMPLETE LIES about a spontaneous protest over a stupid video that sparked the uprising against the Benghazi mission facility. Those emails will show she knew she was lying. Good thing you left that part of it out, huh Allison. Like your colleagues, you give yellow journalism a good name.

    As well, it should be mentioned that the ARB is the most bogus report given. This is like asking criminals to do their own investigations, or letting children assign their own grades. The fact of the matter is that the ARB interviews DID NOT even include note takers, stenographers, or recording of any kind while witnesses were being “interviewed” which is STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE for ANY investigation. Further, they did not even bother to allow the witnesses to review what was written about their interview to insure accuracy prior to publishing the report. The fact of the matter is that the Obozo regime produced a story ahead of time, and then just made it look like they gave a damn about what witnesses said. And they didn’t even interview a single Libyan who witnessed the attack real time. What the hell kind of investigation is that? It’s not one. It’s a scam intended to fool all of you leftist morons and useful idiots that work in the media and who carry Obozo’s water for him on a daily basis.

    Cankles Clinton, unfortunately, was not even sworn in for her Congressional testimony. This is an indictment on the feckless Repubs who agreed not to swear her in LIKE EVERY OTHER PERSON asked to testify. This way, she can go through her legal wranglings to keep from being jailed for perjury, though as a lawyer (HA!) she has a professional obligation before any tribunal to be truthful. Fact is that Cankles lied to the American people and the victim’s families about a stupid video being to blame when she knew withmin moments and from conversations with Mr. Hicks during the attack that no such video or protest took place. Then she lied to Congress about it, as well, and tried to dismiss the matter by saying “what difference does it make how they were killed?” Well, to Mr. Hicks and the other whistleblowers, it makes a HUGE difference because SHE LIED!!!

    The “Stand Down” orders we now know were given TWICE. The only person authorized to tell the military to “stand down” is the POTUS. There was plenty of time and a C130 Gunship offered by Libya to help fend off the attack as it lasted nearly 9 HOURS!!! And Obozo told them to “stand down”. This piece of garbage “journalism” from useful idiot Brito ignores the fact that men were ready to go engage the enemy and save our men. Why would anyone be told to “stand down” if they were not ready to go? Why would anyone need to be told to “stand down” if their only purpose was to recieve wounded and killed from a distant city? They would not. Useful idiot Brito is not smart enough to rationalize this. She’s only good at repeating the propaganda line that Obozo tells her to repeat. Where was Obozo following his 5:00 meeting with Panetta? Was he bowling? Was he getting drunk? Was he outside smoking? Was he calling newly outed gay athletes to congratulate them for their “courage” while he was being a coward?

    Here is what we know and some questions that a real journalist should be asking of Obozo:

    1) The attack in Benghazi was a coordinated terrorist attack with high-grade military weapons.

    2) The attack lasted nearly 9 hours.

    3) An American Abassador, the representative of OUR country ON American soil, was murdered along with a CIA tech guy.

    4) Within minutes of the attack, Stevens called the #2 guy in country, Mr. Hicks, to tell him that he was under attack.

    5) Mr. Hicks called together and immediately organized a team of special ops with the offer of assistance from the Libyan President who provided a C130 transport.

    6) Someon told Mr. Hicks’ group to “stand down” against the wishes of the men prepared to go defend the facility and people. WHO? We know who.

    6.a) Two former Navy SEALs now working for the CIA refused to allow our people to die and went to the facility to rescue personnel and then returned to defend it while they awaited reinforcements. They battled for around 5 to 7 hours before being killed.

    7) Within hours, Mr. Hicks had conversations with fat ass Cankles Clinton regarding Mr. Stevens death. In that conversation, Mr. Hicks discussed the terror attack.

    8) Cankles KNEW it was a terrorist attack. Everyone in the DoD and State departments KNEW it was a coordinated attack and there was no such thing as a protest.

    9) Cankles, Obozo, Carney, Rice, and the rest of the sheet show of incompetent clowns proceeded to blame the incident on a “spontaneous protest that went wrong because of a hateful video” despite the fact that they knew the truth while it was going on.

    10) Cankles #1 sidekick EMAILED Mr. Hicks and others weeks later telling them to NOT cooperate with the Congressional delegation running an investigation into the matter.

    11) NONE… NOT A SINGLE WITNESS TO THE ATTACK… has been interviewed and questioned about what happened. In fact, all of them that were injured were brought to Bethesda and were admitted under false names.

    12) No one has a single clue where the hell Obozo was during an attack on an American Mission that lasted 9 hours and resulted in the death of 4 Americans including our Ambassador.

    Here are the questions that MUST be answered:

    1) What was Stevens doing there in the most dangerous terrorist city on earth on the anniversary of 9/11 without security, and why was he meeting with the Turkish Ambassador there JUST BEFORE the attacks.

    2) Why would the Obozo regime continue to blame this incident on a stupid video that had NOTHING to do with the incident when they knew it was not true right from the initial moments of the attack? WHY WOULD THEY LIE?

    3) The Libyan President on Sept. 12th gave a public announcement about the terror attack being linked to Al Qaeda terror groups, and took the Obozo regime lies as an insult like any normal person would. He delayed FBI access to the site for 18 days because of that insult while the crime scene was left open to the public. Why would the Obozo regime deliberately thumb their nose at the Libyan President whom they helped install?

    4) Why was military assistance denied and not offered from the first moments of the attack? Don’t believe that lie that it would take too long to get there. You can buy a ticket on British Airways that will fly you from London to Tripoly in 3 hours. Dont be such a sucker.

    5) Why are all the witnesses to the attack still NOT being questioned and why are their names being withheld from Congress for giving testimony.

    6) Why would the Obozo regime obstruct the investigation by telling high level officials to not meet with Congressional investigators without regime appointed lawyers to keep them from answering anything?

    7) Where there are lies and there is obstruction coming from the highest ranks in government, why isn’t the media interested in this? This would be like Woodward DEFENDING Nixon during Watergate.

    Have a nice day!

    “I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video,” – Barack Hussein Obozo in speech to UN General Assembly following the Benghazi attack

    “There is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy.” – Barack Hussein Obozo in speech to UN General Assembly following the Benghazi attack

  • angelsinca

    from page 4: “Fox News is simply angry that the other networks weren’t politicizing the attack and condemning President Obama as they were. ”
    Sounds like a speculative lie.

  • Pingback: Bolgernow.com » Blog Archive » Ignorance Not Bliss, Benghazi Butthurt

  • http://www.facebook.com/eelo.fudpucker Eelo Fudpucker

    Obama should be impeached for dereliction of duty.
    He was informed of the attack but instead of leading he disappeared until the next morning when he took off for a campaign stop in Vegas.
    Can you imagine being an American worker there and your consulate comes under attack so you thinking the administration has your back and is sending forces to protect you and you run into the military attaché who informs you that not only is the administration not going to send any help they have ordered the only people defending you to lay down their arms leaving you at the mercy of the terrorists.
    When did the administration decide those Americans there were expendable?

  • http://www.facebook.com/eelo.fudpucker Eelo Fudpucker

    In the coming weeks whistle blowers will confirm that Hillary gave the rebels that were trying to topple Khadaffi stinger missiles without congressional approval.(Shades of Iran/Contra)
    Ambassador Stevens was tasked by Clinton to try and buy them back from the rebels so it wouldn’t be known.
    The terrorists that he was negotiating with are the same ones that murdered him

scroll to top