The Bush Administration did not hamper and obfuscate the 9/11 investigation, nor put out a false story about a video. Just saying'.Chizzang wrote:The House Select Committee on Benghazi has now spent more time and resources investigating those attacks than the entire 9/11 investigation...
I forget which one happened in Libya and which one happened here in the USA
Burn the witch..!!!!
You have a short memory, don't you?LeadBolt wrote: The Bush Administration did not hamper and obfuscate the 9/11 investigation
Spiriting bin Laden's family members out of the country doesn't count?LeadBolt wrote:The Bush Administration did not hamper and obfuscate the 9/11 investigation, nor put out a false story about a video. Just saying'.Chizzang wrote:The House Select Committee on Benghazi has now spent more time and resources investigating those attacks than the entire 9/11 investigation...
I forget which one happened in Libya and which one happened here in the USA
Burn the witch..!!!!
The chairmen wrote a damn book about the obstruction and failures of their commission.houndawg wrote:Spiriting bin Laden's family members out of the country doesn't count?LeadBolt wrote:
The Bush Administration did not hamper and obfuscate the 9/11 investigation, nor put out a false story about a video. Just saying'.
I think DeadBolt would like to have that one back...kalm wrote:The chairmen wrote a damn book about the obstruction and failures of their commission.houndawg wrote:
Spiriting bin Laden's family members out of the country doesn't count?
The chief counsel of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, before leaving the Republican-led committee earlier this year, said he did not believe the Pentagon could have done more to save American lives during the night of the attack, according to copies of his comments included in a Sunday letter from Democrats to Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.).
Army Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman told former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in a transcribed interview by the panel in January that “nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi” to prevent the deaths of four Americans in the immediate response to the attacks, the letter released by Democrats states.
Story Continued Below
“I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region,” Chipman said, according to the letter. “And, sir, I don’t disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed.”
He made similar comments in an interview with the Defense Department’s former chief of staff, Jeremy Bash, according to the transcript of that interview: “I would posit that from my perspective, having looked at all the materials over the last 18 months, we could not have affected the response to what occurred by 5:15 in the morning on the 12th of September in Benghazi, Libya,” Chipman said. “So let me start with that positing or that stipulation.”
Republicans have wasted so much time and money on this. Everything is political spin.CAA Flagship wrote:Committee released their report.
People died.
Clinton lied.
The problem was that most people knew after the first month or two what we know now.Ibanez wrote:Republicans have wasted so much time and money on this. Everything is political spin.CAA Flagship wrote:Committee released their report.
People died.
Clinton lied.
And, like most conk endeavors, an abysmal failure.Ibanez wrote:Republicans have wasted so much time and money on this. Everything is political spin.CAA Flagship wrote:Committee released their report.
People died.
Clinton lied.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/po ... .html?_r=0WASHINGTON — Ending one of the longest, costliest and most bitterly partisan congressional investigations in history, the House Select Committee on Benghazi issued its final report on Tuesday, finding no new evidence of culpability or wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton in the 2012 attacks in Libya that left four Americans dead.
The report, however, did not dispute that United States military forces stationed in Europe could not have reached Benghazi in time to rescue the personnel who died — a central finding of previous inquiries.
The bottom line:OL FU wrote:The problem was that most people knew after the first month or two what we know now.Ibanez wrote: Republicans have wasted so much time and money on this. Everything is political spin.
1. The messed up the security at the embassy. Whose fault? Who knows?
2. The didn't react when the embassy was attacked. Should they? Depends on which "expert" you ask.
3. They blamed the attack on a false narrative about a video for political purposes. and for whatever reason still do.
Now whether this is serious stuff or just politics, everyone can decide for themselves.
Yeah. I tend to agree.SDHornet wrote:The problem for the conks is they spent all this time and money on Benghazi when they could have been doing a better job at banging the drum on her awful email situation and her pay for play setup through the Clinton Foundation. This costly and failed Benghazi investigation just give hilldog supporters an easy out on any other more relevant scandals…Benghazi is just another example of failed hilldog “leadership”, which for the most part, no one really cares about because it happened in a shithole like Libya.
conks picking another losing battle as they have for the past 8 year. Idiots.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... n-created/Benghazi Committee: Hillary Led-State Dept Pushed Video Story, Spent Time Debating Clothing Rescue Team Would Wear During Attack, To Not Offend Libyans…
^This right here.SDHornet wrote:The problem for the conks is they spent all this time and money on Benghazi when they could have been doing a better job at banging the drum on her awful email situation and her pay for play setup through the Clinton Foundation. This costly and failed Benghazi investigation just give hilldog supporters an easy out on any other more relevant scandals…Benghazi is just another example of failed hilldog “leadership”, which for the most part, no one really cares about because it happened in a shithole like Libya.
conks picking another losing battle as they have for the past 8 year. Idiots.
Actually it points more to the incompetence and ineptitude of the establishment conks.Pwns wrote:^This right here.SDHornet wrote:The problem for the conks is they spent all this time and money on Benghazi when they could have been doing a better job at banging the drum on her awful email situation and her pay for play setup through the Clinton Foundation. This costly and failed Benghazi investigation just give hilldog supporters an easy out on any other more relevant scandals…Benghazi is just another example of failed hilldog “leadership”, which for the most part, no one really cares about because it happened in a shithole like Libya.
conks picking another losing battle as they have for the past 8 year. Idiots.
The party of Donald 'Rump, folks.
JohnStOnge wrote:I think any reasonable person would believe that the Obama administration misled the American People on Benghazi. It's very reasonable to believe that there was an election coming up and they needed to avoid being held accountable for failing to make proper decisions pertaining to the security of embassy staff.
But, at the same time, the Democrats have been generally successful in portraying this as a witch hunt. People who didn't want Hillary to begin with will be upset but most people will be in "there they go again" mode with respect to the Republicans.
Might not be fair but it is what it is.
And in this case I'm happy about it because we can NOT have a President Trump. That would be an even worse disaster.
So you are happy that the person in charge of foreign policy, specifically the handling of Benghazi, and who also played a major role in misleading the American public about the events leading up to, during, and following the Benghazi event will serve as POTUS? Jeezuz you keep going further and further down the retard hole. Its unreal how they do that. every. time. And to make it worse it turns out that the stupid conk fvcks refused her requests for more funding for security there three fvcking times. Trump is going down in a landslide...SDHornet wrote:The problem for the conks is they spent all this time and money on Benghazi when they could have been doing a better job at banging the drum on her awful email situation and her pay for play setup through the Clinton Foundation. This costly and failed Benghazi investigation just give hilldog supporters an easy out on any other more relevant scandals…Benghazi is just another example of failed hilldog “leadership”, which for the most part, no one really cares about because it happened in a shithole like Libya.
conks picking another losing battle as they have for the past 8 year. Idiots.
Not really on the e-mail situation. Here Benghazi happened in Sept 2012. Her e-mail scandal didn't blow up (big time publicly) until 2015..And some of her e-mail scandal is related to Benghazi..SDHornet wrote:The problem for the conks is they spent all this time and money on Benghazi when they could have been doing a better job at banging the drum on her awful email situation and her pay for play setup through the Clinton Foundation. This costly and failed Benghazi investigation just give hilldog supporters an easy out on any other more relevant scandals…Benghazi is just another example of failed hilldog “leadership”, which for the most part, no one really cares about because it happened in a shithole like Libya.
conks picking another losing battle as they have for the past 8 year. Idiots.
Well, I don't know if "happy" is the best word. But it is my preference as opposed to having a guy with the emotional stability and maturity of a 10 year old, who is a total demagogue, who has no clue, and who is even more dishonest than Clinton is in that very important position. Plus there's the precedent stuff and the need to reduce the risk of Republican primary voters doing what they did this time again in the future. Best case scenario for the long term future in this case is Trump losing in a landslide of historic proportions.SDHornet wrote:JohnStOnge wrote:I think any reasonable person would believe that the Obama administration misled the American People on Benghazi. It's very reasonable to believe that there was an election coming up and they needed to avoid being held accountable for failing to make proper decisions pertaining to the security of embassy staff.
But, at the same time, the Democrats have been generally successful in portraying this as a witch hunt. People who didn't want Hillary to begin with will be upset but most people will be in "there they go again" mode with respect to the Republicans.
Might not be fair but it is what it is.
And in this case I'm happy about it because we can NOT have a President Trump. That would be an even worse disaster.
I understand your point. I'm not voting for Trump. But I also refuse to vote for a liar who thinks we are to stupid to understand how much she lies!JohnStOnge wrote:Well, I don't know if "happy" is the best word. But it is my preference as opposed to having a guy with the emotional stability and maturity of a 10 year old, who is a total demagogue, who has no clue, and who is even more dishonest than Clinton is in that very important position. Plus there's the precedent stuff and the need to reduce the risk of Republican primary voters doing what they did this time again in the future. Best case scenario for the long term future in this case is Trump losing in a landslide of historic proportions.SDHornet wrote:
Sorry it's like that. But I'm not the one who put that turd forward as the Republican nominee for President.
He's hoping that if he digs far enough, he'll come out on the other side.SDHornet wrote:JohnStOnge wrote:I think any reasonable person would believe that the Obama administration misled the American People on Benghazi. It's very reasonable to believe that there was an election coming up and they needed to avoid being held accountable for failing to make proper decisions pertaining to the security of embassy staff.
But, at the same time, the Democrats have been generally successful in portraying this as a witch hunt. People who didn't want Hillary to begin with will be upset but most people will be in "there they go again" mode with respect to the Republicans.
Might not be fair but it is what it is.
And in this case I'm happy about it because we can NOT have a President Trump. That would be an even worse disaster.
That's not how the retard hole works. As Einstein suggested, it has no bottom.Ibanez wrote:He's hoping that if he digs far enough, he'll come out on the other side.SDHornet wrote:
