Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    Hillary came out and said the new investigation is a waste of time, which we all know is true IF the intent is to actually discover anything new.  But the true intent is to make Obama and/or Hillary look bad - real or not.


     


    In any case, if I were Hillary, I'd say that I think it's a complete waste of time but I welcome the investigation if it finally puts the matter to bed.  I'd be pushing for it and saying that she's got nothing to hide.


     


    Of course, the true hope of the house republicans is to find something controversial related to Benghazi or not.  In fact, I'm pretty sure they aren't expecting to find anything new regarding Benghazi.


     


    It's like the investigations into Bill Clinton that started with White water and ended with a blue dress.  The Monica thing was in no way related to anything.  It's kind of like a cop following you waiting for you to make a slip up - eventually they'll find something, however trivial.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    Time to have the full no holds barred review.   If Obama and Clinton are correct in that there's nothing to see then there's nothing to see and the Dems will end up vindicated and its one less issue for Clinton to deal with if she runs.


    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    In any case, if I were Hillary, I'd say that I think it's a complete waste of time but I welcome the investigation if it finally puts the matter to bed. I'd be pushing for it and saying that she's got nothing to hide.


    That makes complete sense. That's why it's not going to happen.


     


    It's kind of like a cop following you waiting for you to make a slip up - eventually they'll find something, however trivial.


    Sounds a lot like the Plame investigation where they ended up convicting someone that had absolutely nothing to do with what they were investigating.


     


    --


    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Time to have the full no holds barred review.   If Obama and Clinton are correct in that there's nothing to see then there's nothing to see and the Dems will end up vindicated and its one less issue for Clinton to deal with if she runs.


     


    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891


    [/QUOTE]

    There has already been a review....9 of them, at enormous expense to the taxpayers.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    In response to UserName9's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
     Time to have the full no holds barred review.   If Obama and Clinton are correct in that there's nothing to see then there's nothing to see and the Dems will end up vindicated and its one less issue for Clinton to deal with if she runs. 
    There has already been a review....9 of them, at enormous expense to the taxpayers.




    Heh, heh, heh ... the wingnuts are like addicts, just one more hit from the Benghazi pipe and then they'll give it up .... they really mean it this time.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Time to have the full no holds barred review.   If Obama and Clinton are correct in that there's nothing to see then there's nothing to see and the Dems will end up vindicated and its one less issue for Clinton to deal with if she runs.


     


    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891


    [/QUOTE]


    So, you think Issa has been holding back up to now?  Why?  Courtesy?!


    Really?!


     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    Leave it to Liz to state the utterly obvious about the utterly oblivious GOP:


    "As a Senator, I take oversight seriously because it is powerfully important. But Trey Gowdy gives oversight a bad name. The House GOP is on a waste-of-time-and-resources witch hunt and fundraising sideshow, shamefully grasping for any straw to make President Obama, former Secretary Clinton, or Secretary Kerry look bad. This stunt does a disservice to those who serve our country abroad, and it distracts us from issues we should be taking up on behalf of the American people.


    With millions of people still out of work and millions more working full time yet still living below the poverty line, with students drowning in debt, with roads and bridges crumbling, is this really what the House Republicans are choosing to spend their time on? Even for guys who have so few solutions to offer that they have voted 54 times to repeal Obamacare, this is a new low...."


     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Time to have the full no holds barred review.   If Obama and Clinton are correct in that there's nothing to see then there's nothing to see and the Dems will end up vindicated and its one less issue for Clinton to deal with if she runs.


     


    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891


    [/QUOTE]

    There was nothing to see in the latest FOIA request, but somehow it resulted in the narrative that Ben Rhodes changed the CIA talking points.  There was nothing to see in General Lovell's testimony, but somehow it made headlines that a man who was in Germany at the time of the attacks thinks 'we should have done more' despite the fact that he specifically testified that we couldn't have done anything more.


    There was no stand-down order, no real-time video, no evidence Ambassador Stevens was molested or dragged through the streets, no way an air strike from Italy could have reached Benghazi in time, no evidence of gun running to Syria, and no indication that the attack was significantly pre-planned or that Al Qaeda was involved in any significant way.  What makes you think finding nothing more will be the end of it?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:






    Leave it to Liz to state the utterly obvious about the utterly oblivious GOP:






    "As a Senator, I take oversight seriously because it is powerfully important. But Trey Gowdy gives oversight a bad name. The House GOP is on a waste-of-time-and-resources witch hunt and fundraising sideshow, shamefully grasping for any straw to make President Obama, former Secretary Clinton, or Secretary Kerry look bad. This stunt does a disservice to those who serve our country abroad, and it distracts us from issues we should be taking up on behalf of the American people.



    With millions of people still out of work and millions more working full time yet still living below the poverty line, with students drowning in debt, with roads and bridges crumbling, is this really what the House Republicans are choosing to spend their time on? Even for guys who have so few solutions to offer that they have voted 54 times to repeal Obamacare, this is a new low...."


     





    She hit the nail on the head with that statement. Enough...we've had investigations into Benghazi. Unless there is credible new information just call it a day.It doesn't escape anyone that this politically motivated to drag this issue out into the mid-terms. Yes..both sides play these games..but we should not tolerate it from either side.


    Meanwhile the House does nothing but complain about the economy. Why don't they try actually doing something about something that could actually effect their constituents.They should be focusing on the economy and the VA scandal..not Hillary..who by the way has not even announced as a candidate.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    The intent is not to find new information.  What do talking points about what happened after the fact have to do with the fact?  There is no coverup because there was no wrong doing.  In Watergate, there was the breaking of the law - a break in at the Dem HQ.  In Benghazi, no law has been broken.  They are not investigating a crime.  They were originally trying to figure out what happened.


    They are looking for other documents whose contents they can spin into something sinister and then have another investigation.  They hope that if they keep looking, they can find something, however trivial.


    Much like how they cited the IRS lady with contempt because she didn't invoke the 5th in the correct way.


    This is corruption in my opinion.  It's not intended to solve anything or improve anything.  The result will be more and more lawyers going over every word in every email before it's sent.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Hillary and the new Benghazi Investigation

    wE ARE WERE WE ARE TODAY FOR ONE REASON .......... That is the "BIG O" needed to "COVER THIS UP" SO HE COULD GET REELECTED......  AMERICA CONTINUES TO GIVE THIS CORRUPT CHICAGO WAY GANG A "PASS"  !!  Wake up America, its later than you think !!!

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     

Share