Petraeus destroys Republicans fake Benghazi Scandal

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Petraeus destroys Republicans fake Benghazi Scandal

    When the news broke about the Benghazi attack, the coverup theory was that Obama was making up a story about a video and connecting Benghazi to it for political gain.

    When Petraeus first testified on 9/14 that the administration was speaking consistently with the current assessment, it got zero attention from the right.

    When Fox News issued a report fraught with inaccuracies that there were cries to "stand down" and "cries for help", the CIA refuted that report with a detailed and specific timeline, the right decided the CIA could not be trusted.

    When Petraeus's extra-marital affair came to light days after the election, the right decided he had been blackmailed into giving the testimony on 9/14 that they had up to that point ignored.

    When it was discovered that Glen Doherty, one of the ex-Navy seals killed in Benghazi, was in Tripoli at the time the consulate was attacked, there was no reversal of the "cries for help" narrative.  No mea culpa.  No sign of integrity at any level.

    When Petraeus testified a second time that the administration had been speaking consistently with the intelligence assessments of the time, the right turned it's attention to some minutia within the talking points about whether it was "terrorists" or a specific terrorist group, or "extremists" as in the final version.  "Who edited the talking points!" they all shouted.  Coverup! Coverup!

    And now that it is being reported that the talking points were in fact edited within the intelligence community, the right insists that it is a lie to protect Obama's coverup.

    So basically, the only time the right believed anthing said by the intelligence community was the idea that their talking points had been edited.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Petraeus destroys Republicans fake Benghazi Scandal

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmel's comment:

    Hey FREAK-show,..................Drudge only posts articles written by other sources.  He doesn`t write anything himself.  He doesn`t spin anything.  How`s that lobotomy FREAK?




    Hey, ya racist fcuk, how's tricks after the black man was re-elected?

     

    Get your sheets back from the cleaners yet?

     

    So I guess his headlines just write themselves....

     

     

     

    BWAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

     

    Gawd you fvcking racist bigots are too freakin easy.

    Thanks for proving racists like you are truly fvcking ignorant. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Just for kicks,  Iwent and checked out Huffpo.  The only thing they have on Bengazi is a strange cartoon showing Ginngrich standing on Petraeus's back and screaming.  

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Petraeus destroys Republicans fake Benghazi Scandal

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jmel's comment:

    Still waiting for you to prove the "racism" charge FREAK?   I however can prove the booze-drug-shock treatment charges I have against you.   All the nice folks here have to do is read any of your posts. 




    Hey Racist, your dear leader was spotted outside a filling station in AZ, on his way to his cult compound.

     

    Tell us again why all those polls were wrong but you racists knew what the 'real' polls were.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/dorsey/mitt-romney-surfaces-at-a-gas-station-looking-very

    [/QUOTE]

    Jesus Mitt....pull yourself together.  Your starting to look like a 47%er

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Petraeus destroys Republicans fake Benghazi Scandal

    In response to jmel's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    When the news broke about the Benghazi attack, the coverup theory was that Obama was making up a story about a video and connecting Benghazi to it for political gain.

    When Petraeus first testified on 9/14 that the administration was speaking consistently with the current assessment, it got zero attention from the right.

    When Fox News issued a report fraught with inaccuracies that there were cries to "stand down" and "cries for help", the CIA refuted that report with a detailed and specific timeline, the right decided the CIA could not be trusted.

    When Petraeus's extra-marital affair came to light days after the election, the right decided he had been blackmailed into giving the testimony on 9/14 that they had up to that point ignored.

    When it was discovered that Glen Doherty, one of the ex-Navy seals killed in Benghazi, was in Tripoli at the time the consulate was attacked, there was no reversal of the "cries for help" narrative.  No mea culpa.  No sign of integrity at any level.

    When Petraeus testified a second time that the administration had been speaking consistently with the intelligence assessments of the time, the right turned it's attention to some minutia within the talking points about whether it was "terrorists" or a specific terrorist group, or "extremists" as in the final version.  "Who edited the talking points!" they all shouted.  Coverup! Coverup!

    And now that it is being reported that the talking points were in fact edited within the intelligence community, the right insists that it is a lie to protect Obama's coverup.

    So basically, the only time the right believed anthing said by the intelligence community was the idea that their talking points had been edited.

    [/QUOTE]


    Um.........Patreaus spoke on the 12th (not the 14th) and he said exactly what CIA on the ground and the  Libyan officials said..................."terrorist attack, al Qaeda, affiliates of al Qaeda".  Put it in his report, swore to it under oath, and sticks to it today.  Don`t understand why you don`t get this?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ABC News’ John R. Parkinson and Sunlen Miller report:

    The attack that killed four Americans in the Libyan consulate began as a spontaneous protest against the film “The Innocence of Muslims,” but Islamic militants who may have links to Al Qaeda used the opportunity to launch an attack, CIA Director David Petreaus told the House Intelligence Committee today according to one lawmaker who attended a closed-door briefing.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/al-qaeda-took-advantage-of-libyan-protest-cia-chief-says/

    published 9/14

     

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Petraeus destroys Republicans fake Benghazi Scandal

    jmel have a nice Thanksgiving ! I'll be back on Friday so be ready my friend !

     

Share