Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    bin Laden determined to strike in U.A. .

    I wondering if there was any actionable intellegence associated with that message.

    We know that there were bits and pieces known about what was about to happen in the hands of various government agencies and we know that the previous administation (specifically Jamie Gorelick) had built a wall so that these agencies couldn't share information. This is the problem that the Dept of Homeland Security was supposed to solve.


    Given all that, what do you think the Bush administration should have done with the knowledge that some Islamists were determined to strike inside the United States?

     

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    "The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists." Mr. Hicks himself said he spoke to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. Benghazi time the day after the attack and told her it was a planned attack, not a street protest.

    Still, the administration stuck to its story and sent out Susan Rice—the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., someone with no direct connection to the event—to go on the Sunday talk shows and insist it was all about a video.

    From the day of the attack until this week, the White House spin was too clever by half. In the weeks and months after the attack White House spokesmen said they were investigating the story, an internal review was under way. When the story blew open again, last week, they said it was too far in the past: "Benghazi happened a long time ago." Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, really said that.

    Think of that. They can't give answers when the story's fresh because it just happened, they're looking into it. Eight months later they don't have anything to say because it all happened so long ago.

    Think of how low your opinion of the American people has to be to think you can get away, forever, with that.

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/benghazi-scandal-grows_722032.html#

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    From yesterdays hearings:

    "The group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists." Mr. Hicks himself said he spoke to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. Benghazi time the day after the attack and told her it was a planned attack, not a street protest.

    Still, the administration stuck to its story and sent out Susan Rice—the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., someone with no direct connection to the event—to go on the Sunday talk shows and insist it was all about a video.

    From the day of the attack until this week, the White House spin was too clever by half. In the weeks and months after the attack White House spokesmen said they were investigating the story, an internal review was under way. When the story blew open again, last week, they said it was too far in the past: "Benghazi happened a long time ago." Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, really said that.

    Think of that. They can't give answers when the story's fresh because it just happened, they're looking into it. Eight months later they don't have anything to say because it all happened so long ago.

    Think of how low your opinion of the American people has to be to think you can get away, forever, with that.

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

    bin Laden determined to strike in U.A. .

     

    I wondering if there was any actionable intellegence associated with that message.

    We know that there were bits and pieces known about what was about to happen in the hands of various government agencies and we know that the previous administation (specifically Jamie Gorelick) had built a wall so that these agencies couldn't share information. This is the problem that the Dept of Homeland Security was supposed to solve.


    Given all that, what do you think the Bush administration should have done with the knowledge that some Islamists were determined to strike inside the United States?

     

     

     

    Remember the lengthy, exhausting Repubican investigation into the facts surrounding the Bush administration failure to prevent the 9/11?

    No?

    That's because there weren't any.

    Richard Clarke, the former counterterrorism chief under President Bush repeatedly warned the administration about al Qaeda’s determination to attack the U.S.  Clark wrote emphatic emails to the Bush administration of the al Qaeda threat throughout 2001:

    “Bin Ladin Public Profile May Presage Attack” (May 3)

    “Terrorist Groups Said Co-operating on US Hostage Plot” (May 23)

    “Bin Ladin’s Networks’ Plans Advancing” (May 26)

    “Bin Ladin Attacks May Be Imminent” (June 23)

    “Bin Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats” (June 25)

    “Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks” (June 30)

    “Planning for Bin Ladin Attacks Continues, Despite Delays” (July 2)

     

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    Death is a part of life.  Benghazi was a long time ago. 

    The fact that Obama/Clinton had no interest in saving the lives of Americans that THEY put in harms way, then lied to the American people in a campaign/adminstration-wide effort, means nothing in the face of the Jody Arias verdict or a basketball player announcing to the world what he does in the privacy of his own home.

    It's Obama...the agenda is more important than the truth..... 

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    So far there have been 9 HoR hearings and two review boards just on Benghazi alone.

    And the neo-cons aren't yet done fishing.

    During the Bush administration there were 54 attacks on US diplomatic missions around the world resulting in the deaths of 13 Americans and there were only 3 hearings, in total, by the HoR on embassy security. 




    Because the admin was open and honest about what happened each time.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    Or are you saying that they were just incompetent and didn't care how many foreign service people died in the line of duty? They just buried their heads in the sand and kept doing the same thing over and over regardless of how many lives lost.

    THAT is a disgrace.




    Im saying if, they were told there was a serious threat and they would have done nothing then that would have been negligent but, apparently that never happened.

    or

    If they would have said it wasnt a terror attack after the poeple on the ground and the CIA said it was then that would have been unacceptable but, apparently that didnt happen either.

    If either of those things happened with Benghazi the highest ranking official that knew or ordered it should be held accountible.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

     

    Were any of them DELIBERATELY covered-up and lied about to protect the lies surrounding a campaign?

     




    THAT is the difference!

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    Even the repubs admit the hearings didn't add any new, substantive info.

    The term "witch hunt" was used several times.

    Even the Libyans are wondering what the BFD is....

     

     

     

    I would call being demoted for telling the truth new news.

    I would call having caught Hillary and Obama lying about the video new news.

    I would call editing terrorism out of the talking points day one new news.

    If this was Bush, you would be typing in all caps about why isn't he being frog-marched out of the White House.

    And the Libyans:  I stopped worrying about what they think when they ran up the Al queda flag over their capital.

     

     

     





    Hence the word "substantive" to which none of this applies.

    I type nothing in all caps.  You're thinking of someone else.  My statements are lucid and thoughtful enough on their own.

    Way to pretend you ever cared even a bit about what the Libyans think, though.  Some people never had the luxury of your indifference.

     

     

     

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/10/White-House-Benghazi-off-the-record

    whitehouse meets privately with select reporters?

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

     

     

    Question him on what?

     

     

     

     

     




    Oh I don't know, maybe question him on anyof the 54 attacks and 13 dead Americans...

     

     

    As a starter;

    "Have you changed any security at our embassies after the 3rd, 10th, 20th...54th attack?"

    "If so, why are Americans still dying?"

    "What do you propose to do in order to ensure the safety of our diplomatic corps around the world?"

     

    And then you could ask the same questions the neo-cons are asking of this admin:

     

    "Why didn't you forsee the possibility of the 3rd, 10th, 20th...54th attack?"

    "Why didn't you change security after the 1st death or the 4th death or the 10th death of an American overseas?"

     

     

     

     

    So, is your poisn't that Obama gets to skate because stuff happened under Bush?  Tat quite a lax standard you have there.

    Many, many of these attacks happened in war zones, and to the best of my memory, none of them were covered up like Benghazi.  nor we're any Ambassadors killed.

     

    Obama lied, an ambassador died.

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    skeeter Obama lied ...... and an ambassador dies ..... give examples of the lies that got Stevens killed .

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    bigdog where is the coverup ..... there is no new information that came out of these hearings ....

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Buckospal. Show Buckospal's posts

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    Jay Carney tried desperately today to make a silk purse out of a sows ear! He failed miserably! The "Fast and Furious" like gun smuggling to Syria via Turkey orchestrated by the CIA and facilitated in the embassy in Libya will ooze out sooner now because Carney threw the CIA under the bus! It's going to get nasty in the next couple of weeks and since even the AP is jumping on the band wagon, even the Globe may pick the story up!

    Next up is a comical interlude as John Kerry testifys about what he knew!  

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    skeeter Obama lied ...... and an ambassador dies ..... give examples of the lies that got Stevens killed .



    As soon as you give me the lies Bush said.

     

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to tvoter's comment:

     

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/10/White-House-Benghazi-off-the-record

    whitehouse meets privately with select reporters?

     




    They aren't "reporters" as much as they are "supporters".

    This is to give them the game plan.

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

    Re: Where is the coverage of the Bengazi hearings?

    In response to bigdog2's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    bigdog where is the coverup ..... there is no new information that came out of these hearings ....

     



    Sis, you`re too smart to act dumb. 

     

    FIVE Sunday shows.........."it`s the video".  Hillary........."it`s the video". Obama........."it`s the video".  Jay Carney........."it`s the video".  All the while, they ALL KNEW 15 minutes after the attack, it was al Qaeda!!! 

    CIA talking points and memos CHANGED at the highest levels (Clinton and Obama).  C`mon sis, you`re kidding right?

     

     



    The the details in the emails and those memos changes  were brought to attention to the House and Senate Intellegence Committees in March  .... I think any member of those committees of either party would have said something then about a cover-up

     

    Sen Bob Cocker (R) Tenn the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations has stated that he has seen all emails and films concerning Benghazi Attacks has stated that he is satified with the Administration accounts of the events that led to attacks .

     Large Dawg again where is the coverup ?

     

Share