Movie 13 Hours will re-open Benghazi discussion

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Yes, because the chain of command and military who investigated the entire event know nothing compared to the parents of those killed.

Really?

So you're saying what happened on the ground by those that were there,
and the slain Heroes parents who heard Hillary's video explanation have
something to gain by lying?
Common sense says the only one to gain by
lies is Hillary and past behavior is a good indication of present behavior.
She has lied many times before, and imho lied here trying to blame a video.

I guess when she left the White House broke, she took the furniture
and art work so she could have a yard sale in order to survive. LOL

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

So you're saying what happened on the ground by those that were there, and the slain Heroes parents who heard Hillary's video explanation have
something to gain by lying?

We've covered this about 100 times already.

There was no stand down order. A local officer telling his guys not to rush into an unknown situation while they rally militia backup is not a stand down order. This has been investigated to death.

When the bodies arrived back in the US the video was still being flagged by the CIA as a primary motivation.

But hey, if it's on the big screen it must be true right?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

When the bodies arrived back in the US the video was still being flagged by the CIA as a primary motivation.

?

Oh really? Then WHY IS HILARY DENYING THAT SHE BLAMED THE VIDEO?! Please answer that? Hilary isn't defending her blaming the video. She is denying blaming the video.

It's possible the parents have an agenda, maybe they don't want her to be President. But we know Hilary is a serial liar, especially when her career is at stake, so why believe her?

Spence, why did she keep flip-flopping between blaming the video, and declaring that it was a terrorist attack? If it's fog of war, why not say "we are getting conflicting intel, we are looking into it"?

You cannot win this one. It doesn't pass the common sense smell test.

And instead of making fun of my Hollywood sources (even though the movie isn't out yet), can't you just tell me one thing I said that's wrong?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

There was no stand down order. A local officer telling his guys not to rush into an unknown situation while they rally militia backup is not a stand down order. This has been investigated to death.

?

The conversation in question invoilved the CIA station chief, and the 4 security officers who were present. All 4 security officers claim that the station chief ordered them not to go to the State Dept compound. All 4. They have testified to that. The CIA station chief denies it.

Spence, in all sincerity (I'm not being sarcastic), what proof is there, that the 4 security guys are lying? For sure, we know they didn't leave the CIA annex right away, we know that for a fact. Some time had passed before they left. Was there a tape recording or something?

The local militia that we relied on there? They ignored repeated calls to help. Hopefully we learned the lesson that we cannot rely on them.