Bengaaaazzziiiiiiiii. !!!!!!!!

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

At the time she was likely getting information from the CIA that they were leaning toward the video motivation. don't think so


If this was the case I could certainly believe the Administration would be looking for legal options to arrest the offender. "offender"?

You keep pretending like there's zero evidence the video had a role in the attack...

it's not pretending...the only "role" was as a purposeful lie the admin could and did disseminate...happily

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

it's not pretending...the only "role" was as a purposeful lie the admin could and did disseminate...happily

So was General Petreaus lying when he initially told Congress the video was largely to blame. There were some 20 intelligence reports that pointed to the video at the time.

Did Hillary make all these up? I'm not sure even Bill Belichick could pull that off.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

So was General Petreaus lying when he initially told Congress the video was largely to blame.

"Lying" . . . or "mistaken"? Hillary contradicts that testimony in her emails to her family and to the Egyptian government.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by detbuch

"Lying" . . . or "mistaken"? Hillary contradicts that testimony in her emails to her family and to the Egyptian government.

While I think that this investigation is rediculous, I agree with you here.

What's shocking to me is the great surprise here as every politician in the world says one thing and does another.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

While I think that this investigation is rediculous, I agree with you here.

What's shocking to me is the great surprise here as every politician in the world s ays one thing and does another.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The surprise is that this is something we, the public didn't know before. It is not old news. And it is evidence, smoking gun if you will, that she knew she was lying.

If, indeed, all politicians in the world say one thing and do another, that is not quite the same as saying, portraying, one thing to the public to hide, or deflect from, what she knows truly happened. That would be called a cover-up. Which, ironically, is what she helped nail Nixon for. A cover-up.

But, apparently, what's good for the goose is not good for the gander here. Nixon was forced to resign from the presidency or be impeached. HRC gets to run for President.

[Doover]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The surprise is that this is something we, the public didn't know before. It is not old news. And it is evidence, smoking gun if you will, that she knew she was lying.

If, indeed, all politicians in the world say one thing and do another, that is not quite the same as saying, portraying, one thing to the public to hide, or deflect from, what she knows truly happened. That would be called a cover-up. Which, ironically, is what she helped nail Nixon for. A cover-up.

But, apparently, what's good for the goose is not good for the gander here. Nixon was forced to resign from the presidency or be impeached. HRC gets to run for President.

Hillary Rodham was expelled from the Nixon Investigation for lying.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

What's shocking to me is the great surprise here as every politician in the world says one thing and does another.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

we're not talking about every politician in the world...we're talking about HRC....I think the great surprise for many here...is that for this particular politician, whose lies can be chronicled for decades and whose lies have been egregious and repetitive to the degree that a healthy % in the country when polled come up with the word "liar" to describe her (I'm not sure what you've got in terms of actual evidence for your "every politician in the world" hypocrite contention)...the surprise is that she is so aggressively defended and championed as someone who should be our President...

no Eben, we're not surprise that Hillary lies(it's actually expected at this point).... nor that politicians the world over lie or are hypocrites, or that people the world over lie or are hypocrites, but lying...particularly when it involves someone in a position of power and trust and involves great consequences should carry a stigma and even penalty, for some it appears to be an asset...you can't continue to claim the government is corrupt if you don't hold politicians or appointees of politicians accountable( if you haven't noticed the money, power and influence that currently exists in Washington makes it almost impossible to hold anyone accountable *note Justice Dept re: IRS and Lois L)....you can't continue to complain about corporate welfare etc.. while supporting and voting for someone who promises to grow the size and scope of government and funnel more of the country's resources through it (which will only exacerbate the problems that you currently see)...

"The point is that when it comes to Clinton's lying and the press(and others) not caring and turning their derision on those who do, it’s déjà vu for as far as the eye can see."

"We’ve grown accustomed to public officials lying to us, but the fabric of society requires we maintain a reasonable level of trust in those we’ve elected to protect our interests. When you’ve abused that trust, you invite chaos and misery."

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

What's shocking to me is the great surprise here as every politician in the world says one thing and does another.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Eben, as I've tried to explain regarding the above, can you explain to me how someone, who acknowledges the inherent dishonesty and current lack of accountability that exists through politics and government here and elsewhere, can possibly support a candidate whose plan is to grow the size and scope of the government full of corrupt and dishonest individuals and funnel more of the country's wealth through their fingers????

[Doover]

Democrats HATE Government and then DEMAND more of it!

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

"Lying" . . . or "mistaken"? Hillary contradicts that testimony in her emails to her family and to the Egyptian government.

That depends on the context of what the current thinking was when the email was sent. I'd note the formal investigations into the general matter found that communication to Congress and the public was consistent with the state of the intelligence at that time.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd note the formal investigations into the general matter found that communication to Congress and the public was consistent with the state of the intelligence at that time.

The formal investigation did not have the emails by HRC noted here at that time.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The formal investigation did not have the emails by HRC noted here at that time.

I believe they would have had the communication with Egypt as that wasn't an email but rather notes from a call. The email doesn't suggest a heck of a lot. Early that evening al Nusra took credit for the attack (later taking this back). They always stated that militants were involved and the notes given to Clinton before her call was based on the current thinking it was a well planned attack. This, was later revised.

Then more evidence suggesting the video was a key motivator came forth and I'd assume this was part of General Petreaus's first testimony to Congress where he stated just this...was the General in on the ruse as well?

When you look at what Clinton herself said on Sept 12th

Yesterday, our U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya was attacked. Heavily armed militants assaulted the compound and set fire to our buildings. American and Libyan security personnel battled the attackers together. Four Americans were killed. ... This is an attack that should shock the conscience of people of all faiths around the world. We condemn in the strongest terms this senseless act of violence, and we send our prayers to the families, friends, and colleagues of those we’ve lost. ...There will be more time later to reflect, but today, we have work to do. There is no higher priority than protecting our men and women wherever they serve.
We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the internet. America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear—there is no justification for this, none. Violence like this is no way to honor religion or faith. And as long as there are those who would take innocent life in the name of God, the world will never know a true and lasting peace.

I don't see much inconsistency.

Interestingly, Rep. Jim Jordan who led the email attack was on Fox News this morning claiming the administration was trying to cover up a Libyan failure.

Why in the hell is someone who's supposed to be "investigating" the incident, on TV pushing conspiratorial "conclusions?"

[Doover]

Odd I don't seem to remember you bringing up when Biraq OweBlamerLiar put his entire hand on the Justice System Scales during the O'Reilly interview, saying "not a smidgen of corruption" of the IRS.
Or more recently doning the same thing during the 60 Minutes interview commenting on the FBI investigation of the KilterBeast.

[Fly Rod]

if anyone watched the documentary last nite of 13 hours at Benghazi there is and was a cover up....according to the 3 courageous security team members that were told to stand down by a CIA director and then defied the order and went to help, them 4 lives could have been saved if the first stand down order was not given.....where is the liar with her pants on fire in all of this?.....did Clinton aides meet to scrub damaging documents?....who gave the CIA officer orders to stand down?....there will always B blood on the present administrations hands

http://video.foxnews.com/v/379387491...=3793874919001

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Why in the hell is someone who's supposed to be "investigating" the incident, on TV pushing conspiratorial "conclusions?"

Check with Nebe. He has the answer. Everyone does it.