- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
- Messages
- 28,822
- Reaction score
- 20,495
- Location
- Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Pb? Anyone?
You won't get an answer from pb - it doesn't fit his agenda.
Pb? Anyone?
The question I want an answer to is why on earth would you give a stand down order when American citizens are being attacked? pb, do you know the answer to that?
It was in the middle of a Presidential campaign. Nuff said.
Pb? Anyone?
I still don't buy it Jack. If I was one of those into wild conspiracies, the way I hear it told it was State who made almost all the changes. I would say somewhere there is a memo or a e-mail or something such as a State message where Hillary turned down the extra security. Hence State made most of the changes to protect her run for the presidency in 2016.
Now I am not conspiratist, but this would make better sense to me. I just don't know.
The question I want an answer to is why on earth would you give a stand down order when American citizens are being attacked? pb, do you know the answer to that?
Hillary would not have made that decision. No SecState would have. Diplomatic Security does that. Nonetheless, I think that State's spokesperson feared that Hillary would be blamed, and that's what drove the process.
Really? Because you just said the crime is:I think you're missing the point. The investigation we're discussing is the investigation into how the attack was portrayed in Washington. That will not affect the investigation of who did what in Libya.
So it sounds as if you are talking about the same thing I am, not giving those who committed the crime in Libya notification that they are under suspicion......which was what the SoS office used as a reason for not wanting the WH to say it was "terrorism" by any particular group.The murder of four Americans.
See, you ARE talking about what I am talking about.Hillary would not have made that decision. No SecState would have. Diplomatic Security does that. Nonetheless, I think that State's spokesperson feared that Hillary would be blamed, and that's what drove the process.
Really? Because you just said the crime is:
So it sounds as if you are talking about the same thing I am, not giving those who committed the crime in Libya notification that they are under suspicion......which was what the SoS office used as a reason for not wanting the WH to say it was "terrorism" by any particular group.
Um...They already knew they were under suspicion. They knew there was no demonstration. The DoS spokesperson was using "national security" to pursue a political objective. Neither the CIA nor the FBI complained that the TP's undermined the investigation.
So it sounds as if you are talking about the same thing I am, not giving those who committed the crime in Libya notification that they are under suspicion......which was what the SoS office used as a reason for not wanting the WH to say it was "terrorism" by any particular group.
Um...
November 16, 2012
After the hearings, lawmakers who questioned Petraeus said he testified that the CIA's draft talking points written in response to the assault on the diplomat post in Benghazi that killed four Americans referred to it as a terrorist attack. But Petraeus told the lawmakers that reference was removed from the final version, although he wasn't sure which federal agency deleted it.
Democrats said Petraeus made it clear the change was not done for political reasons during President Barack Obama's re-election campaign.
"The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. "He completely debunked that idea."
Petraeus: U.S. didn't reveal role of terrorists in Benghazi to avoid tipping them off - San Jose Mercury News
Now the Republicans are using the tragic death of four Americans to raise money.
Republicans raising money off Benghazi effort
On a new fundraising page, the committee asks for donations to keep up the fight, declaring it a “coverup” and using pictures of President Obama and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
The page implores supporters to “demand answers.”
I guess that means those who play party politics have to decide...do we care more about justice for 4 American adults or 20 American children?
What's wrong with that? President Obama sent me at least a dozen emails about gun control urging me to send money to support the fight. And what is wrong with demanding answers? We've already found somebody (somebodies) lied through their teeth.
Who was it that lied through their teeth?
Who was it that lied through their teeth?
I can't disagree with that assessment, but hes no different than anybody else who has held that job. Which is to protect the president.Jay Carney is at the top of the list.
I don't believe you are correct hereThe people who said a YouTube video was responsible; the people who doctored the talking points down from 90 Proof to lemonade; the people who said the only change made to the talking points was to change the word consulate to diplomatic facility; the people who denied that Al Qaeda was involved. So far.
I don't believe you are correct here
I can't disagree with that assessment, but hes no different than anybody else who has held that job. Which is to protect the president.
You won't get an answer from pb - it doesn't fit his agenda.
Moderator's Warning: |
Cease the baiting. |
Both President Obama and SOS Hillary Clinton were at Dover and spoke when the four came home. So you are wrong when you say they didn't care.
Obama, Clinton Honor Fallen Americans | RealClearPolitics
Obama, Hillary Clinton Honor Ambassador Chris Stevens, Libya Attack Victims