Page 2 of 37 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 361

Thread: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

  1. #11
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    we should probably put it in context.

    Terrorist attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    there have been a lot of embassy attacks. i don't recall another one fueling a conspiracy theory, but i could be wrong. i'd like to know why the others haven't been given similar scrutiny.


    edit to add : fox and msnbc have zero journalistic credibility. they surrendered their integrity as part of their business models.
    Here's the Fox News story:

    At least four career officials at the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have retained lawyers or are in the process of doing so, as they prepare to provide sensitive information about the Benghazi attacks to Congress, Fox News has learned.

    Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official and Republican counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, is now representing one of the State Department employees. She told Fox News her client and some of the others, who consider themselves whistle-blowers, have been threatened by unnamed Obama administration officials.

    “I'm not talking generally, I'm talking specifically about Benghazi – that people have been threatened,” Toensing said in an interview Monday. “And not just the State Department. People have been threatened at the CIA.”
    Toensing declined to name her client. She also refused to say whether the individual was on the ground in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, when terrorist attacks on two U.S. installations in the Libyan city killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.

    However, Toensing disclosed that her client has pertinent information on all three time periods investigators consider relevant to the attacks: the months that led up to the attack, when pleas by the ambassador and his staff for enhanced security in Benghazi were mostly rejected by senior officers at the State Department; the eight-hour time frame in which the attacks unfolded, and the eight-day period that followed the attacks, when Obama administration officials incorrectly described them as the result of a spontaneous protest over a video.
    “It's frightening, and they're doing some very despicable threats to people,” she said. “Not ‘we're going to kill you,’ or not ‘we're going to prosecute you tomorrow,’ but they're taking career people and making them well aware that their careers will be over [if they cooperate with congressional investigators].”

    Federal law provides explicit protections for federal government employees who are identified as “whistle-blowers.” The laws aim to ensure these individuals will not face repercussions from their superiors, or from other quarters, in retaliation for their provision of information about corruption or other forms of wrongdoing to Congress, or to an agency’s inspector-general.

    Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican from California who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday to complain that the department has not provided a process by which attorneys like Toensing can receive the security clearances necessary for them to review classified documents and other key evidence.

    “It is unavoidable that Department employees identifying themselves as witnesses in the Committee’s investigation will apply for a security clearance to allow their personal attorneys to handle sensitive or classified material,” Issa wrote. “The Department’s unwillingness to make the process for clearing an attorney more transparent appears to be an effort to interfere with the rights of employees to furnish information to Congress.”
    The Obama administration maintains that it has been more than forthcoming on Benghazi and that it is time for the State Department to move on. At a recent hearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Kerry noted that administration officials have testified at eight hearings on Benghazi, provided 20 briefings on the subject and turned over to Congress some 25,000 documents related to the killings.

    “So if you have additional questions or you think there's some document that somehow you need, I'll work with you to try to get it and see if we can provide that to you,” Kerry told committee Chairman Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., on April 17. But Kerry added: “I do not want to spend the next year coming up here talking about Benghazi.”
    Asked about Issa’s complaints about attorneys not receiving security clearances, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell on Monday indicated that – far from threatening anyone – the administration hasn’t been presented with any such cases. “I'm not aware of private counsel seeking security clearances or -- or anything to that regard,” Ventrell told reporters. “I'm not aware of whistle-blowers one way or another.”

    Ventrell cited the work of the FBI – whose probe of the attacks continues almost eight months later and without any known instances of perpetrators being brought to justice – and the Accountability Review Board. The board was an internal State Department review panel led by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen. An unclassified version of the board’s final report that was released to the public contained no conclusions that suggested administration officials had willfully endangered their colleagues in Benghazi or had misled the public or Congress.

    “And that should be enough,” Ventrell said at Monday’s press briefing. “Congress has its own prerogatives, but we've had a very thorough, independent investigation, which we completed and [which was] transparent and shared. And there are many folks who are, in a political manner, trying to sort of use this for their own political means, or ends.”

    Read more: Obama administration officials threatened whistle-blowers on Benghazi, lawyer says | Fox News
    What in this story is not credible? I'll wait.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    07-25-13 @ 09:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    3,328

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    It sorta makes sense that the current administration might go after any 'whistleblowers'. They have somewhat become famous for going after such people, more so than just about every other administration. Must have something to do with transparency.


    But what exactly are they blowing the whistle on ?.............

  3. #13
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,105

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Here's the Fox News story:



    What in this story is not credible? I'll wait.
    because fox has chosen to be a confirmation bias-delivering entertainment network, not a legitimate news source. they cherry pick stories and data to support a preexisting conclusion rather than to choose news coverage in any unbiased way. some at fox have decided that this tragedy could be used as a weapon against Obama, and it's as disgusting as the other side using dead kids to push legislation.

    i don't watch fox, so you'll have to let me know if they covered earlier embassy attacks with similar vigilance. don't waste too much of your evening researching it, though, because i already can guess the answer with 95+ percent certainty.

  4. #14
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    because fox has chosen to be a confirmation bias-delivering entertainment network, not a legitimate news source. they cherry pick stories and data to support a preexisting conclusion rather than to choose news coverage in any unbiased way. some at fox have decided that this tragedy could be used as a weapon against Obama, and it's as disgusting as the other side using dead kids to push legislation.

    i don't watch fox, so you'll have to let me know if they covered earlier embassy attacks with similar vigilance. don't waste too much of your evening researching it, though, because i already can guess the answer with 95+ percent certainty.
    How about actually answering my post? What in that article is not credible?? You made the statement that Fox is not a credible news source. If you don't watch Fox News, why do you assume their news isn't credible? Or. Are you one of those poor souls who can't tell the difference between their news broadcasts and their infotainment segments?
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #15
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,149

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    Ive been giving the Executive branch the benefit of the doubt on Benghazi,
    to your credit, this appears to be true. one needs only read the winger posts in that dud, Benghazi Bombshell Drops On Obama, Hillary thread to know most have not been so circumspect

    ... but the evidence is mounting, and Im not sure where this is going to end up.
    let's see if that admitted lack of information prevents you from offering any speculation

    Here we have the latest event in which intelligence officials with intimate knowledge of the attack have apparently never talked to congress.
    how do WE know this?

    We know documents were withheld under executive privilege.
    WE do not know this. but show us where Executive Privilege was improperly used to conceal what should be made public

    We know there are survivors of the attack who have been hidden away.
    no WE do not
    show us who has been hidden away and how that was able to happen without kidnapping charges being filed

    And when questioned by the media, the White House claims it just politics, instead of being cooperative.
    it IS politics. but prove that i am wrong and identify the questions asked which the white house has refused to answer

    At a certain point you have to start asking who exactly the President works for. Is it us?
    most of US know the answer. he IS working for us. while the congress is working for the highest bidder

    This latest change is developing in just the last couple hours. Except it to be a hot topic in the next week.
    good. then you should have no problem finding the answers to the questions i have challenged you to answer. would be disappointed to see you run from such a challenge
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  6. #16
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,105

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    How about actually answering my post? What in that article is not credible?? You made the statement that Fox is not a credible news source. If you don't watch Fox News, why do you assume their news isn't credible? Or. Are you one of those poor souls who can't tell the difference between their news broadcasts and their infotainment segments?
    i don't waste my time. i watched enough fox to know that the network is only worthy of scorn from those of us who consider journalism to be even slightly noble. i dropped fox in 2005, and msnbc about a year later. it has made my life much better.

    when i leaned republican, fox chose stories that reinforced my views, and i imagined that they were striking some blow against the "liberal media." i know when i'm being sold a bill of goods, though, and eventually, i could stand it no longer. this conspiracy nonsense stinks of conspiracy nonsense. no matter how much fox wants this to be watergate, it just isn't.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    How about actually answering my post? What in that article is not credible?? You made the statement that Fox is not a credible news source. If you don't watch Fox News, why do you assume their news isn't credible? Or. Are you one of those poor souls who can't tell the difference between their news broadcasts and their infotainment segments?
    Doe4s fox have the opportunity to be right? yes. Has fox blatantly and knowingly lied so bad that comedy networks have had to point it out to them? Yes. Sorry, but I don't need to be bothered confirming every piece of information from supposed news because I know that cable news organizations are less reliable than partisan blogs. The fact that once or twice fox accidentally posted a fact does not make them a reliable news source. Oh, and if you actually want to show fox is reliable you will need to show consistency which certainly is not shown by one article of theirs. So feel free to show us every article in the past 10 years.....I'll wait.

  8. #18
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    i don't waste my time. i watched enough fox to know that the network is only worthy of scorn from those of us who consider journalism to be even slightly noble. i dropped fox in 2005, and msnbc about a year later. it has made my life much better.

    when i leaned republican, fox chose stories that reinforced my views, and i imagined that they were striking some blow against the "liberal media." i know when i'm being sold a bill of goods, though, and eventually, i could stand it no longer. this conspiracy nonsense stinks of conspiracy nonsense. no matter how much fox wants this to be watergate, it just isn't.
    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    Doe4s fox have the opportunity to be right? yes. Has fox blatantly and knowingly lied so bad that comedy networks have had to point it out to them? Yes. Sorry, but I don't need to be bothered confirming every piece of information from supposed news because I know that cable news organizations are less reliable than partisan blogs. The fact that once or twice fox accidentally posted a fact does not make them a reliable news source. Oh, and if you actually want to show fox is reliable you will need to show consistency which certainly is not shown by one article of theirs. So feel free to show us every article in the past 10 years.....I'll wait.
    This thread is about one news article. Those who call it conspiracy nonsense reinforced by that Big Bad Wolf Fox should step up and tell us what is not credible in that article. People who make those broad statements and accusations should either point out the in-credible parts of this story or stop maligning them in this instance.

    I have my answer. I've asked Helix twice and he's delined. You Tererun would turn the table on me. I didn't make the wrong assumption.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    we should probably put it in context.

    Terrorist attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    there have been a lot of embassy attacks. i don't recall another one fueling a conspiracy theory, but i could be wrong. i'd like to know why the others haven't been given similar scrutiny.


    edit to add : fox and msnbc have zero journalistic credibility. they surrendered their integrity as part of their business models.

    What other Embassy attacks took place recently wherein we drove the leader of that Country out of Power? So what do you have to say about those Foreign News Agencies. Are they Biased too. Considering they aren't part of our politics. But they are biased too.....Right?

  10. #20
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,287

    re: Threats Against Benghazi Whistleblowers Alleged [W:345/361]

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    What other Embassy attacks took place recently wherein we drove the leader of that Country out of Power? So what do you have to say about those Foreign News Agencies. Are they Biased too. Considering they aren't part of our politics. But they are biased too.....Right?
    What difference does it make at this point in time. Huh? Already tried that one?
    Well then ...
    That's not her signature ... it's an autopen and it doesn't mean she read it. She's furious someone put that signature on a denial for support.
    Yeah ... that'll have to do for now.

Page 2 of 37 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •