• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans Altered Benghazi Emails, CBS News Report Claims [W:361]

Try to follow me on this, if you read the rest of the quote it says:

KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "
Uhhhhmmm, no.

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
 
Try to follow me on this, if you read the rest of the quote it says:

KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "

Dude, he is specifically acknowledging that he did not call the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack. Which he then went on to lie about later. You can try to rationalize this anyway you like, but he plainly said, in easy to comprehend language, that he did not call it a terrorist attack.

and oh, btw, who has he brought to justice?
 
Last edited:
It doesn't help you.


"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "


Oh, and by the way, he himself acknowledges that he did not call it a terrorist attack during the Rose Garden speech in this 60 minutes interview, as you can see.
So what? People on the right seem to be hung up on the word 'terrorist.' Why? President Obama knew it was terrorism, but had non political reasons for not saying it in public. Did you also notice he didn't say it was caused by a video? The points Susan Rice gave on the Sunday talk shows were approved by the CIA director David Petraeus.

Petraeus Says U.S. Tried to Avoid Tipping Off Terrorists After Libya Attack
 
Dude, he is specifically acknowledging that he did not call the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack. Which he then went on to lie about later. You can try to rationalize this anyway you like, but he plainly said acknowledged, in easy to comprehend language, that he did not call it a terrorist attack.

and oh, btw, who has he brought to justice?
It takes time, how long was it before we got Osama Bin Laden? Maybe they are on to something.

Officials say Benghazi suspects under surveillance
 
:lamo

One was during a Presidential Debate. Are you going to claim that didn't happen either?
Do you have a link? What did he say, I don't remember?
 
No, what did he say? Give me a ****ing link and what he said.

So, you're the type that doesn't watch the debates then acts like he knows what's going on, huh?
 
So, you're the type that doesn't watch the debates then acts like he knows what's going on, huh?

I watched the debates and I remember there was a controversy with Romney and Candy Crowley interjected about what Obama said in the Rose Garden then later reversed herself. So what? Where is the repeatedly you mentioned? This whole argument is incredibly stupid, what the **** is the point?!? Only a person from the right could come up with such crap. Jesus.
 
I watched the debates and I remember there was a controversy with Romney and Candy Crowley interjected about what Obama said in the Rose Garden then later reversed herself. So what? Where is the repeatedly you mentioned? This whole argument is incredibly stupid, what the **** is the point?!? Only a person from the right could come up with such crap. Jesus.

The point is that he lied. He lied about the cause, he lied about lying about the cause, and you folks "on the left" are lying about him lying.

It's all about leadership, bro, I don't expect you to understand.


p.s. Another thing: It never seemed just a little strange that Crowley was prepared for the "Get the transcript"?
 
The point is that he lied. He lied about the cause, he lied about lying about the cause, and you folks "on the left" are lying about him lying.

It's all about leadership, bro, I don't expect you to understand.


p.s. Another thing: It never seemed just a little strange that Crowley was prepared for the "Get the transcript"?

What he said was the UNCLASSIFIED information which was approved by David Patraeus the then director of the CIA. To say he is not a leader is partisan BS.
 
What he said was the UNCLASSIFIED information which was approved by David Patraeus the then director of the CIA.

No. There was plenty of unclassified information out by the second day, much less a week later.

To say he is not a leader is partisan BS.

Really. He can't prepare for an obvious attack, he lies about it afterward, and he has no idea what anyone in his administration is doing. That's A1 special sauce leadership right there!

The only partisan bs here is ignoring the reality of this Presidency.
 
Because he lied about it. Repeatedly.

if that were actually on tape, you and faux news would be running it on a loop, 24/7
quit making **** up
 
if that were actually on tape, you and faux news would be running it on a loop, 24/7
quit making **** up

They did run it non stop. The whole administration called it anything but terrorism for weeks. Revisionism isn't going to work here, buddy.
 
They did run it non stop. The whole administration called it anything but terrorism for weeks. Revisionism isn't going to work here, buddy.

President called it terrorism literally the next day.
 
President called it terrorism literally the next day.

No, he blamed it on an obscure youtube video the next day. How ****ing irresponsible is that?

That is the definition of passing the buck.

And they ran like hell from the word "terrorism" early on.
 
You know Republicans would ****up a wet dream, don't you? In my opinion they don't give two ****s about those four people we lost, they just want make political hay over their dead bodies. What **** has happen to the GOP?

I'm not a member of the GOP, and I'm not a bit interested in making political hay. But I have wanted to know since the beginning what happened and why. And in case the reason you used "four people" is because you don't know all four names, those who died were Abassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glenn Doherty, and Ty Woods.

Don't delude yourself that only Republicans wishing to make political hay care about Benghazi.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...democrat-who-voted-for-hillary-clinton-obama/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...blic_testimony_on_benghazi_attack_118396.html
 
Last edited:
President called it terrorism literally the next day.

No he didn't. In fact, after the instance you are mistakenly alluding too, he confirmed in an interview that he did not call it terrorism. As I have already illustrated in this very thread.
 
No, he blamed it on an obscure youtube video the next day. How ****ing irresponsible is that?

That is the definition of passing the buck.

And they ran like hell from the word "terrorism" early on.

He called it an act of terror. He used those words, standing in the rose garden, on Sept 12.
 
He called it an act of terror. He used those words, standing in the rose garden, on Sept 12.

Of course the context was vague, having said in in the third to last paragraph of his prepared statment, which contained over 800 words.

Add in the narative that played out afterwords, and I think it's a bit of a reach to claim President Obama at the time stated Stevens and others were killed by terrorists.
 
He called it an act of terror. He used those words, standing in the rose garden, on Sept 12.

And two hours later confirmed in a 60 minutes interview that he did not call Benghazi a terrorist attack. Watch the interview instead of repeating a lie he later told in a Presidential debate.

"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "

[video]http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134495n&tag=mg;60minutes[/video]
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom