• 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]

Really, you think he suffered the full heft of the US govt?

Talk about a weak tangent.


You think he didn't?

The Secretary of State of the United States of America, Hilary Clinton, tells a family member of one the murdered Benghazi victims on the tarmac were the bodies are being unloaded they are going to get the guy responsible for the video, and you don't think that represents the full weight and measure of the US?

Talk about an alarming and totally delusional attempt to minimize the situation.
 
Yes, and Nuland's TRUE concern was right there too, that she did not want all of that intel released for security reasons, she wanted any and all leads to remain intact.

It was not done for political reasons as implied by the leak to ABC, and even Petraeus confirmed that back in November.

The FBI was running the investigation, not Nuland and the State Department. The FBI, as you can see in the emails, didn't have a problem with the early versions of the points.
 
You can follow any tangent you like, the point still is that ABC ran with a story on leaked false info from anon GOP sources, spinning Nuland's reasons for not releasing all of the intel on the attack.

Re-read your post, and then think about the accusations and labels you have applied to the GOP on this issue.

Objectivity shouldn't be a concept that is so difficult to comprehend...
 
You think he didn't?

The Secretary of State of the United States of America, Hilary Clinton, tells a family member of one the murdered Benghazi victims on the tarmac were the bodies are being unloaded they are going to get the guy responsible for the video, and you don't think that represents the full weight and measure of the US?

Talk about an alarming and totally delusional attempt to minimize the situation.
Prove this silly tangent.
 
Re-read your post, and then think about the accusations and labels you have applied to the GOP on this issue.

Objectivity shouldn't be a concept that is so difficult to comprehend...
You are trying to argue about "objectivity" while pushing a meme that this is really all a conspiracy by the WH....to cover up an email.....that ABC did not even have a hard copy of but they reported as being true....from an anon source?
 
The FBI was running the investigation, not Nuland and the State Department. The FBI, as you can see in the emails, didn't have a problem with the early versions of the points.
Um, I seriously doubt the FBI is the only investigative office involved in finding who attacked the compounds, but that aside, this has zero bearing on what ABC reported and what actually was written by Nuland.
 
:shock:

I think I'll just let you believe your take, so you can continue to post it for others to read.
Oh, so you have zero to back up your claim.

You certainly live up to the conservative standard.
 
Keep dancing guys. GOP operatives altered evidence. The only issue is not who is going to resign in the GOP leadership, but who's going to jail. Evidence tampering is a crime.

They altered evidence? Are you claiming they photoshoped emails? Please explain how emails from the WH are altered. If emails are alterable, then who's to say the emails released by the WH weren't altered?
 
Um, I seriously doubt the FBI is the only investigative office involved in finding who attacked the compounds, but that aside, this has zero bearing on what ABC reported and what actually was written by Nuland.

Then what "leads" were you suggesting Nuland was concerned about?

BTW, you're right, the FBI wasn't the only agency investigating what happened. There were dozens of reporters all over the compound well before FBI got there because nobody in the government bothered to investigate until some reporter came up with Stevens' diary.
 
You are trying to argue about "objectivity" while pushing a meme that this is really all a conspiracy by the WH....to cover up an email.....that ABC did not even have a hard copy of but they reported as being true....from an anon source?

I haven't pushed a thing. Now your adding projection to your subjectivity. The only thing I did was question why the GOP would alter something that is so easily refuted.

I've also posed a question about the veracity of the WH, given the same anonymous sources.
 
I wouldn't blame the GOP. Just maybe some of it's members (if what the ABC reported said is true).

Yes, perhaps some of it's members, IF what ABC reported was true. What if it wasn't true? Where did the altered emails come from?
 
Could someone please point out where it says the Republicans altered the emails? I can't find it.
 
Could someone please point out where it says the Republicans altered the emails? I can't find it.

tell us what other group would be interested in modifying them to spin the story against the white house
 
So if Benghazi is like Watergate, and according to you Watergate wasn't that serious....Ergo, Benghazi isn't all that serious.

According to Woodward actually

Quote me where I said "Watergate wasn't that serious" and while you're at it, show in these emails where the connection is made to a youtube video. Remember Obama and Hillary told the grieving families while they stood next to the coffins containing their loved ones they were killed because of a youtube video. The poor schmuck that created that youtube video still rots in prison today.

Do you care about the Americans killed in benghazi whose deaths could have been prevented? Do you care that your Government whose JOB was to protect them failed and then LIED to their faces?

Yes or No
 
Then what "leads" were you suggesting Nuland was concerned about?

BTW, you're right, the FBI wasn't the only agency investigating what happened. There were dozens of reporters all over the compound well before FBI got there because nobody in the government bothered to investigate until some reporter came up with Stevens' diary.
What leads? Um, specific groups and individuals associated in the attack which multiple agencies are tracking.

You really needed me to explain that to you?

"The CIA agreed with the concerns raised by the State Department and revised the talking points to make them less specific than the CIA's original version, eliminating references to al Qaeda and affiliates and earlier security warnings."
 
You can follow any tangent you like, the point still is that ABC ran with a story on leaked false info from anon GOP sources, spinning Nuland's reasons for not releasing all of the intel on the attack.

So, you're saying that the minority party is really running the show, because the president is too weak and incompetent to make his own decisions?
 
What leads? Um, specific groups and individuals associated in the attack which multiple agencies are tracking.

You really needed me to explain that to you?

"The CIA agreed with the concerns raised by the State Department and revised the talking points to make them less specific than the CIA's original version, eliminating references to al Qaeda and affiliates and earlier security warnings."

You know who CIA and State answer to, right?
 
So, you're saying that the minority party is really running the show, because the president is too weak and incompetent to make his own decisions?

Didn't you know?

Obama has no clue what's happening at all under his executive supervision. He's the most clueless President in American History
 
Geeze. There is a ton of evidence to back up my claim. It's been in the news. I have no obligation to help you catch up.
Yeah, you have no obligation to back up anything, but the point still stands, you choose not to, ergo it is funny to see you whining about "objectivity" when you can't point to any objective evidence for your silly claim.
 
So, you're saying that the minority party is really running the show, because the president is too weak and incompetent to make his own decisions?
I didn't know that spinning unfounded stories is "running the show", thanks for the GOP/con viewpoint!
 
Some anonymous sources in the White House, DOJ, and the IRS confirmed it.

Well, that certainly convinces me! What's the matter with everybody else? :lamo:
 
Back
Top Bottom