• 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!

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi chapter

pbrauer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
25,394
Reaction score
7,208
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
hillary_clinton_ap_605.jpg



Hillary Clinton released the Benghazi chapter from her new book to Politico. She obviously wants everything out way in advance for her run for the White House. And scolding Republicans for politicizing the attack on the backs of the four dead Americans.

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi chapter

Hillary Clinton offers a detailed account of the deadly attack on the American embassy in Benghazi — and a pointed rebuttal to Republican critics who’ve laced into her over the incident — in a much-anticipated chapter of her forthcoming book, “Hard Choices,” obtained by POLITICO.
“Those who exploit this tragedy over and over as a political tool minimize the sacrifice of those who served our country,” Clinton writes in the gripping chapter, “Benghazi: Under Attack.”

Casting doubt on the motivations of congressional Republicans who have continued to investigate the attacks, including with an upcoming House select committee, Clinton continues: “I will not be a part of a political slugfest on the backs of dead Americans. It’s just plain wrong, and it’s unworthy of our great country. Those who insist on politicizing the tragedy will have to do so without me.”
Read more: Exclusive: Hillary Clinton
 
Last edited:
hillary_clinton_ap_605.jpg



Hillary Clinton released the Benghazi chapter from her new book to Politico. She obviously wants everything out way in advance for her run for the White House. And scolding Republicans for politicizing the attack on the backs of the four dead Americans.

I'm very sure that it's her account. The account she wants put forward. It may also, in fact, be what she knows about it and all she knows about it. It does not mean that it's all there is though or that it's all the facts. She was not the only person in the decision chain nor was she the only person who had the authority to give orders during the incident or to frame the statements made later about what happened (also known as, and so far proved to be, lies).
 
Hmm...is it worse to politicize the failures and lies of the regime or is it worse to fail and lie about 4 dead Americans?
 
Hmm...is it worse to politicize the failures and lies of the regime or is it worse to fail and lie about 4 dead Americans?

This from the people who hear about the latest mass shooting at a public school, shrug and say, "Whatevs. 2nd amendment, bitches."
 
I've never written what you wrote, nor ever referred to such violence as caused by a lame video that wasn't even presented in the country in question. When you want to illustrate what I say use quotes otherwise you can apologize for attributing words to me that I've never written.


This from the people who hear about the latest mass shooting at a public school, shrug and say, "Whatevs. 2nd amendment, bitches."
 
I've never written what you wrote, nor ever referred to such violence as caused by a lame video that wasn't even presented in the country in question. When you want to illustrate what I say use quotes otherwise you can apologize for attributing words to me that I've never written.

If you are saying that you don't believe the issue of the 2nd amendment trumps any outrage at the near monthly mass shooting, then yes, I apologize. Otherwise, get bent.
 
This is heartwarming:

Its a sad event of course, but I really wonder why the leftist village failed this loser human? I mean "it takes a village" right? Someone said that; and clearly this guy is a radical leftist who believes in that "village" people concept right? So why did the village fail him? Do we need to register the villages? License them maybe? Maybe we should charge the villages a fee, or hey maybe we need to lock up village failures like this loser human's daddy?

More cavalierly dismissing mass shootings and making it all about gun control.

Its funny (well I don't mean laughing funny) but I would have thought it was due to WMDs, keeping your doctor, and even the NSA snoopage.....the government has seriously gone out of its way to discard its trust of the people. For the government (say like a diane scam artist feinstein) to say ban guns/trust us the government to protect you while turning police into a para military organization just forces common sense on people - HELL NO to GUN CONTROL.

I like this next one in particular. "...while crying about the losses of a few." I guess a "few" deaths only matter if they're ambassadors killed by terrorists in a foreign land. Citizens killed in mass shootings? No sweat!

I'm sorry, but this is a free country not one of fascist dictators that kill millions of people. We're free in part because of our right to bear arms, and you choosing to ignore the reality of 263 million dead people at the hands of government while crying about the horrible losses of a few shows a significant inadequacy on your part. For ever irrelevant. That's how you should be viewed.

Or on the significance of reports on mass shootings. Yep, the "big impacts" of victims of mass shootings are just hyped up.

Actually they are made to have big impacts by those who want control over people and a look thirst or power.

The reactions to mass shootings is "hysteria":

Because the media and politicians use the hysteria and pain of a mass shooting to control legal gun owners. You see gun enthusuiast, owners, and trained people with guns dont need as much of their beloved govt. the restrictions here impact legal gun owners not mentally ill people who are capable of planning and executing horrible crimes. I dare say those gang murders you noted aren't impacted either. You know who IS impacted? The honest and dedicated civilians that MIGHT have been armed and ready to defend themselves if it weren't for politicians of control.

Yikes, in this next one Calgun really does mourn 12 dead in one shooting (albeit instantly making it about the terrible antis). Guess I'm wrong about him after all. He'll definitely call for an investigation into laws that allow for the ease of acquiring them. Looks like I have some apologizing to do.

I'm reading on the news at leaset 12 dead?

This is going to be a bad one, the anti's will come out the wood
work shortly.

Must be a terrible time for the families there, wishing them well.

Ha ha, just kidding. He goes on to call the victims of mass shootings statistically irrelevant compared to the deaths caused by governments. In fact, reading through Calgun's posts that was pretty much his primary theme.

So what about the 100 million plus people killed in "civilized societies" that were unable to defend themselves from tyranical governments over the past 100 years - how did that work out for those civilizations?

and...

Governments have killed 263 million people in the last 113 years, those we lose due to criminals that ignore gun laws in the United States, while tragic, don't even begin to scratch the surface of the criminals called "GOVERNMENT" in the world in which we live - TODAY.




Yep, all that heartwarming soul searching from the side that wants an investigation into Benghazi.
 
Last edited:
the cloud that will always hang over her head is being part of the lie the administration pushed day after day about the attack, it was about the video and her comment "what difference does it make".
 
And yet I still never used the words you attributed to me with quotes. Which makes you a liar and one willing to misrepresent others.

My adamant stance on our civil liberty and right to own guns has little to do with a political leader lying to us about why US citizens were killed in a full on terrorist incursion against a US facility they failed to provide adequate security for.


This is heartwarming:



More cavalierly dismissing mass shootings and making it all about gun control.



I like this next one in particular. "...while crying about the losses of a few." I guess a "few" deaths only matter if they're ambassadors killed by terrorists in a foreign land. Citizens killed in mass shootings? No sweat!



Or on the significance of reports on mass shootings. Yep, the "big impacts" of victims of mass shootings are just hyped up.



The reactions to mass shootings is "hysteria":



Yikes, in this next one Calgun really does mourn 12 dead in one shooting (albeit instantly making it about the terrible antis). Guess I'm wrong about him after all. He'll definitely call for an investigation into laws that allow for the ease of acquiring them. Looks like I have some apologizing to do.



Ha ha, just kidding. He goes on to call the victims of mass shootings statistically irrelevant compared to the deaths caused by governments. In fact, reading through Calgun's posts that was pretty much his primary theme.



and...






Yep, all that heartwarming soul searching from the side that wants an investigation into Benghazi.
 
And yet I still never used the words you attributed to me with quotes. Which makes you a liar and one willing to misrepresent others.

My adamant stance on our civil liberty and right to own guns has little to do with a political leader lying to us about why US citizens were killed in a full on terrorist incursion against a US facility they failed to provide adequate security for.

Okay, so you do believe then that the 2nd amendment trumps outrage over the victims of mass shootings, and therefore I was 100% correct. Combined with your belief that those victims are statistically irrelevant, it's clear that your outrage over the four deaths in Benghazi is feigned, and that people like you have less moral authority in this matter than anybody else. You faking outrage over the ambassadors' deaths is like someone at a beef ranch criticizing a poultry farm for killing animals.
 
Last edited:
Since you applied quotes to your crass statement you suggested I wrote it, and that makes you 100% false and a liar.


Okay, so you do believe then that the 2nd amendment trumps outrage over the victims of mass shootings, and therefore I was 100% correct. Combined with your belief that those victims are statistically irrelevant, it's clear that your outrage over the four deaths in Benghazi is feigned, and that people like you have less moral authority in this matter than anybody else. You faking outrage over the ambassadors' deaths is like someone at a beef ranch criticizing a poultry farm for killing animals.
 
the cloud that will always hang over her head is being part of the lie the administration pushed day after day about the attack, it was about the video and her comment "what difference does it make".

Mornin Mtm. :2wave: Well and that Part about her.....not checking back on her people to see if they made out Alive. So while she may try to push some narrative. There are two other books out that are Ripping her open. So she will be needing a new mouth piece.

Her hope was that this would all be forgotten by the time the Election came round. Now that its not she has to try and cover herself. Problem is she told the Nation she would take responsibility. Now she will pay the price.....should she jump.

Which if it becomes to much.....and all start focusing on her not checking back on her people. She will be toast. Then wont even decide to run.
 
Since you applied quotes to your crass statement you suggested I wrote it, and that makes you 100% false and a liar.

You're incredibly confused about what "quotes" mean. I said that the outrage at the deaths from benghazi tend to come from people who minimize the deaths from mass shootings, usually via support of 2nd amendment rights. I applied that to you because I was pretty sure I remembered you holding those beliefs in other threads. Not only that, but I get the super bonus of finding time after time of you saying that mass shooting deaths are statistically irrelevant. NOT ONLY THAT, but I got the super double fudge bonus of you confirming my initial statement when you said "My adamant stance on our civil liberty and right to own guns..."

Everything about your position on this topic is a lie. You lie about your outrage over four deaths in Benghazi, and you lie about my claims about your position. Just lie after lie after lie. Anyone else can follow this conversation and see for themselves that everything about you is just one giant lie.
 
hillary_clinton_ap_605.jpg



Hillary Clinton released the Benghazi chapter from her new book to Politico. She obviously wants everything out way in advance for her run for the White House. And scolding Republicans for politicizing the attack on the backs of the four dead Americans.

You know she met with BO yesterday in an unannounced and unscheduled meeting. Then people caught wind of it thru twitter. So then they released she was going to have lunch with BO.

He knows she has to distance herself from him.....but any money says he wants to get assurances that some of his turmoil he created sticks around. Once he is done and become nothing more than a pun......chline for comedians. That is.
 
Mornin Mtm. :2wave: Well and that Part about her.....not checking back on her people to see if they made out Alive. So while she may try to push some narrative. There are two other books out that are Ripping her open. So she will be needing a new mouth piece.

Her hope was that this would all be forgotten by the time the Election came round. Now that its not she has to try and cover herself. Problem is she told the Nation she would take responsibility. Now she will pay the price.....should she jump.

Which if it becomes to much.....and all start focusing on her not checking back on her people. She will be toast. Then wont even decide to run.

i think she would lying to herself if she believes this is somehow going away by the time she announces her run for president.
 
the cloud that will always hang over her head is being part of the lie the administration pushed day after day about the attack, it was about the video and her comment "what difference does it make".

From the article in question.

Clinton defends the intelligence at the time preceding the attack on the American compound in Benghazi. An anti-Islamic video that had sparked a protest at an embassy in Cairo was proved in “later investigation and reporting,” including by The New York Times, to have been “indeed a factor” in what happened in Benghazi, Clinton writes.

That point is among those that has been debated during hearings into the attacks.

“There were scores of attackers that night, almost certainly with differing motives,” she writes. “It is inaccurate to state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video. It is equally inaccurate to state that none of them were. Both assertions defy not only the evidence but logic as well.”

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton

why are we blaming her for relying on the intelligence they had at the time?
 
i think she would lying to herself if she believes this is somehow going away by the time she announces her run for president.

Well like a typical Liberal Democrat.....she thinks because she uttered the words. She takes responsibility. There has been no consequences due to her major failure at State. They tried to pump her resume with the Frequent Flyer Miles. Plus even tho she hurried and pivoted away from the video, she can't get around the fact. That she.....Hillary Clinton. Wife of former President Bill Clinton. Didn't tell BO to place the country on High Alert around the 11th Anniversary of 911. It was her job.....to keep not just those in Benghazi safe. But All those abroad overseas. (not counting Military).
 
From the article in question.



Exclusive: Hillary Clinton

why are we blaming her for relying on the intelligence they had at the time?

i blame the administration for pushing a story they knew to be false. the administration knew the next day the why/what/who about the attack.

she knew it too. she is a liar!!
 
From the article in question.



Exclusive: Hillary Clinton

why are we blaming her for relying on the intelligence they had at the time?



Its been debunked.....there was no protest. So she can defend all she wants. Overseas New Sources have reported it as well.

Moreover.....all she is doing is trying to cover. That She and her Dept. Hired Ansar Al Sharia as Security for Benghazi. Another fact she can't get around.
 
Well like a typical Liberal Democrat.....she thinks because she uttered the words. She takes responsibility. There has been no consequences due to her major failure at State. They tried to pump her resume with the Frequent Flyer Miles. Plus even tho she hurried and pivoted away from the video, she can't get around the fact. That she.....Hillary Clinton. Wife of former President Bill Clinton. Didn't tell BO to place the country on High Alert around the 11th Anniversary of 911. It was her job.....to keep not just those in Benghazi safe. But All those abroad overseas. (not counting Military).

even thou i don't like kerry, he has done more in his short tenure as SOS then clinton did in 4 years.
 
even thou i don't like kerry, he has done more in his short tenure as SOS then clinton did in 4 years.

Yeah well.....he has been played like a rag doll. But at least he has engaged with those who aren't afraid to talk tuff. Hillary was a different story. Most Arabs let whatever she said go in one ear and Right out the other. All the while smiling in her face and nodding say yes yes. We can help you with money.
 
Its been debunked.....there was no protest. So she can defend all she wants. Overseas New Sources have reported it as well.

Moreover.....all she is doing is trying to cover. That She and her Dept. Hired Ansar Al Sharia as Security for Benghazi. Another fact she can't get around.

you don't seem to accept the idea that the administration was only acting on information that seemed accurate at the time.

why is that answer reasonable.
 
you don't seem to accept the idea that the administration was only acting on information that seemed accurate at the time.

why is that answer reasonable.

Because they knew who it was that was attacking us before that month of Sept. You don't seem to accept the answer that the Public wasn't being told that State Hired Ansar al Sharia.....a group that is associated with AQ and really technically an Off shoot of the morphing thereof.

That Hillary was quite aware they were Hired. As she showed up a couple of months prior and added security was put in place. By Her! Libyan Security.....she Hired.

One doesn't.....let the enemy in, and then give them the Keys to the doors. KnowwhatImean UWS!
 
you don't seem to accept the idea that the administration was only acting on information that seemed accurate at the time.

why is that answer reasonable.

because its NOT true!! you are accepting their lie!!
 
Because they knew who it was that was attacking us before that month of Sept. You don't seem to accept the answer that the Public wasn't being told that State Hired Ansar al Sharia.....a group that is associated with AQ and really technically an Off shoot of the morphing thereof.

That Hillary was quite aware they were Hired. As she showed up a couple of months prior and added security was put in place. By Her! Libyan Security.....she Hired.

One doesn't.....let the enemy in, and then give them the Keys to the doors. KnowwhatImean UWS!

did we know it was that specific militia groupt which was attacking us at the time of the attack?
 
Back
Top Bottom