View Poll Results: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

Voters
106. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, They are exploiting Benghazi

    73 68.87%
  • No

    27 25.47%
  • Other

    6 5.66%
Page 13 of 34 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 339

Thread: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

  1. #121
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    You got to be kidding me, many on the right would take what she said out of context, like: "What difference does it make."

    I watched that remark in its full context. It was a despicable response to a serious inquiry designed to deflect attention from the question and drive people to an emotional visceral political stance, where the focus shifts to taking sides instead of finding answers. She achieved this goal to some extent as evidenced by all the folks on this board who do not want answers.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  2. #122
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by johndylan1 View Post
    I watched that remark in its full context. It was a despicable response to a serious inquiry designed to deflect attention from the question and drive people to an emotional visceral political stance, where the focus shifts to taking sides instead of finding answers. She achieved this goal to some extent as evidenced by all the folks on this board who do not want answers.
    I still can not get an answer as to whether or not there were any direct orders to hold that understaffed, diplomatic mission, at Any cost.

  3. #123
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by DiavoTheMiavo View Post
    To be sure some bad stuff happened on Bush's watch. However, I once googled each one of these incidents, and in some cases, the number of dead actually include the people doing the attack. Also, in only one case was an actual US official targeted. They were basically targeting American interests.

    I would be remiss however, if I did not mention Benghazi was a **** up . . . period. No evil intent, no coverups . . . just a cluster **** . . . like so many of GW's chess moves . . . just not as bad. BUT . . . most people bitching about the 4-dead . . . really believe they are on the moral high ground. Seriously, they do. Boy oh boy though, don't you ever mention a GW screw up . . . he's not president anymore. Yep . . . for some reason, asking why they were not outraged by the Iraq war Clinton made us get into (remember, when it was going good it was Bush's war . . . when it was bad it was Clinton's fault).

    Reagan runs up the deficit and shrinks the size of our military? Carter & Clinton's fault.

    1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon? Carter's fault.

    Bush 1 screws up his own presidency, continues shrinking the military, and raises taxes? Carter's fault.

    Bush-43 experiences the first recession of his presidency early on? Clinton's fault.

    Obama experiences the first recession of his presidency early on? Obama's fault (Carter & Clinton may have had a hand in it though).

    Bush-43 is president when almost 3000 are killed on 9/11? Clinton's fault.

    Bush ignores the August 2001 PDB about Al Qaeda using planes as missiles? Clinton's fault.

    Bush-43 decides to invade Iraq because Bill Clinton said there was WMD there? Obviously Clinton's fault.

    Nairobi and Tanzania Embassy bombings under Clinton's watch? Not only Clinton's fault, but one of the reasons we were attacked on 9/11, proving once again 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

    All the embassy and American interest's attacked under Bush-43? Guess who is responsible? Not George . . . that's all I am going to say . . . plus the Bush-43 administration was so honest. I mean for cryminy sake. . . Jesus was his hero and that's good enough for me.
    Why justify avoiding answers in this case? The past occurrences have nothing to do with the question at hand, it's just a diversion. Focus.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  4. #124
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    So noted.
    That tells us a lot about you.
    Actually, it says a lot more about you. Why does it matter if the attackers were motivated by anger over a youtube video or anger over something else? Why would it be worse if it was a coordinated al Qaeda attack timed to "commemorate" 9/11? Does it make the security lapse any more egregious? Does it make anyone more dead?

  5. #125
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,013

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    I seriously doubt the Republicans who keep harping about Benghazi care about the four people who died September 11, 2012. They are in my opinion using their deaths for political gain, they want to use this tragedy to weaken the chances of Hillary Clinton should she decide to run for president in 2014. They misquote what Clinton said during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Jan. 23, 2013, they say she said "What difference does it make?" Here is what she actually said:

    "With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."
    The difference is that the President and his cabinet lied to us for two weeks and planted a false story about the attacks on Benghazi were inspired by a youtube video.

  6. #126
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by ObamacareFail View Post
    The difference is that the President and his cabinet lied to us for two weeks and planted a false story about the attacks on Benghazi were inspired by a youtube video.
    And then the administration recognized its mistake and said it was an act of terror.

    And that is why Romney got in trouble " trying to use Benghazi to score political points during the second presidential debate.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  7. #127
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by johndylan1 View Post
    I watched that remark in its full context. It was a despicable response to a serious inquiry designed to deflect attention from the question and drive people to an emotional visceral political stance, where the focus shifts to taking sides instead of finding answers. She achieved this goal to some extent as evidenced by all the folks on this board who do not want answers.
    Baloney, here is the whole conversation:

    Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary. I'd like to join my colleagues in thanking you for your service sincerely, and also appreciate the fact that you’re here testifying and glad that you’re looking in good health.

    Clinton: Thank you.

    Johnson: Were you fully aware in real time -- and again, I realize how big your job is and everything is erupting in the Middle East at this time -- were you fully aware of these 20 incidents that were reported in the ARB[State Department Accountability Review Board] in real time?

    Clinton: I was aware of the ones that were brought to my attention. They were part of our ongoing discussion about the deteriorating threat environment in eastern Libya. We certainly were very conscious of them. I was assured by our security professionals that repairs were under way, additional security upgrades had taken place.

    Johnson: Thank you. Did you see personally the cable on -- I believe it was August 12th -- specifically asking for, basically, reinforcements for the security detail that was going to be evacuating or leaving in August? Did you see that personally?

    Clinton: No, sir.

    Johnson: OK. When you read the ARB, it strikes me as how certain the people were that the attacks started at 9:40 Benghazi time. When was the first time you spoke to -- or have you ever spoken to -- the returnees, the evacuees? Did you personally speak to those folks?

    Clinton: I‘ve spoken to one of them, but I waited until after the ARB had done its investigation because I did not want there to be anybody raising any issue that I had spoken to anyone before the ARB conducted its investigation.

    Johnson: How many people were evacuated from Libya?

    Clinton: Well, the numbers are a little bit hard to pin down because of our other friends --

    Johnson: Approximately?

    Clinton: Approximately, 25 to 30.

    Johnson: Did anybody in the State Department talk to those folks very shortly afterwards?

    Clinton: There was discussion going on afterwards, but once the investigation started, the FBI spoke to them before we spoke to them, and so other than our people in Tripoli -- which, I think you’re talking about Washington, right?

    Johnson: The point I’m making is, a very simple phone call to these individuals, I think, would’ve ascertained immediately that there was no protest prior to this. This attack started at 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time and it was an assault. I appreciate the fact that you called it an assault. But I’m going back to then-Ambassador [Susan] Rice five days later going on the Sunday shows and, what I would say, is purposefully misleading the American public. Why wasn’t that known? And again, I appreciate the fact that the transparency of this hearing, but why weren’t we transparent to that point in time?


    Clinton: Well, first of all, Senator, I would say that once the assault happened, and once we got our people rescued and out, our most immediate concern was, number one, taking care of their injuries. As I said, I still have a DS [Diplomatic Security] agent at Walter Reed seriously injured -- getting them into Frankfurt, Ramstein to get taken care of, the FBI going over immediately to start talking to them. We did not think it was appropriate for us to talk to them before the FBI conducted their interviews. And we did not -- I think this is accurate, sir -- I certainly did not know of any reports that contradicted the IC [Intelligence Community] talking points at the time that Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows. And you know I just want to say that people have accused Ambassador Rice and the administration of misleading Americans. I can say trying to be in the middle of this and understanding what was going on, nothing could be further from the truth. Was information developing? Was the situation fluid? Would we reach conclusions later that weren’t reached initially? And I appreciate the --

    Johnson: But, Madame Secretary, do you disagree with me that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determine what happened wouldn’t have ascertained immediately that there was no protest? That was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained?


    Clinton: But, Senator, again—

    Johnson: Within hours, if not days?

    Clinton: Senator, you know, when you’re in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process going on, number one—

    Johnson: I realize that’s a good excuse.

    Clinton: Well, no, it’s the fact. Number two, I would recommend highly you read both what the ARB said about it and the classified ARB because, even today, there are questions being raised. Now, we have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people. But what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing is still unknown --

    Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that -- an assault sprang out of that -- and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.


    Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator. Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. The IC has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out. But you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.

    Johnson: OK. Thank you, Madame Secretary.

    In Context: Hillary Clinton's 'What difference does it make' comment


  8. #128
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    11-12-16 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,485

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Actually, it says a lot more about you. Why does it matter if the attackers were motivated by anger over a youtube video or anger over something else? Why would it be worse if it was a coordinated al Qaeda attack timed to "commemorate" 9/11? Does it make the security lapse any more egregious? Does it make anyone more dead?
    The senior officer present went down with his mission; what more does the right want?

  9. #129
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,304

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Baloney, here is the whole conversation:

    Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary. I'd like to join my colleagues in thanking you for your service sincerely, and also appreciate the fact that you’re here testifying and glad that you’re looking in good health.

    Clinton: Thank you.

    Johnson: Were you fully aware in real time -- and again, I realize how big your job is and everything is erupting in the Middle East at this time -- were you fully aware of these 20 incidents that were reported in the ARB[State Department Accountability Review Board] in real time?

    Clinton: I was aware of the ones that were brought to my attention. They were part of our ongoing discussion about the deteriorating threat environment in eastern Libya. We certainly were very conscious of them. I was assured by our security professionals that repairs were under way, additional security upgrades had taken place.

    Johnson: Thank you. Did you see personally the cable on -- I believe it was August 12th -- specifically asking for, basically, reinforcements for the security detail that was going to be evacuating or leaving in August? Did you see that personally?

    Clinton: No, sir.

    Johnson: OK. When you read the ARB, it strikes me as how certain the people were that the attacks started at 9:40 Benghazi time. When was the first time you spoke to -- or have you ever spoken to -- the returnees, the evacuees? Did you personally speak to those folks?

    Clinton: I‘ve spoken to one of them, but I waited until after the ARB had done its investigation because I did not want there to be anybody raising any issue that I had spoken to anyone before the ARB conducted its investigation.

    Johnson: How many people were evacuated from Libya?

    Clinton: Well, the numbers are a little bit hard to pin down because of our other friends --

    Johnson: Approximately?

    Clinton: Approximately, 25 to 30.

    Johnson: Did anybody in the State Department talk to those folks very shortly afterwards?

    Clinton: There was discussion going on afterwards, but once the investigation started, the FBI spoke to them before we spoke to them, and so other than our people in Tripoli -- which, I think you’re talking about Washington, right?

    Johnson: The point I’m making is, a very simple phone call to these individuals, I think, would’ve ascertained immediately that there was no protest prior to this. This attack started at 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time and it was an assault. I appreciate the fact that you called it an assault. But I’m going back to then-Ambassador [Susan] Rice five days later going on the Sunday shows and, what I would say, is purposefully misleading the American public. Why wasn’t that known? And again, I appreciate the fact that the transparency of this hearing, but why weren’t we transparent to that point in time?


    Clinton: Well, first of all, Senator, I would say that once the assault happened, and once we got our people rescued and out, our most immediate concern was, number one, taking care of their injuries. As I said, I still have a DS [Diplomatic Security] agent at Walter Reed seriously injured -- getting them into Frankfurt, Ramstein to get taken care of, the FBI going over immediately to start talking to them. We did not think it was appropriate for us to talk to them before the FBI conducted their interviews. And we did not -- I think this is accurate, sir -- I certainly did not know of any reports that contradicted the IC [Intelligence Community] talking points at the time that Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows. And you know I just want to say that people have accused Ambassador Rice and the administration of misleading Americans. I can say trying to be in the middle of this and understanding what was going on, nothing could be further from the truth. Was information developing? Was the situation fluid? Would we reach conclusions later that weren’t reached initially? And I appreciate the --

    Johnson: But, Madame Secretary, do you disagree with me that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determine what happened wouldn’t have ascertained immediately that there was no protest? That was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained?


    Clinton: But, Senator, again—

    Johnson: Within hours, if not days?

    Clinton: Senator, you know, when you’re in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process going on, number one—

    Johnson: I realize that’s a good excuse.

    Clinton: Well, no, it’s the fact. Number two, I would recommend highly you read both what the ARB said about it and the classified ARB because, even today, there are questions being raised. Now, we have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people. But what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing is still unknown --

    Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that -- an assault sprang out of that -- and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.


    Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator. Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. The IC has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out. But you know, to be clear,
    it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime
    .




    Johnson: OK. Thank you, Madame Secretary.

    In Context: Hillary Clinton's 'What difference does it make' comment

    Amazing ... read it Pete ... absorb it Pete ... understand it Pete ... she contradicts herself in an effort to cover all the bases.
    And she didn't acknowledge that she was pretty much the first person to trot out those talking points she said were being looked into.
    Would have been a perfect opportunity to mention that, huh.
    And, btw, have they brought them to justice?

  10. #130
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Actually, it says a lot more about you. Why does it matter if the attackers were motivated by anger over a youtube video or anger over something else? Why would it be worse if it was a coordinated al Qaeda attack timed to "commemorate" 9/11? Does it make the security lapse any more egregious? Does it make anyone more dead?
    It seems it did matter with the Obama White House that it was all about a Youtube video. It was all about getting Obama reelected and covering up the incompetencies of Hillary Clinton and Obama.

Page 13 of 34 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... 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
  •