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 17 of 34 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 339

Thread: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

  1. #161
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    Unfortunately for you, the ones who resort to the most fallacies, seem to be on the right.
    Using a fallacious argument to accuse others of making fallacious argument. This bit of irony made me laugh, thanks.

  2. #162
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    Is the right going to, lead the way, through fiscal forms of responsibility?
    Who knows, I was referring to security and protection of Americans abroad. You seem to want to change the subject.

  3. #163
    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
    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
    Exactly as I had stated an attempt to turn a simple line of questioning into an emotional and visceral event. The Behind the scenes reason for this line of questioning is that you had people on the ground that were never consulted as to what happened before a false conclusion was propounded. There had been reports of some who had spoken off the record saying the video was never a serious consideration. Many who were there have been placed under gag orders, so the media couldn't dig into what happened. And recent e mails have proved that Hillary lied when she said their was confusion some time later. The official time that everyone knew it wasn't a reaction to a video was 9:45AM 9/12, this is indisputable because of the judicial watch inquiry.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  4. #164
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    12-04-17 @ 04:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,186
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    No one covered up the fact that Americans died.

    So again, take these two hypothetical situations:
    1). Protesters take advantage of security lapses to kill 4 Americans.
    2). Terrorists take advantage of security lapses to kill 4 Americans.

    What's the difference? The problem isn't who did it; the problem is that security wasn't good enough in the first place.
    This is a good point that the security was woefully inadequate, especially for the developing situation. What I find disgusting is that the embassy was obviously requesting from the State Department more security.

    There was an understanding within the State Department that officials in Libya ought not to request more security, in part because of concerns about the political fallout of seeking a larger military presence in a country that was still being touted as a foreign policy success.

    The embassy was told through back channels to not make direct requests for security. This was more of the direct cause of the deaths than any other single factor and the reason for covering up.
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

  5. #165
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Exactly. The U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens request beefing up security at the Benghazi consulate and Hillary Clinton ignores the request while spending hundreds of millions of dollars on remodeling embassies in Europe, purchasing green cars and building charging stations for these cars, purchasing enough booze for embassy parties than the sailors of the entire Pacific Fleet could consume on a week long shore leave. Then to say there was no money for beefing up security ??? State Department security spending comes from the same State Department maintenance funding.

    Then you have the majority of those serving in the U.S. military asking why didn't Obama issue an order to at least try to save these Americans in Benghazi during the attack ? And those Navy and Army flag officers who went on the record were purged from the military by the Obama administration.

    As for if they were protesters or terrorist with links to Al Qaedas. It defiantly made a difference to the Obama White House because Obama reelection platform for being given a second chance in 2012 was that "Al Qaeda was being decimated and was on the run" which was a complete lie.
    She spent millions on comedians to make appearances at her facilities, but wouldn't protect those soon-to-be-dead Americans. It really makes you wonder about her priorities.

  6. #166
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
    Maybe; how many times did the senior diplomat present, request that his mission be downsized due to a lack of sufficient staff?
    What part of your question makes it ok to leave them to die? BTW, "staff" refers to state dept employees, not security. The state dept should have had a military presence there to protect it-like in Iraq. Just another failure of Hillary.

  7. #167
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    is everything
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 09:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,810

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    I'm confused. How does saying the attacks sprang out of a protest cover up failures in security? Is it somehow okay if protesters kill Americans, but not al Qaeda?
    The people after the administration on this do indeed condemn Obama and Clinton for inadequate security. One important fact that many people overlook is that Benghazi was pretty much a war zone at the time. Since the Libyan government was unable/unwilling to do much of anything to defend the facility, you would have needed a fairly large number of Marines to do so. Stevens didn't want that kind of presence — he felt he couldn't do his job under those circumstances.

    But of course security deficiencies make up only part of the breathless indictment. The other major impeachable offence here is the way the administration MISLED the American people by LYING and PRETENDING that Al Qaeda didn't conduct this assault. OK, it wasn't really AQ, but there were people from AQ affiliates involved, and that's good enough.

    Ya see, Obama was going around saying that AQ was "on the run." If AQ attacked one of our overseas diplomatic facilities, that would undermine Obama's claim. So the WH made up this lie about the video. Yeah, yeah, it was really the CIA that put that out, picking up on press reports of interviews with some of the terrorists involved who said that was at least part of their motivation. But don't get sidelined — Obama's a liar. If you don't take that as a given, yer likely to get confused by the facts.

    To stop being sarcastic for a moment (sorry, but some of the comments I've seen here kinda lead me into it), let's ask ourselves: Isn't AQ in fact "on the run"? Haven't they been on the run since the fall of 2001 when we landed special forces in Afghanistan, started killing some and detaining others, and then believed we had Bin Laden cornered in a cave complex in Tora Bora? He got away. He hid in Pakistan, and was very quiet. We found him. He's not running or hiding anymore.

    Of course, I hate war. I hate killing. But let's be honest, we went after these people about as hard as it can be done. We bombed the hell out of that mountain hideout with B-52s. We showed no mercy for AQ's Taliban allies. We sent F-18s and AC-130s and Apaches, the best killing machine we have, out to mow them down and blow 'em up real good. If you didn't run, and if you weren't lucky, you were killed.

    AQ can't safely hide anywhere in the world today, and it's been that way for well over a decade. Why did Obama use "on the run" in his campaign? Because Bush used it within weeks of the 9/11 attacks: Bush: Terrorists 'On The Run'. Even those who oppose Obama should admit that he's a world-class politician — he doesn't miss a trick.
    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Right now it looks like … Obama as CnC was in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, dereliction of duty.
    Very official-sounding. Where's the impeachment article?
    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    the media (someone somewhere) blamed or kind of hinted at the video
    "'In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, the IC received numerous reports, both classified and unclassified, which provided contradictory accounts that there were demonstrations at the Temporary Mission Facility. In some cases, these intelligence reports--which were disseminated widely in the Intelligence Community--contained references to press reports on protests that were simply copied into intelligence products. Other reporting indicated there wete no protests." — U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, "Review of the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi Libya, September 11-12, 2012," Jan 15, 2014, p. 33

    I think I heard these reports appeared in some North African media outlets. I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but I need to prepare for another round of the War of 2014 between Boston and Montreal. Too bad we couldn't have settled this problem with AQ over a soccer (football) match.

    OK, one last one:
    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    If most people knew what happened in Benghazi during the debates he would have gutted Obama. But most didnt-the media was dragging its feet, and there was still much information being obscured by the whitehouse.
    What wasn't known? What is now known that wasn't known when that debate took place on Oct 17? In fact, what has come out since the beginning of October?
    there is a lot of BS floating around
    Not all that much really. You just see the same lame nonsense repeated over and over.

  8. #168
    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
    No . . . the clamor over Benghazi is the diversion.
    from what? The investigation is for discovery, not diversion. The diversion is on the side of those obstructing the discovery. Ask yourself why.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  9. #169
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    The difference between life and death?

    So..... if Ambassador Stevens was killed by protesters, maybe he'd still be alive????

    What is the difference between an ambassador killed by protestors due to bad security and one killed by al Queda due to bad security?
    Ive already answered this question-one is the result of a "random, spontaneous" event (much harder to plan for, and unexpected) vs dropping the ball after months of requests for additional security, increased AQ presence, and being ignored by Hillary.

    One paints the president and hillary as incompetent-and they simply couldn't have that in an election season, could they?

  10. #170
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,670

    Re: Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Exactly. The U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens request beefing up security at the Benghazi consulate and Hillary Clinton ignores the request while spending hundreds of millions of dollars on remodeling embassies in Europe, purchasing green cars and building charging stations for these cars, purchasing enough booze for embassy parties than the sailors of the entire Pacific Fleet could consume on a week long shore leave. Then to say there was no money for beefing up security ??? State Department security spending comes from the same State Department maintenance funding.

    Then you have the majority of those serving in the U.S. military asking why didn't Obama issue an order to at least try to save these Americans in Benghazi during the attack ? And those Navy and Army flag officers who went on the record were purged from the military by the Obama administration.

    As for if they were protesters or terrorist with links to Al Qaedas. It defiantly made a difference to the Obama White House because Obama reelection platform for being given a second chance in 2012 was that "Al Qaeda was being decimated and was on the run" which was a complete lie.
    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Because than its a random event that would have been hard to plan for, vs the culmination of months of attacks and denied pleas for help from the Presidents own representative, from his boss-the sec of state.

    That would have looked bad in the election season, wouldn't it?
    And there you have the source of all the conservative rage. The real scandal isn't that four Americans died, or that security wasn't tough enough. The REAL scandal is that Obama didn't take enough of a political hit before the '12 election.

    As someone who had family who almost didn't make it out of Iraq all I have to say is that's disgusting. 2,996 people died on 9/11 because of incompetence. 4,487 soldiers died and 32,223 were wounded in Iraq because of blatantly misrepresented intelligence and atrocious planning.

Page 17 of 34 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... 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
  •