• 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!

Ho Hum, another republican admits Benghazi is just a Hillary witch hunt. [W:42]

I do not know if your 1,000 year prediction will come true. However, to say that Bush is responsible for 9/11 is saying that he failed to imagine everything that would happen, then. A quite illogical statement, because as of now we DO imagine all of these thing that could happen, and the same who say that Bush failed to imagine 9/11 are against the stuff that would accurately predict it. EG: Defense budget, intelligence systems, and a more accurate police state.

Again, to say that Bush is responsible for economic collapse is also not entirely true. While some blame can go to the President and some policies. The bankers and the loaners are really the main problem from the crash. Everyone KNOWS this.

Now if you would have said, Bush will be blamed by some small portion for these two things 1,000 years from now. I guess I could see that happening, but then again. I thought you liberals were supposed to know that human civilization would have destroyed itself by then.

I'm not going to debate either of the two issues but I will point out that I did not say that bush* was responsible for 9/11. I said he was responsible for not preventing it. POTUS is responsible for defending the nation from attack. Everyone knows this. Now, how much *blame* you think bush* has is a different isssue. Blame and responsibility are not the same.

As far as the crash goes, no, everybody does not know that.
 
I'm not going to debate either of the two issues but I will point out that I did not say that bush* was responsible for 9/11. I said he was responsible for not preventing it. POTUS is responsible for defending the nation from attack. Everyone knows this. Now, how much *blame* you think bush* has is a different isssue. Blame and responsibility are not the same.

As far as the crash goes, no, everybody does not know that.

Defending the nation and knowing when something is going to happen are two different things too. Again, I said we didn't have near as much intelligence as we do today, but terrorist attacks still happen. Obama is responsible for terrorist attacks as is Bush. But, of course Presidents are supposed to make sure all their citizens stay safe. However, there will always be people willing to KILL us due to their crazy and insane ideas. NO President can prevent that. So basically yeah, we all know Bush was President during the 9/11 attacks. So what? People say the Clinton years couldn't have prevented it either... Maybe it was unpreventable.

We should be doing a better job at tracking everything going on over there or we just blow them all up. Those are our only two options and both will lead to hard choices....
 
How old are you? Or were you paying attention during the Bush years? I'm not going to name things that can be easily found with a google search. Why don't you do some research before you jump to conclusions? Man, how liberals forget about their hatred for Bush after nearly 8 years... Hm.

You don't like people insulting Obama. I didn't like people insulting Bush. BTW when does the statute of limitations run out on blaming Bush for both of those things??? Care to answer this direct question? To say that the insults against Bush are vague and undefined is simply negligent. You keep spouting them even though, they AREN'T True and are from the same cusp as the Obama insults.

OK. You want some close examples. You did try to poke holes in his military record. I'm sure you are going to say his military record should be questioned right? Why then shouldn't crazy people question Obama's birth? See what I mean. Same thing different sides. You also repeatedly called him every descriptive word for stupid that lies from the dictionary, and even tried to make a thing out of his grades. I guess Obama was smart and covered his up. Huh? So how is that better?

When are you going to drop the "slightly" from your moniker?

Con, your rant doesn't make a lot of sense. This thread is about a witch hunt. Say "witch hunt" out loud. You said "something something similar things". I asked you to clarify that statement and you have yet to back up that statement in any way. Your incoherent rant tells me you cant hence you rant instead of admitting it. And I do find it funny that the one posting childish rants asks "how old are you". and con, notice how you ask a lot of "questions" instead of making a point. its a classic conservative dodge. the "statute of limitation" narrative is especially funny.

anyhoo, read this slowly: this thread and my responses to you have nothing to do with me or your opinion of my opinion. its about the fact that two republicans and one of the investigators telling us that the Benghazi investigation is a witch hunt. If you are unable to respond in an coherent and adult fashion maybe you refrain from posting at a debate forum.
 
Con, your rant doesn't make a lot of sense. This thread is about a witch hunt. Say "witch hunt" out loud. You said "something something similar things". I asked you to clarify that statement and you have yet to back up that statement in any way. Your incoherent rant tells me you cant hence you rant instead of admitting it. And I do find it funny that the one posting childish rants asks "how old are you". and con, notice how you ask a lot of "questions" instead of making a point. its a classic conservative dodge. the "statute of limitation" narrative is especially funny.

anyhoo, read this slowly: this thread and my responses to you have nothing to do with me or your opinion of my opinion. its about the fact that two republicans and one of the investigators telling us that the Benghazi investigation is a witch hunt. If you are unable to respond in an coherent and adult fashion maybe you refrain from posting at a debate forum.

wow you completely ignored two of my examples of which you asked for. Then again, that's not surprising to me coming from you. Maybe it doesn't make sense, because democrat hatred of Bush doesn't make that much sense. Think about that for a second.
 
wow you completely ignored two of my examples of which you asked for. Then again, that's not surprising to me coming from you. Maybe it doesn't make sense, because democrat hatred of Bush doesn't make that much sense. Think about that for a second.

con, read this slowly, there were not two examples of a "witch hunt" in your incoherent rant. when you grow up, try to post something relevant and coherent. remember this thread is about the fact that two republicans and one of the investigators told us that the Benghazi investigation is a witch hunt.
 
Nobody on the Benghazi Committee is saying this. Any RINO can say something that is wrong. Richard Hanna is wrong. Hillary is a felon. She belongs in prison.

magic presto, they're RINO's. whining at the facts doesn't magically change reality. maybe you'd be more comfortable in a chat room environment.
 
magic presto, they're RINO's. whining at the facts doesn't magically change reality. maybe you'd be more comfortable in a chat room environment.

I think asking everyone who disagrees with you to leave this forum is bad form...
 
Why were they not witch hunts? The grades and the military record?

con, I'm going to type this as slow as I can. If you think the delusions you cling to are witch hunts then using actual sentences, explain why you think they constitute a witch hunt. see how you continue with the typical conservative dodge of "oh yea, what about this?" You seem to confuse legitimate criticism with witch hunt. Its why you have to ask "questions". again, this thread is about the fact that two republicans and one of the investigators told us that the Benghazi investigation is a witch hunt. Its not about me. Its not about your delsuions. When you realize this a debate forum and not a chat room, feel free to respond.
 
That is what political parties do....


It's doesn't mean the investigation of Benghazi isn't without merit... you are promoting a logical fallacy.

If opposing parties don't keep each other in check.... who will??

I think after 7 investigations into Benghazi we know what happened. Instead of working together to make our emissaries safer, the republicans are still trying to find fault with the secretary of state which happened to be Hillary who is now running for president
 
con, I'm going to type this as slow as I can. If you think the delusions you cling to are witch hunts then using actual sentences, explain why you think they constitute a witch hunt. see how you continue with the typical conservative dodge of "oh yea, what about this?" You seem to confuse legitimate criticism with witch hunt. Its why you have to ask "questions". again, this thread is about the fact that two republicans and one of the investigators told us that the Benghazi investigation is a witch hunt. Its not about me. Its not about your delsuions. When you realize this a debate forum and not a chat room, feel free to respond.

No this is where you are wrong again and twisting the entire thing. You posted a babbling rant about stuff you thought were insults against Obama. That's when I responded about the lies and insults said about Bush. The examples I posted, it just so happens can also be described as witch-hunts. Poking through someone's military record is a witch-hunt! So is poking through someone's grades. So you tell me why you think they aren't. Don't just say "legitimate criticisms." Explain in full sentences.
This is just like poking through someone's daily life during and up to a terrorist attack on one of our embassies. They are all part of the same cusp of partisan politics that has been around in this country for centuries! So stop hiding behind your partisan blinders and admit Democrats do this stuff too.

Sure, 7 investigations is a lot. Why do you think I have admitted it? We all agree on that but as I said before, that is a legitimate operation whether political or not. I'm not sure it really matter. Democrats constantly dig into the evils of the Koch Brothers and Big Oil and every other little thing that bothers them about western civilization. Some of which is also necessary. Are they allowed to go overboard? Sure, as long as they keep up their own enthusiasm and have the will to continue. You keep complaining about something that is allowed to exist, as far as I know.

BTW, I never knew asking questions was strictly a conservative dodge. Wow..:roll:
 
If you are unable to respond in an coherent and adult fashion maybe you refrain from posting at a debate forum.
Says the most immature poster on the site. However, your obnoxious and adolescent posting style hasn't prevented you, on this one occasion, from actually swerving into the truth. Benghazi is a non-issue. Republicans look foolish in their continued pursuit of this non story and Hillary will emerge from this in a stronger position than when she went in.
 
Says the most immature poster on the site. However, your obnoxious and adolescent posting style hasn't prevented you, on this one occasion, from actually swerving into the truth. Benghazi is a non-issue. Republicans look foolish in their continued pursuit of this non story and Hillary will emerge from this in a stronger position than when she went in.

You know I was thinking about that just the other day as it seems like she didn't actually wipe her email server either. She just caused a lot of confusion over at the SD for allowing people to use personal email accounts. I would still hate to see her and her SD team in charge of the country's fledgling technology systems, but that's besides the point. I think the investigations are allowed to continue as long as they have the will to do it. Though I think this recent implosion will be the beginning of the end of that. So the question becomes, why wasn't Vern complaining after the fourth fifth or sixth investigation as loudly as he is now?
 
sorry vance, your inability to respond with anything other than whining only proves my point. thanks. Now when you feel up to it you should read the report from the 7th investigation. well that's if you actually care about the truth.

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf
Im sorry. Its hard to take anything I see a RAT write too seriously about this topic considering how much you RATS have been trying to bury the Benghazi thing since day one.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's knock off the personal attacks, mudslinging and name calling.
 
No this is where you are wrong again and twisting the entire thing. You posted a babbling rant about stuff you thought were insults against Obama. That's when I responded about the lies and insults said about Bush. The examples I posted, it just so happens can also be described as witch-hunts. Poking through someone's military record is a witch-hunt! So is poking through someone's grades. So you tell me why you think they aren't. Don't just say "legitimate criticisms." Explain in full sentences.
This is just like poking through someone's daily life during and up to a terrorist attack on one of our embassies. They are all part of the same cusp of partisan politics that has been around in this country for centuries! So stop hiding behind your partisan blinders and admit Democrats do this stuff too.

Sure, 7 investigations is a lot. Why do you think I have admitted it? We all agree on that but as I said before, that is a legitimate operation whether political or not. I'm not sure it really matter. Democrats constantly dig into the evils of the Koch Brothers and Big Oil and every other little thing that bothers them about western civilization. Some of which is also necessary. Are they allowed to go overboard? Sure, as long as they keep up their own enthusiasm and have the will to continue. You keep complaining about something that is allowed to exist, as far as I know.

BTW, I never knew asking questions was strictly a conservative dodge. Wow..:roll:

Can you explain one instance where democrats did something this bad, manufactured a massive controversy completely out of thin air ?
 
Can you explain one instance where democrats did something this bad, manufactured a massive controversy completely out of thin air ?

Sure ever hear of the movie Fahrenheit 9/11? No. What about an Inconvenient Truth? Oh right you want something completely out of thin air. OK How about all the recent race riots and Black Lives Matters? No Ok How about Obama's entire 2008 campaign message? How is that Hope and Change coming? Even Chris Matthews doesn't have the thrill up his leg anymore. Still not good enough? What about that campus rape story? Remember that? It was supposed to start the discussion and change rape culture on campus, even though it was fake!

Oh speaking of young people we must not forget the liberal war against the NFL and how it damages young men and should be abolished...

The Go To Liberal defense for making up fake stuff is, "Who cares, it brings awareness to the issue."
 
Last edited:
I think asking everyone who disagrees with you to leave this forum is bad form...

I ask no one to leave. I simply suggest if they are unable to post in a style appropriate for a debate forum that maybe they would be more comfortable in a chat room environment. For example when posters whine incessantly at a poster or about him, they're not really trying to have an honest and intelligent conversation. when they post they typical "oh yea both sides do similar things" without explaining, I guestion if they understand what a debate forum is. And when asked to explain they choose to make vague references as if they are replying. when you ask them again to please to explain their point they continue to whine and deflect. Lets look at this new poster. I called out this poster for simply calling people Rinos that didn't tell him what he wanted to believe. Lets see how he responds to this.


I just know the facts. Hillary has committed felonies.

WSJ Op-ED: The Real Benghazi Investigation | Select Committee on Benghazi

Richard Nixon was forced to resign based on NOTHING compared to Hillary's felonies.
Well R, that is a vast improvement over your "everybody is a Rino" rant. But I see you continued your "felony" narrative. I'm not seeing anything in your link to back up your "felony" narrative. Its good form when you post a link to cut and paste the blurb you think is relevant to your post. I say that because I don't see anything in the link that in any way backs up your "felony" narrative. All I read was a misleading editorial about Gowdy that tries to dismiss McCarthy admitting that the investigation is a witch hunt. And your editorial is out of date. You need a misleading editorial about gowdy that tries to dismiss two republican congress and a named source working for the committee that admits the investigation is a witch hunt.
 
Im sorry. Its hard to take anything I see a RAT write too seriously about this topic considering how much you RATS have been trying to bury the Benghazi thing since day one.

I think I figured out your problem. You are subconsciously trying to compensate for your lack of response concerning the 9-11 commission antics from Bush.. See bush and company tried to stop that commission and would not speak to them under oath. He only agreed to speak with them in secret and only for an hour and only with Dick. "only for an hour" should rankle a real American. Democrats have not been trying to bury anything from day 1. Read this slowly, this is the 8th investigation. 2 congressman and an investigator for the committee have confirmed its a witch hunt. I can show you where Cheney lied to the 9-11 commission and nothing was done. that's the opposite of a witch hunt just so you know.
 
I think I figured out your problem. You are subconsciously trying to compensate for your lack of response concerning the 9-11 commission antics from Bush.. See bush and company tried to stop that commission and would not speak to them under oath. He only agreed to speak with them in secret and only for an hour and only with Dick. "only for an hour" should rankle a real American. Democrats have not been trying to bury anything from day 1. Read this slowly, this is the 8th investigation. 2 congressman and an investigator for the committee have confirmed its a witch hunt. I can show you where Cheney lied to the 9-11 commission and nothing was done. that's the opposite of a witch hunt just so you know.
After you are done with the personal attacks....can you answer these questions?

When did the State Department know there was a threat?
Why didnt they act upon their intel?
Who fed the media the lie about the cause of the attack?
Why did everyone in the Obama administration knowingly spread a story they knew was a lie regarding the cause of the attacks?
Why did it take 3 years to produce the emails?

Those are some pretty direct questions...wouldnt you say? Something that direct...that shouldnt take 3 years to answer, should it?
 
FBI investigation of Hillary’s emails is ‘criminal probe’ | New York Post

But the inspector general for the intelligence community has told Congress that of 40 Clinton emails randomly reviewed as a sample of her correspondence as secretary of state, four contained classified information.

If it is proved that Clinton knowingly sent, received or stored classified information in an unauthorized location, she risks prosecution under the same misdemeanor federal security statute used to prosecute former CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus, said former federal prosecutor Bradley Simon.

Yes, Hillary Clinton Broke the Law | National Review Online

Here is the Federal Records Act, passed in 1950: The head of each Federal agency shall make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities. (44 U.S. Code § 3101) So the question would seem to be: Are emails records? The answer is obvious — and was so long before Hillary Clinton took over at Foggy Bottom. Here is the State Department’s own treatment of the question from 1995: Another important modern improvement is the ease of communication now afforded to the Department world-wide through the use of E-mail. . . . All employees must be aware that some of the variety of the messages being exchanged on E-mail are important to the Department and must be preserved; such messages are considered Federal records under the law. (5 FAM [Foreign Affairs Manual] 443.1) In fact, step-by-step guidance was being offered to employees two decades ago about how to preserve email records. So if Clinton failed to follow procedures, it was not for lack of available instruction on the subject. There have been modifications, particularly in recent years, about what constitutes “private email” that does not fall under the purview of these regulations, but such details are irrelevant here, because Clinton apparently did not transfer any of the communications from her private account for preservation. To maintain that that is above-board, one also must maintain that Clinton did not send a single work-related email in four years as America’s top diplomat. Which we know is false. So, yes, Hillary Clinton broke the law.

th
 
For example when posters whine incessantly at a poster or about him, they're not really trying to have an honest and intelligent conversation.

And this doesn't stop you from doing similar things. You call everyone who disagrees with you con, and ask them to debate "properly." Without even defining what you mean by that.

when they post they typical "oh yea both sides do similar things" without explaining, I guestion if they understand what a debate forum is.

So I'm not really sure what you expected here. Do you actually hear yourself? Do you not understand that this is a debate politics forum!!! That usually means everything is fair game in politics. Maybe YOU'D be more comfortable in Democratic Underground. Though because your only "slightly" liberal. I'm not sure they would like you that much...

Sure we can all agree with you on this topic and say yeah. Look at those crazy republicans constantly going after Hillary, but then. That wouldn't really be a debate would it? I'm sorry did you want to debate how crazy JUST the Republicans are? Again what did you expect?

There is nothing in the rules on DP that says we can't point out how one-sided you are being. In fact, there is a whole entire section of this website devoted to media bias, highlighting one-sided hypocrisy on both sides.

So I replied to someone else who asked a similar question about Democrats making crap up out of thin air. Care to reply to that or are you just going to ignore it? These examples are only vague to somebody who hasn't been into politics in the last ten years, so why not google these controversies for yourself and learn something about how crazy democrats can be instead of only picking on Republicans. But I remember you don't like examples that aren't from this election period, so I included at least two.

Sure ever hear of the movie Fahrenheit 9/11? No. What about an Inconvenient Truth? Oh right you want something completely out of thin air. OK How about all the recent race riots and Black Lives Matters? No Ok How about Obama's entire 2008 campaign message? How is that Hope and Change coming? Even Chris Matthews doesn't have the thrill up his leg anymore. Still not good enough? What about that campus rape story? Remember that? It was supposed to start the discussion and change rape culture on campus, even though it was fake!

Oh speaking of young people we must not forget the liberal war against the NFL and how it damages young men and should be abolished...

The Go To Liberal defense for making up fake stuff is, "Who cares, it brings awareness to the issue."

I'll add one more and say that the liberal/hippie war against Monsanto and GMOs are usually built up around false pretenses and failure to understand science and basic genetics.
 
Last edited:
Sure ever hear of the movie Fahrenheit 9/11? No. What about an Inconvenient Truth? Oh right you want something completely out of thin air. OK How about all the recent race riots and Black Lives Matters? No Ok How about Obama's entire 2008 campaign message? How is that Hope and Change coming? Even Chris Matthews doesn't have the thrill up his leg anymore. Still not good enough? What about that campus rape story? Remember that? It was supposed to start the discussion and change rape culture on campus, even though it was fake!

Oh speaking of young people we must not forget the liberal war against the NFL and how it damages young men and should be abolished...

The Go To Liberal defense for making up fake stuff is, "Who cares, it brings awareness to the issue."

That's a resounding "No" then ?

I'm not talking about when they bring attention to some issue your propaganda told you not to care about.

I'm talking about putting a bullseye on a politician for absolutely no reason at all, and then go on to completely, unquestionably lie about them, continually, for three+ years.
 
Back
Top Bottom