• 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!

Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Says

Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

VanceMack said:
You cant fix what was ****ed up til you know who ****ed up, how, and why.
Click to expand...
I disagree with part of your statement. The "who" is arbitrary, the why is what's important. We have already investigated the why and have already begun making those changes.

And right now...we know precisely jack and dammit about any of the details as to who what and why.
Click to expand...
Those who are in need to know already know plenty, as evidenced by the mountains of documents and testimony transcripts, etc.
keymanjim said:
You actually were attacking the source of the article and not the content thereof.
Click to expand...
No, I wasn't. I was attacking the notion people should not be allowed to question the validity of a source, especially given the dubious nature of this source.

I wasn't attacking the article, I was attacking the ridiculous idea one should not question a possibly biased source.

And, yes. I made a fondue in my short typing that. Is that a bad thing?
Click to expand...
A little worrisome, yes. :)
Fenton said:
No, its about finding out who was responzible for ignoring their request for more security, for ignoring the danger of keeping the Ambasador there, after a hole was blown in their compound wall and for the lies about the You-Tube Video.
Click to expand...
A) not really and B) this article does that in what way? It doesn't. It just fans the flames. It's meant for people just like you, who only want to listen to that which you already agree with, not something which might provide the slightest bit of objectivity.

What we need to know is WHY the process broke down and what can be done (if anything) to prevent in the future. The YouTube thing is nothing but a red herring. It was a red herring when presented by Democrats immediately after and it is a red herring now by Republicans to push a "cover-up" narrative. The YouTube discussion is a waste of time and the fact you're still talking about it is a waste of both of our time.

And we know why troops weren't sent in after we began received word of the assaults, we've already been told why. It was during the testimonies. So what we need to do is figure how the logistics to be better equipped for the future. That's what matters.

Aren't you folks getting tired of trying to defend dirt bags and scum of the earth liars ?
Click to expand...
I'll make you a deal. The moment you quit thinking everything a Democrat/liberal does is wrong, evil and scummy, I'll consider taking advice from you. Until that time comes, you'll just be another incredibly biased poster in my eyes.
MaggieD said:
Please provide your proof that Fox News regularly lies. If you can't tell the difference between their hard news segments and their infotainment, that's on you.
Click to expand...
While it really is irrelevant to this particular thread, feel free to watch more Jon Stewart or check out LiberalViewer on YouTube. There's no doubt they have their biases as well, but you cannot ignore the video evidence they provide.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

rocket88 said:
I'm going with the same folks who ignored the warnings about 9/11.
Click to expand...

That would be the Clinton administration that ignore or neglected these warnings, going all the way back to a very big and obvious warning in 1993. I'll remind you that while the actual attack took place very early in G.W. Bush's administration, all the planning and preparation for it, along with all the warnings that ought to have been apparent to a government that was paying enough attention, took place on Clinton's watch.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Bob Blaylock said:
That would be the Clinton administration that ignore or neglected these warnings, going all the way back to a very big and obvious warning in 1993. I'll remind you that while the actual attack took place very early in G.W. Bush's administration, all the planning and preparation for it, along with all the warnings that ought to have been apparent to a government that was paying enough attention, took place on Clinton's watch.
Click to expand...

I hate to speak for others, but I believe he's talking about this:

Kurt Eichenwald writes that the Bush administration received more warnings about terrorist plots before 9/11 than the now-infamous memo “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the U.S.” Eichenwald writes that particular memo did not include a specific warning—but several others did. In May 2001, there was a warning of a terrorist operation planned by a “group presently in the United States,” and in June, a brief that called an attack “imminent.” Eichenwald writes the information “Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed."
Click to expand...
Report: Bush Had More 9/11 Warnings - The Daily Beast
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

rocket88 said:
Prior to anything happening. PRIOR to the
attack when they "ignored" it. That's the real issue here, right? Because if the real issue is politicians lying, I've got news for you...

So before the attack, when Obama didn't send more security -- faulty intel is not criminal.

Again, you focus on Limbaugh. Jimbo's focusing on Bush. I swear you guys are like cats -- ooh a squirrel!
Click to expand...

You brought up the "right wing talk show host" as a pathetic comparison to Politicians who are so corrupt, so devoid of character, integrity and compassion, they would lie to the faces of the Family who lost their loved ones in Benghazzi.

You guys will sell out on just about any level.

The thing is you folks think of that as a positive, it just means that the train wrecks are much larger.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Bob Blaylock said:
That would be the Clinton administration that ignore or neglected these warnings, going all the way back to a very big and obvious warning in 1993. I'll remind you that while the actual attack took place very early in G.W. Bush's administration, all the planning and preparation for it, along with all the warnings that ought to have been apparent to a government that was paying enough attention, took place on Clinton's watch.
Click to expand...

Clearly a lot of it does go back to Clinton, but it's not as if Bush would have been powerless over actionable intelligence.

The point was that there likely wasn't a lot of actionable intelligence prior to Benghazi, just as there wasn't before 9/11. So blaming Obama is as pointless as blaming Bush for 9/11.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Fenton said:
You brought up the "right wing talk show host" as a pathetic comparison to Politicians who are so corrupt, so devoid of character, integrity and compassion, they would lie to the faces of the Family who lost their loved ones in Benghazzi.

You guys will sell out on just about any level.

The thing is you folks think of that as a positive, it just means that the train wrecks are much larger.
Click to expand...

I pointed out the right's propensity to stick up for their own folks. It's just as strong as that on the left. Only an idiot wouldn't see that. Heck, I've seen right on this very board, people who are still defending Nixon.

The one who blew it up into a bad analogy was you.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Slyfox696 said:
I disagree with part of your statement.
The "who" is arbitrary, the why is what's important. We have already investigated the why and have already begun making those changes.

Those who are in need to know already know plenty, as evidenced by the mountains of documents and testimony transcripts, etc.
No, I wasn't. I was attacking the notion people should not be allowed to question the validity of a source, especially given the dubious nature of this source.

I wasn't attacking the article, I was attacking the ridiculous idea one should not question a possibly biased source.

A little worrisome, yes. :)
A) not really and B) this article does that in what way? It doesn't. It just fans the flames. It's meant for people just like you, who only want to listen to that which you already agree with, not something which might provide the slightest bit of objectivity.

What we need to know is WHY the process broke down and what can be done (if anything) to prevent in the future. The YouTube thing is nothing but a red herring. It was a red herring when presented by Democrats immediately after and it is a red herring now by Republicans to push a "cover-up" narrative. The YouTube discussion is a waste of time and the fact you're still talking about it is a waste of both of our time.

And we know why troops weren't sent in after we began received word of the assaults, we've already been told why. It was during the testimonies. So what we need to do is figure how the logistics to be better equipped for the future. That's what matters.

I'll make you a deal. The moment you quit thinking everything a Democrat/liberal does is wrong, evil and scummy, I'll consider taking advice from you. Until that time comes, you'll just be another incredibly biased poster in my eyes.

While it really is irrelevant to this particular thread, feel free to watch more Jon Stewart or check out LiberalViewer on YouTube. There's no doubt they have their biases as well, but you cannot ignore the video evidence they provide.
Click to expand...

" The Process " broke down because it was Politically expediant to have a Libyan Ambassador, on the ground in Benghazi just prior to the election.

After he was murdered by terroist, NOT a uprising or riot it was politically expediant for them to first, Publicize a vague YouTube Video, make sure it was distributed to as many radical Islamic backwater countries as possible and then blame everything on the director.

All other secondary issues could be ignored, like safety or more security, or at least more security on SEPTEMBER 11TH !!!!

Ya think ?

And I'll stop looking upon the libs as scummy low life individuals when they show sincere HUMAN attributes like Character and Integrity, and SINCERE COMPASSION instead of putting their political well being first and foremost.

After Benghazzi they reminded me of adolescent punks who scrambled to get their lies straight so they could fool the morons.

Well we're not all Obama voters, and don't arbitrarily believe everything that they tell us, especially when its an OBVIOUS lie.

Otherwise if it walks like a duck, quaks like a duck and flies like a duck...
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

rocket88 said:
I pointed out the right's propensity to stick up for their own folks. It's just as
strong as that on the left. Only an idiot wouldn't see that. Heck, I've seen right on this very board, people who are still defending Nixon.

The one who blew it up into a bad analogy was you.
Click to expand...


Funny you should mention Nixon. At least he didn't get his Ambassador killed because he needed a political prop for a election.

A "victory" for his foreign affairs "brilliance".

He was ten times the leader Obama is, and was taken down for something Democrats get a slap on the wrist for these days.

Hell Sandy Berger shoved Top Secret documents in his socks, walked out with them, Clinton perjured himself. Appointed a ***kin criminal to run Fannie Mae, Oh but Nixon is evil. BS dude
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Fenton said:
Funny you should mention Nixon. At least he didn't get his Ambassador killed because he needed a political prop for a election.

A "victory" for his foreign affairs "brilliance".

He was ten times the leader Obama is, and was taken down for something Democrats get a slap on the wrist for these days.

Hell Sandy Berger shoved Top Secret documents in his socks, walked out with them, Clinton perjured himself. Appointed a ***kin criminal to run Fannie Mae, Oh but Nixon is evil. BS dude
Click to expand...

Point proved, thank you.

You'll defend anyone and anything if they're a Republican. Then you scream about partisanship. THAT's BS.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

rocket88 said:
Point proved, thank you.



You'll defend anyone and anything if they're a Republican. Then you scream about partisanship. THAT's BS.
Click to expand...

Why are you here ? To make a point that Benghazzi is just ideologues protecting their President ? Is that the point of the OP ? Or just you and your mitigation ?

FYI Nixon's not President, Obama is and people should be held responsible for a disaster that far out clipped anything Nixon did.

For a level of dishonesty that would make even hardcore socio-paths blush.

Try to stay on task.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Fenton said:
Why are you here ? To make a point that Benghazzi is just ideologues protecting their President ? Is that the point of the OP ? Or just you and your mitigation ?

FYI Nixon's not President, Obama is and people should be held responsible for a disaster that far out clipped anything Nixon did.

For a level of dishonesty that would make even hardcore socio-paths blush.

Try to stay on task.
Click to expand...

Oh, NOW you want to get back on track....sure....
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Slyfox696 said:
I disagree with part of your statement. The "who" is arbitrary, the why is what's important. We have already investigated the why and have already begun making those changes.

Those who are in need to know already know plenty, as evidenced by the mountains of documents and testimony transcripts, etc.
No, I wasn't. I was attacking the notion people should not be allowed to question the validity of a source, especially given the dubious nature of this source.

I wasn't attacking the article, I was attacking the ridiculous idea one should not question a possibly biased source.

A little worrisome, yes. :)
A) not really and B) this article does that in what way? It doesn't. It just fans the flames. It's meant for people just like you, who only want to listen to that which you already agree with, not something which might provide the slightest bit of objectivity.

What we need to know is WHY the process broke down and what can be done (if anything) to prevent in the future. The YouTube thing is nothing but a red herring. It was a red herring when presented by Democrats immediately after and it is a red herring now by Republicans to push a "cover-up" narrative. The YouTube discussion is a waste of time and the fact you're still talking about it is a waste of both of our time.

And we know why troops weren't sent in after we began received word of the assaults, we've already been told why. It was during the testimonies. So what we need to do is figure how the logistics to be better equipped for the future. That's what matters.

I'll make you a deal. The moment you quit thinking everything a Democrat/liberal does is wrong, evil and scummy, I'll consider taking advice from you. Until that time comes, you'll just be another incredibly biased poster in my eyes.

While it really is irrelevant to this particular thread, feel free to watch more Jon Stewart or check out LiberalViewer on YouTube. There's no doubt they have their biases as well, but you cannot ignore the video evidence they provide.
Click to expand...
Obviously they dont 'know' and neither do you. Of course...the who is never important...when it is someone you are invested in protecting. It IS absolutely important to determine all of those characteristics...unless of course...as discussed...you have something to hide...or in this case, someones ass to cover.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Slyfox696 said:
No, I wasn't. I was attacking the notion people should not be allowed to question the validity of a source, especially given the dubious nature of this source.

I wasn't attacking the article, I was attacking the ridiculous idea one should not question a possibly biased source.
Click to expand...
Just to refresh your memory:
Slyfox696 said:
Yes, imagine the audacity of people to suggest something a Republican lawyer told a disreputable Republican news site may not quite be as serious as suggested...
Click to expand...

Yep, you were attacking the source. Not the substance.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

iguanaman said:
You keep "forgetting" that the CIA was in charge of security in Benghazi not the State Dept.

CIA Takes Heat for Role in Libya - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

The CIA's secret role helps explain why security appeared inadequate at the U.S. diplomatic facility. State Department officials believed that responsibility was set to be shouldered in part by CIA personnel in the city through a series of secret agreements that even some officials in Washington didn't know about.
Click to expand...

Whether the CIA took over part or all of the security concerns, ultimately it was the state department's responsibility to ensure security. As it always has been, as it still is today.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Fenton said:
How is that relevent to Benghazi ?
Click to expand...
You'd have to ask the person who made the argument. :shrug:
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

keymanjim said:
Whether the CIA took over part or all of the security concerns, ultimately it was the state department's responsibility to ensure security. As it always has been, as it still is today.
Click to expand...

So the State Dept is responsible for keeping CIA personnel safe? Almost all of the people at the embassy were CIA operatives or employees, including the 2 dead security contractors.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

iguanaman said:
So the State Dept is responsible for keeping CIA personnel safe? Almost
all of the people at the embassy were CIA operatives or employees, including the 2 dead security contractors.
Click to expand...

And the dead Ambassador ?
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

iguanaman said:
So the State Dept is responsible for keeping CIA personnel safe? Almost all of the people at the embassy were CIA operatives or employees, including the 2 dead security contractors.
Click to expand...

Almost all. But, the CIA isn't responsible for their security. That has always been the state department's job. Even if they had relegated that job to the CIA, it's the state department that is responsible.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

That Embassy was a CIA operation, they were in charge of security and they should take all the blame
Click to expand...

hardly

daily beast: U.S. Officials Knew Libya Attacks Were Work of Al Qaeda Affiliates - The Daily Beast

cbs: Lt Col Woods says his 16 member team pulled a month before attack - CBS News

the hill: GOP: US Consulate received repeated threats, had requested more security - The Hill's Global Affairs

wapo: White House secret meetings examine al-Qaeda threat in North Africa - The Washington Post

the hill: Report: FBI still not on scene in Benghazi - The Hill's DEFCON Hill

wsj: Militant Link to Libya Attack - WSJ.com

beast: U.S. Consulate in Benghazi Bombed Twice in Run-Up to 9/11 Anniversary - The Daily Beast

wapo: Sensitive documents left behind at U.S. diplomatic post in Libya - The Washington Post

ex: Dems join chorus questioning Obama on attack | WashingtonExaminer

wapo: Panetta says undetermined terrorist group carried out attack on US Consulate in Libya - The Washington Post

abc: Some Administration Officials Were Concerned About Initial White House Push Blaming Benghazi Attack on Mob, Video - ABC News

wsj: Gross Security Failure - WSJ.com

abc: Security Concerns Keep FBI From Scene of Ambassador's Murder, Official Says - ABC News

wapo: From video to terrorist attack: a definitive timeline of administration statements on the Libya attack - The Washington Post

youtube: Tammy Duckworth: Marines Should Have Been in Benghazi - YouTube

beast: Obama's Shaky Libya Narrative - The Daily Beast

cns: Lieberman Calls for Independent Investigation into Libyan Attack | CNS News

cnn: Exclusive: Amb. Chris Stevens worried about al Qaeda hit list – Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs

huffpo: CNN's Use Of Christopher Stevens' Journal Is 'Disgusting': State Dept.

cbs: Why Did The White House Take So Long To Admit Libya Attack Was Terrorism? « CBS

weekly standard: Permanent Spin | The Weekly Standard

wsj: Miscues Before Libya Assault - WSJ

independent: US 'was warned of Libya embassy attack but did nothing' - Independent.ie

fox: Diplomatic, western posts targeted repeatedly in Benghazi in run-up to deadly assault | Fox News

buzzfeed: US Embassy In Cairo Deletes Controversial Tweets

sentinel: http://atlanticsentinel.com/2012/09/administration-insists-benghazi-attack-not-premeditated/

independent: Revealed: inside story of US envoy's assassination - World Politics - World - The Independent

atlantic wire: Report: Ambassador Stevens Said He Was on an Al-Qaeda Hit List

cns: Where Was Obama on Night of Benghazi Attack?

cbs, 60 minutes: Obama Says Attacks In Libya And Egypt Are Just "Bumps In The Road" - YouTube
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

keymanjim said:
Almost all. But, the CIA isn't responsible for their security. That has always been the state department's job. Even if they had relegated that job to the CIA, it's the state department that is responsible.
Click to expand...

That is ridiculous buck passing. Of course the CIA is responsible for its own employees and contractors, the State Dept has no way to protect people they don't even know exist. I wonder why the CIA gets a pass in your mind?
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Fenton said:
" The Process " broke down because it was Politically expediant to have a Libyan Ambassador, on the ground in Benghazi just prior to the election.
Click to expand...
That makes no sense. Are you saying we should pull all of our ambassadors every time we have an election?

After he was murdered by terroist, NOT a uprising or riot
Click to expand...
Uhh, even if it had been an uprising or riot, it still would have been an act of terror...like Obama said the very next day. :shrug:

it was politically expediant for them to first, Publicize a vague YouTube Video, make sure it was distributed to as many radical Islamic backwater countries as possible and then blame everything on the director.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it didn't actually work that way, but I'm sure you're not really interested in the truth if it gets in the way of your fictional narrative.

All other secondary issues could be ignored, like safety or more security, or at least more security on SEPTEMBER 11TH !!!!
Click to expand...
Yes, because the only place in the world it was 9/11 was in Benghazi. Everywhere else it was some other date. :roll:

The fact is they did amplify security in many different ways across the world. Obviously, something was missed, and this is what needs to be fixed. But that's what I and the current Administration has been saying all along. So what exactly are you getting at?

And I'll stop looking upon the libs as scummy low life individuals when they show sincere HUMAN attributes like Character and Integrity, and SINCERE COMPASSION instead of putting their political well being first and foremost.
Click to expand...
:lamo

You do realize no one takes your opinion seriously when you say things like this, don't you? I'm only responding because I have time to kill before I go do some work moving things.

After Benghazzi they reminded me of adolescent punks who scrambled to get their lies straight so they could fool the morons.
Click to expand...
As you are a Republican, I have no doubt you're quite familiar what that looks like.

Well we're not all Obama voters
Click to expand...
Okay...???

and don't arbitrarily believe everything that they tell us, especially when its an OBVIOUS lie.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm just going to go out on a limb and say with the mindset you have, you're probably not the best person to determine what's obvious and what's not.

Otherwise if it walks like a duck, quaks like a duck and flies like a duck...
Click to expand...
Then it's John McCain?

Probably not where you were heading with that, but it seemed appropriate nonetheless.
keymanjim said:
Yep, you were attacking the source. Not the substance.
Click to expand...
*sigh*

Read it again...I'm clearly attacking the idea someone cannot question a questionable source. I'm not attacking anything about the article, I'm merely pointing out the fact this was a Republican lawyer talking to a disreputable Republican news source and to suggest someone cannot question the integrity of this story based on those grounds is asinine.

Hopefully you'll understand it this time. If not, let me know, and I'll try to draw you a picture.
iguanaman said:
So the State Dept is responsible for keeping CIA personnel safe? Almost all of the people at the embassy were CIA operatives or employees, including the 2 dead security contractors.
Click to expand...

Under Obama's leadership, anything which might even loosely be connected to Obama is Obama's responsibility. You remember that one time when that one dude from over yonder who did that one thing which caused those people to do that stuff? Yeah, that was Obama's fault. Just ask Lindsey Graham or Fox News.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

iguanaman said:
That is ridiculous buck passing. Of course the CIA is responsible for its own employees and contractors, the State Dept has no way to protect people they don't even know exist. I wonder why the CIA gets a pass in your mind?
Click to expand...

Unless things has changed drastically, CIA types fill different posts within the embassy. You could have CIA types as a cultural attache, commo specialists, with USAID, the thing is they fill valid slots within an embassy. You could have a couple with the military attaches or almost anyplace.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

Slyfox696 said:
*sigh*

Read it again...
Click to expand...

You read it again:
Yes, imagine the audacity of people to suggest something a Republican lawyer told a disreputable Republican news site may not quite be as serious as suggested...
Click to expand...

You're attacking the source, not the substance.
 
Re: Obama Administration Officials Threatened Whistle-Blowers On Benghazi, Lawyer Say

rocket88 said:
So the people that worked at the FBI in 2001 have all left? None of them are still there? None of their proteges?
Click to expand...

If you knew you wouldn't be asking me. "Probably" doesn't make for much of a debate,which is why many Americans want facts instead. You're obviously in the other camp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom