• 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!

Republican-led report debunks Benghazi theories and accusations

beefheart said:
Beirut?

He was the greatest baseball player of all time.

(I don't hear people talking about Beirut, you had to dig deep to make that one up)
Click to expand...

Of course no one ever brought that up. :lamo
 
Amadeus said:
Republicans should pay a heavy price for this, but they won't. They won't even learn their lesson because no one holds them accountable. Two years of politics-polluting vitriol and it ends with a report that quietly lets Republicans off the hook. These same Republicans will be stirring up sh!t again the next time Obama sneezes.

Until then, to all Benghazi drum-beaters, you're a bunch of losers. Pack your sh!t up and get the f**k out of here.
Click to expand...

No, the people who're still trying to cover the asses of the Democrats and Obama are the ones who should eat ****.


The OBama administration, Hillary and the Democrats ( and their supporters ) pushsd the false narrative of a protest gone awry because it was Politically damaging to tell the truth about how 4 American died.
 
beefheart said:
So, we have wasted taxpayer's money a seventh time and came up with the same conclusion every time.

Wait....lets have another investigation! Because:


BENGHAZI!!!!
Click to expand...


Obama and the Democrats and Hillary Clinton LIED to the American people and to the family members of those who lost their lives at a American embassy that had been attacked 2 weeks prior.

Thats and the fact that Obama and Hillary and the Democrats are a bunch of low lifes has already been established.
 
Deuce said:
Wrongest Post of the Year, 2014 nomination.
Click to expand...



His post was spot on.

Obama, Hillary , the Democrats and their supporters DID try to diminish the deaths of four Americans.

You people are STILL doing it.
 
Fenton said:
His post was spot on.

Obama, Hillary , the Democrats and their supporters DID try to diminish the deaths of four Americans.

You people are STILL doing it.
Click to expand...

I knew Sean Smith. Don't talk to me about diminishing death.
 
I don' think this report about a report is true at all. Drudge report used to give the Benghazi story a huge amount of space and had big headline banners every time a pundit commented on it. Today - there is nothing. So this is simply not true.






;)
 
Fenton said:
Obama and the Democrats and Hillary Clinton LIED to the American people and to the family members of those who lost their lives at a American embassy that had been attacked 2 weeks prior.

Thats and the fact that Obama and Hillary and the Democrats are a bunch of low lifes has already been established.
Click to expand...


You are 0-7
 
Prior to Benghazi, were there 13 attacks on embassies ... under President Bush?

On May 5, 2014, Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., told MSNBC host Ed Schultz that there has already been exhaustive testimony and investigation of the incident.

"This thing is just going on and on to boredom actually," Garamendi said. "The Armed Services Committee actually did a hearing and the result was there’s nothing here. That’s obviously a great tragedy, but Ed, during the George W. Bush period, there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world. Sixty people died. In Karachi, there was a death of one of our diplomats, and those were not investigated during that period of time because it was a tragedy."
Click to expand...

Interesting conclusion -
Overall, we found Garamendi slightly understated the number of deadly attacks and total fatalities, even using a strict definition. ... so we rate it Mostly True.
Click to expand...
 
CanadaJohn said:
It was only a left/right issue because many on the left wanted to dismiss the deaths of four Americans in a diplomatic facility as no big deal.
Click to expand...

:shock:

Are you serious with this?
 
apdst said:
The Libbos can't seem to shutup about Beirut.
Click to expand...

BS. Dems had opportunity to hang Beruit politically around Reagan's neck. They did not. Please prove they did.

apdst said:
No matter what conclusion this report comes to, it doesn't change all the other lies the regime told about Benghazi.
Click to expand...

Your denial. It is delicious.
 
Somerville said:
Prior to Benghazi, were there 13 attacks on embassies ... under President Bush?



Interesting conclusion -
Click to expand...

A bombing outside of an Embassy is now counted as a bombing of the Embassy.

Interesting how the left keeps changing the definition of words to further a political agenda.

From your own link.

> "Is Benghazi different? Absolutely," said Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and an adjunct assistant professor in Georgetown University’s security studies program.

One reason, he said, is that an American ambassador died in the attack, which hadn’t happened since the 1970s. Another relevant question, Gartenstein-Ross said, "is whether what happened was put to the American people in an honest manner, not just with respect to the administration, but also with respect to the intelligence community."..."<
 
CanadaJohn said:
Let's see. The Republican House authorized and co-produced a bipartisan report on the Benghazi attack and the deaths of an Ambassador and three brave former Marines and found that the CIA was not negligent in the lead up to and the handling of the situation as it happened. Americans should be proud of that non-political, bipartisan cooperation into a serious issue, and yet this thread is full of politics from those on the left without an apparent care for those who lost their lives.

I didn't see any reference to how the State Department or the White House handled the matter - both as it relates to security leading up to the attacks and the dissemination of false story lines following the events. Perhaps it's in the report or perhaps that was outside of the jurisdiction of the House Intelligence Committee.

Bottom line, those who complain that the House Republicans are driven solely by politics and attempts to embarrass the President and his administration should be heartened by the fact that at least some members of Congress are serious about their roles in oversight.
Click to expand...

Where was all this concern about the lives lost when all the republicans and their sheeple were dancing on their graves and disgracing their memories by fabricating lie after lie about Benghazi? NOW that they've been proven to be liars, you just now care about the politics of this topic? There were so many BS Benghazi threads they had to make a whole subforum for the threads in here. All of it lies. If you want to stand up for the people who got killed there, take on all those idiots who made that subforum flow with trumped up crap all in their name.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Let's see. The Republican House authorized and co-produced a bipartisan report on the Benghazi attack and the deaths of an Ambassador and three brave former Marines and found that the CIA was not negligent in the lead up to and the handling of the situation as it happened. Americans should be proud of that non-political, bipartisan cooperation into a serious issue, and yet this thread is full of politics from those on the left without an apparent care for those who lost their lives.

I didn't see any reference to how the State Department or the White House handled the matter - both as it relates to security leading up to the attacks and the dissemination of false story lines following the events. Perhaps it's in the report or perhaps that was outside of the jurisdiction of the House Intelligence Committee.

Bottom line, those who complain that the House Republicans are driven solely by politics and attempts to embarrass the President and his administration should be heartened by the fact that at least some members of Congress are serious about their roles in oversight.
Click to expand...

This just in - that's exactly what drives them. There have been more investigations and finger pointing for Benghazi from the Republicans than ever took place after 9/11. Want to compare available intelligence and body counts on those two incidents?
 
poweRob said:
BS. Dems had opportunity to hang Beruit politically around Reagan's neck. They did not. Please prove they did.



Your denial. It is delicious.
Click to expand...

What have I denied?
 
Kobie said:
:shock:

Are you serious with this?
Click to expand...

Yeah, apparently he is. Benghazi is only an issue because of the left!:lamo

I can only conclude that these people are nuts.
 
APACHERAT said:
A bombing outside of an Embassy is now counted as a bombing of the Embassy.

Interesting how the left keeps changing the definition of words to further a political agenda.

From your own link.

> "Is Benghazi different? Absolutely," said Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and an adjunct assistant professor in Georgetown University’s security studies program.

One reason, he said, is that an American ambassador died in the attack, which hadn’t happened since the 1970s. Another relevant question, Gartenstein-Ross said, "is whether what happened was put to the American people in an honest manner, not just with respect to the administration, but also with respect to the intelligence community."..."<
Click to expand...

Actually, Benghazi wasn't an embassy. Had it been an embassy there would have been a significant marine presence there. If you're going to rave, at least get your facts right.
 
Wiggen said:
Actually, Benghazi wasn't an embassy. Had it been an embassy there would have been a significant marine presence there. If you're going to rave, at least get your facts right.
Click to expand...

Where was the embassy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom