• 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!

State Department: Stop asking us about the Beghazi attack

Why did you dishonestly snip this from my post when you quoted it?

The secene is under the control of the investigators. As they are the one's with the expertise in this area. If they don't tell the State Dept. anything or ask them not to say anything what do you want the State Dept to do? Give some pablum feel good rhetoric?

I think they are doing the right thing by keepping very tight lipped.
 
FBI — Frequently Asked Questions

under the "Counter Terrorism" header.

This is what it says:

What is the FBI’s role in combating terrorism?

The FBI is the nation’s lead federal law enforcement agency for investigating and preventing acts of domestic and international terrorism. It is the lead federal agency for investigating attacks involving weapons of mass destruction—those involving chemical, radiological, or biological agents or nuclear weapons. The FBI is also responsible for specific terrorism-related offenses, such as violence at airports, money laundering, attacks on U.S. officials, and others. The FBI also works closely with the Director of National Intelligence and other U.S. intelligence agencies to gather and analyze intelligence on terrorism and other security threats. It is the number one priority of the FBI to protect the U.S. and U.S. persons and interests around the world from terrorist attack.

I don't have a problem with the FBI using its keen resources to investigate the scene. What I have a problem with is hiding behind it, and pretending that because they're doing it, you can't say anything. This isn't a crime scene, as you agree, and nothing here indicates that an FBI investigation, internationally, makes it a crime scene. There's no "law" to be enforced here.
 
The secene is under the control of the investigators. As they are the one's with the expertise in this area. If they don't tell the State Dept. anything or ask them not to say anything what do you want the State Dept to do? Give some pablum feel good rhetoric?

I think they are doing the right thing by keepping very tight lipped.

Of course you do. :roll: But this doesn't answer my question -- why did you snip my post and make a sarcastic remark I had already addressed in what you snipped?
 
No. I'm just pointing out nobody should be surprised.

After all, we are a nation that admits to running secret prisons and engages in kidnapping on the international scene. Ideas like the Rule of Law are nothing but dusty good hearted jokes.

What do you mean, "no"? By saying this, you ARE saying the administrations are equivalent.
 
LOL, AQ is part of the CIA. Only problem is they have lost control of their dog so they want to kick it for being disobedient. That doesn't mean all cells in AQ are not on US side....secretly.
 
This is what it says:



I don't have a problem with the FBI using its keen resources to investigate the scene. What I have a problem with is hiding behind it, and pretending that because they're doing it, you can't say anything. This isn't a crime scene, as you agree, and nothing here indicates that an FBI investigation, internationally, makes it a crime scene. There's no "law" to be enforced here.

I'm hesitant to even post this, as I'm afraid I'm going to make your head explode....but here goes:

Can I obtain detailed information about a current FBI investigation that I see in the news?

No. Such information is protected from public disclosure, in accordance with current law and Department of Justice and FBI policy. This policy preserves the integrity of the investigation and the privacy of individuals involved in the investigation prior to any public charging for violations of the law. It also serves to protect the rights of people not yet charged with a crime.


Can I get a "LOL"? ;)
 
Of course you do. :roll: But this doesn't answer my question -- why did you snip my post and make a sarcastic remark I had already addressed in what you snipped?


Why are trying to use this attack as political fodder?
 
I'm hesitant to even post this, as I'm afraid I'm going to make your head explode....but here goes:

Can I obtain detailed information about a current FBI investigation that I see in the news?

No. Such information is protected from public disclosure, in accordance with current law and Department of Justice and FBI policy. This policy preserves the integrity of the investigation and the privacy of individuals involved in the investigation prior to any public charging for violations of the law. It also serves to protect the rights of people not yet charged with a crime.


Can I get a "LOL"? ;)

I'm not sure why my head would explode. This is what I've been saying. None of those concerns are at play here.
 
Why are trying to use this attack as political fodder?

What "political fodder"?

That's ridiculously lame. Like others, you attempt to quash criticisms of the Administration with this nonsense. Fortunately, as with the others, I'm not beholden to you.
 
I'm not sure why my head would explode. This is what I've been saying. None of those concerns are at play here.

The reason I was worried about marked increase in head pressure is the very last word..."crime"...this is an FBI investigation and they do treat it as a crime. At least, that's my interpretation of the passage.
 
What "political fodder"?

That's ridiculously lame. Like others, you attempt to quash criticisms of the Administration with this nonsense. Fortunately, as with the others, I'm not beholden to you.


Nope you're not beholden to me and fortunately your partison hackery is fairly transparent.
 
The reason I was worried about marked increase in head pressure is the very last word..."crime"...this is an FBI investigation and they do treat it as a crime.

The State Department isn't subordinate to the FBI.
 
Nope you're not beholden to me and fortunately your partison hackery is fairly transparent.

As I said, I will not yield to the lame name-calling. It's a legitimate criticism, and I will offer it whether or not it bothers you, and whatever you wish to call it.
 
As I said, I will not yield to the lame name-calling. It's a legitimate criticism, and I will offer it whether or not it bothers you, and whatever you wish to call it.


It's poilotical fodder. There are perfectly legit reasons to be very tight lipped
 
It's poilotical fodder. There are perfectly legit reasons to be very tight lipped

Oh, I see. Because you think there are, any notion to the contrary, no matter how well-supported (well enough that you've taken to the cheap shots instead of debating the substance, I notice), MUST be "political fodder."

This gets more lame the deeper you go down the hole.

Especially when I did offer one legitimate reason to be tight-lipped, which you pretended I did not and tried to bludgeon me with it, and pointed out that it's not reason they cited.
 
I don't see anything out of line with what the State Department said here.

I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face. Batman was a crime scene -- we had information galore. Zimmerman/Martin was a crime scene -- we had information galore...recordings...photographs...likely scenerios...coppers constantly updating the press.

This is bull****. And know what it tells me? All is not as it seems. Wake up.
 
The State Department isn't subordinate to the FBI.

Nor is the FBI subordinate to the State Department...they are subordinate to the Department of Justice and truthfully, critical elements may not ever be shared with Dept of State...basically, State is deferring to the FBI, as the FBI is the agency that has full authority over this investigation.
 
Nor is the FBI subordinate to the State Department...they are subordinate to the Department of Justice and truthfully, critical elements may not ever be shared with Dept of State...basically, State is deferring to the FBI, as the FBI is the agency that has full authority over this investigation.

They do not have "full authority." They have no authority that State doesn't grant, or that the President doesn't specifically order. State is a separate department over which Justice does not have authority.

State may well be granting the authority, but the point is, they make it sound like they have no choice. That's not correct, and it's lame.
 
I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face. Batman was a crime scene -- we had information galore. Zimmerman/Martin was a crime scene -- we had information galore...recordings...photographs...likely scenerios...coppers constantly updating the press.

This is bull****. And know what it tells me? All is not as it seems. Wake up.

Neither of these situations you cite have a single thing to do with national security or with the ongoing security of personnel still stationed at embassies and consulates in the 23 nations that are currently under siege. I'm wide awake, thank you very much - and my concerns rest with not compromising the safety of those still in harm's way.
 
They do not have "full authority." They have no authority that State doesn't grant, or that the President doesn't specifically order. State is a separate department over which Justice does not have authority.

State may well be granting the authority, but the point is, they make it sound like they have no choice. That's not correct, and it's lame.

I'm sorry, but since when does the FBI get its authority from the Dept of State? You just stated that State and DoJ are two separate departments but then state the FBI takes its marching orders from State??? I think I'm misinterpreting your post...can you clarify?
 
I'm sorry, but since when does the FBI get its authority from the Dept of State? You just stated that State and DoJ are two separate departments but then state the FBI takes its marching orders from State??? I think I'm misinterpreting your post...can you clarify?

You are.

The FBI cannot take over the investigation at an embassy without State's consent or a Presidential order. The FBI doesn't have that authority. So this act that State has no choice is just that - an act.

And State would not be beholden to FBI investigative policy, in terms of what it can discuss, even if they grant said consent. They can AGREE to it, but again, that's voluntary, and not the hands-tying that the spokeswoman suggested.
 
Okay how do we go about persecuting this war?

If not treating the scene as a crime scene and gathering as much information as possible.

We tell Libya that they can take care of the islamofacists, or we can do it for them and they can pick which side they want to be on.
 
Nor is the FBI subordinate to the State Department...they are subordinate to the Department of Justice and truthfully, critical elements may not ever be shared with Dept of State...basically, State is deferring to the FBI, as the FBI is the agency that has full authority over this investigation.

You make it sound as though State is voting "present" -- is that your intent?
 
So, what, you guys want what? The investigation to be contaminated by giving out the details to whoever asks?

****ing right-wingers. It's not about justice or security of the US or anything. It's just about attacking Democrats. You'd rather let our attackers go free than let the Democrats get a "win."
 
Back
Top Bottom