Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi

Is this the beginning of the end of Barack Obama's Presidency ?

Is this Barack Obama's Watergate ?

Nixon resigned because he lied (not under oath) that he had no knowledge of the Watergate break in knowing it could hurt his reelection for a second term in the White House. Nixon wasn't informed of the Watergate break in until after it happened. And no one was murdered during the Watergate break in.

Evidence has already surfaced that President Obama knew while the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was in progress that it was a well organized attack having nothing to do with a You Tube video and by the next day it was confirmed that the attack was an Al Qaeda attack.

But Obama knowing he has been running for reelection on a platform that Al Qaeda was on the run and being decimated, that if the American people found out that Al Qaeda isn't on the run and have expanded it's base of operations during his first term in the White House all across the Middle East and North Africa, this could cause him to lose reelection. So he ordered a cover up six weeks before the November elections.

Will President Obama show the same respect to the office of the Presidency and resign as Nixon did back in 74 ?

Will the Democrats follow the same course as the Republicans honorably did back in 74 when they told Nixon it's time to go ?

It's starting to look likely some Democrats see Obama's Watergate coming.

Sunday Shows: Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi, Syria

>" Democrats on Sunday morning's news shows appeared to back away from President Barack Obama on his administration's response to the Benghazi terror attack and his blurry "red line" on Syria's chemical weapons.
On Fox News Sunday, Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) admitted that the Obama administration's talking points on Benghazi, edited to remove references to extremism and blaming protests against an anti-Islamic YouTube video for the violence, were "false. They were wrong. There were no protests outside the Benghazi compound."

On CBS News' Face the Nation, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), the Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, also admitted that the administration's talking points were wrong, though putting the changes down to the fact that the intelligence changed over time in a "volatile situation."


Meanwhile, on Syria, former Rep. Jane Harman, a prominent California Democraet, acknowledged on NBC News' Meet the Press that the Obama administration had been slow to respond: "I wish we had acted sooner."

Republicans remain divided on the Syria issue, but on Benghazi the caucus anticipates a week of testimony that will prove deeply damaging to the Obama administration, as well as the media's attempts to protect him. "<
Sunday Shows: Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi, Syria

APACHERAT said:

Is this the beginning of the end of Barack Obama's Presidency ?

Is this Barack Obama's Watergate ?

Nixon resigned because he lied (not under oath) that he had no knowledge of the Watergate break in knowing it could hurt his reelection for a second term in the White House. Nixon wasn't informed of the Watergate break in until after it happened. And no one was murdered during the Watergate break in.

Evidence has already surfaced that President Obama knew while the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was in progress that it was a well organized attack having nothing to do with a You Tube video and by the next day it was confirmed that the attack was an Al Qaeda attack.

But Obama knowing he has been running for reelection on a platform that Al Qaeda was on the run and being decimated, that if the American people found out that Al Qaeda isn't on the run and have expanded it's base of operations during his first term in the White House all across the Middle East and North Africa, this could cause him to lose reelection. So he ordered a cover up six weeks before the November elections.

Will President Obama show the same respect to the office of the Presidency and resign as Nixon did back in 74 ?

Will the Democrats follow the same course as the Republicans honorably did back in 74 when they told Nixon it's time to go ?

It's starting to look likely some Democrats see Obama's Watergate coming.

Sunday Shows: Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi, Syria

>" Democrats on Sunday morning's news shows appeared to back away from President Barack Obama on his administration's response to the Benghazi terror attack and his blurry "red line" on Syria's chemical weapons.
On Fox News Sunday, Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) admitted that the Obama administration's talking points on Benghazi, edited to remove references to extremism and blaming protests against an anti-Islamic YouTube video for the violence, were "false. They were wrong. There were no protests outside the Benghazi compound."

On CBS News' Face the Nation, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), the Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, also admitted that the administration's talking points were wrong, though putting the changes down to the fact that the intelligence changed over time in a "volatile situation."


Meanwhile, on Syria, former Rep. Jane Harman, a prominent California Democraet, acknowledged on NBC News' Meet the Press that the Obama administration had been slow to respond: "I wish we had acted sooner."

Republicans remain divided on the Syria issue, but on Benghazi the caucus anticipates a week of testimony that will prove deeply damaging to the Obama administration, as well as the media's attempts to protect him. "<
Sunday Shows: Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi, Syria

Click to expand...

I tried this thread, nobody cared, maybe you will have better luck than I did. I do think as this cover up unravels it could be the undoing of obama's presidency though. I'm not talking impeachment but if he was elected on the basis of a cover up and a huge lie to the American people he may be considered an illegitimate president and may as well spend his second term playing more golf, more BB and taking more vacations because he will be more than a lame duck, he will be completely impotent.

APACHERAT said:

Is this the beginning of the end of Barack Obama's Presidency ?

Is this Barack Obama's Watergate ?

Nixon resigned because he lied (not under oath) that he had no knowledge of the Watergate break in knowing it could hurt his reelection for a second term in the White House. Nixon wasn't informed of the Watergate break in until after it happened. And no one was murdered during the Watergate break in.

Evidence has already surfaced that President Obama knew while the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was in progress that it was a well organized attack having nothing to do with a You Tube video and by the next day it was confirmed that the attack was an Al Qaeda attack.

But Obama knowing he has been running for reelection on a platform that Al Qaeda was on the run and being decimated, that if the American people found out that Al Qaeda isn't on the run and have expanded it's base of operations during his first term in the White House all across the Middle East and North Africa, this could cause him to lose reelection. So he ordered a cover up six weeks before the November elections.

Will President Obama show the same respect to the office of the Presidency and resign as Nixon did back in 74 ?

Will the Democrats follow the same course as the Republicans honorably did back in 74 when they told Nixon it's time to go ?

It's starting to look likely some Democrats see Obama's Watergate coming.

Sunday Shows: Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi, Syria

>" Democrats on Sunday morning's news shows appeared to back away from President Barack Obama on his administration's response to the Benghazi terror attack and his blurry "red line" on Syria's chemical weapons.
On Fox News Sunday, Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) admitted that the Obama administration's talking points on Benghazi, edited to remove references to extremism and blaming protests against an anti-Islamic YouTube video for the violence, were "false. They were wrong. There were no protests outside the Benghazi compound."

On CBS News' Face the Nation, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), the Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, also admitted that the administration's talking points were wrong, though putting the changes down to the fact that the intelligence changed over time in a "volatile situation."


Meanwhile, on Syria, former Rep. Jane Harman, a prominent California Democraet, acknowledged on NBC News' Meet the Press that the Obama administration had been slow to respond: "I wish we had acted sooner."

Republicans remain divided on the Syria issue, but on Benghazi the caucus anticipates a week of testimony that will prove deeply damaging to the Obama administration, as well as the media's attempts to protect him. "<
Sunday Shows: Democrats Back Away from Obama on Benghazi, Syria

Click to expand...

I stopped reading when you asked if President Obama would resign.

Benghazi is not Watergate. Jesus. Watergate attempted to disenfranchise the American people. After Nixon knew exactly what had happened, he did everything in his power to cover it up.

Benghazi was a screw-up. And that's IF it happened the way I think it did: that our country failed to protect its Ambassador and didn't send help when they could have and should have.

To me, it isn't important that he said it was all about a YouTube video. Anyone who heard that discounted it from Jump Street, in my opinion.

MaggieD said:

Benghazi is not Watergate. Jesus.

Click to expand...

It's called Benghazigate, so it's the same thing. Deal with it.

MaggieD said:

I stopped reading when you asked if President Obama would resign.

Benghazi is not Watergate. Jesus. Watergate attempted to disenfranchise the American people. After Nixon knew exactly what had happened, he did everything in his power to cover it up.

Benghazi was a screw-up. And that's IF it happened the way I think it did: that our country failed to protect its Ambassador and didn't send help when they could have and should have.

To me, it isn't important that he said it was all about a YouTube video. Anyone who heard that discounted it from Jump Street, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Nobody died in Watergate, it pales in comparison to Benghazi.

sawyerloggingon said:

Nobody died in Watergate, it pales in comparison to Benghazi.

Click to expand...

Nobody died in Iraq...o wait never mind.

sawyerloggingon said:

Nobody died in Watergate, it pales in comparison to Benghazi.

Click to expand...

No. I don't agree.

I know you don't like the guy, (hell, I don't either) but to even contemplate it would cause his impeachment is ludicrous.

MaggieD said:

No. I don't agree.

I know you don't like the guy, (hell, I don't either) but to even contemplate it would cause his impeachment is ludicrous.

Click to expand...

I never said it will cause his impeachment, it may however make him an impotent pres that nobody takes serious if it is discovered he was elected undr false pretenses, if he coverd up a huge mistake and lied in order to get elected. This may be his undoing.

sawyerloggingon said:

Nobody died in Watergate, it pales in comparison to Benghazi.

Click to expand...

You wish it was as good as watergate. We know this because every little thing that happens with Obama you jump like an excited and easily fooled dog thinking he will have to resign or be impeached. It is not happening. I know you are excited because faux has fooled you into thinking this time they reaklly did throw the ball, but like always you run off all excited while everyone else laughts at you trying to fetch a ball that never existed.

But maybe this time you are right. maybe this time it actually means something despite months of nothing. Maybe you will get Obama to resign and then Mittens can be president. Maybe I am just too cruel to let you in on the end of that joke.

sawyerloggingon said:

I never said it will cause his impeachment, it may however make him an impotent pres that nobody takes serious if it is discovered he was elected undr false pretenses, if he coverd up a huge mistake and lied in order to get elected. This may be his undoing.

Click to expand...

Wow, even that is way out of the realm of possibility. You do have a hope, and that is in the 2014 election if you can get enough reps into the legislature to keep doing the spoiled brat congressional hissy fit tactic they have been employing for the past 4 years.

tererun said:

You wish it was as good as watergate. We know this because every little thing that happens with Obama you jump like an excited and easily fooled dog thinking he will have to resign or be impeached. It is not happening. I know you are excited because faux has fooled you into thinking this time they reaklly did throw the ball, but like always you run off all excited while everyone else laughts at you trying to fetch a ball that never existed.

But maybe this time you are right. maybe this time it actually means something despite months of nothing. Maybe you will get Obama to resign and then Mittens can be president. Maybe I am just too cruel to let you in on the end of that joke.

Click to expand...

How many times do I have to say this? I DO NOT think it is an impeachable offense. I DO THINK it may make him an illegitimate president that will garner no respect from the American people, then he better just go play golf the next 4 years.

tererun said:

You wish it was as good as watergate. We know this because every little thing that happens with Obama you jump like an excited and easily fooled dog thinking he will have to resign or be impeached. It is not happening. I know you are excited because faux has fooled you into thinking this time they reaklly did throw the ball, but like always you run off all excited while everyone else laughts at you trying to fetch a ball that never existed.

But maybe this time you are right. maybe this time it actually means something despite months of nothing. Maybe you will get Obama to resign and then Mittens can be president. Maybe I am just too cruel to let you in on the end of that joke.

Click to expand...

Your continuously mean-spirited posts get really tiring. Nine uses of the word "you" pretty much show you have no interest in the topic -- only in the poster.

sawyerloggingon said:

How many times do I have to say this? I DO NOT think it is an impeachable offense. I DO THINK it may make him an illegitimate president that will garner no respect from the American people, then he better just go play golf the next 4 years.

Click to expand...

You speak for the american people now? I guess that is why they elected obama because you spoke for them? Join us back in reality.

Wow, look at how desperately they want this to be an earth-shattering scandal. It's like they can taste it.

MaggieD said:

Your continuously mean-spirited posts get really tiring. Nine uses of the word "you" pretty much show you have no interest in the topic -- only in the poster.

Click to expand...

The fact you flip flop based on who agrees with you shows you are pretty good at the republican mantra.

tererun said:

The fact you flip flop based on who agrees with you shows you are pretty good at the republican mantra.

Click to expand...

I don't generally flip-flop. Unlike others, I'm not a one-trick pony -- and I occasionally change my mind.

sawyerloggingon said:

How many times do I have to say this? I DO NOT think it is an impeachable offense. I DO THINK it may make him an illegitimate president that will garner no respect from the American people, then he better just go play golf the next 4 years.

Click to expand...

Not going to happen. The People don’t care enough about this. And the more time that passes the less they will care.

I recently realized that we have been conditioned by the liberal media for decades to believe that Watergate was the utmost horrible event that ever occurred in the U.S. Presidency. It was a break in at a hotel room, that Nixon had no knowledge of.

Now, what happened in Libya? Obama didn't know, but we know that there were requests for more security months before it happened, right up to the SOS. No hotel room here. Hi level people died. More died in the hours after the event, left without any support. And so far it seems, without any attempt to help them. As far as we know at this point, Obama was informed of the dire situation, went to bed, then headed off to Vegas for a fundraiser.

And Nixon was impeached. Yeah, there's a potential for big trouble for our current president. Again, he's in way over his head, as he was the first day he stepped into that office.

MaggieD said:

I stopped reading when you asked if President Obama would resign.

Benghazi is not Watergate. Jesus. Watergate attempted to disenfranchise the American people. After Nixon knew exactly what had happened, he did everything in his power to cover it up.

Benghazi was a screw-up. And that's IF it happened the way I think it did: that our country failed to protect its Ambassador and didn't send help when they could have and should have.

To me, it isn't important that he said it was all about a YouTube video. Anyone who heard that discounted it from Jump Street, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Your right, you can't compare Benghazigate to Watergate. Watergate only involves a cover up. Benghazigate goes beyond Watergate with four Americans dead and incopetantsy in both the State Department and the White House.

Obama was lying all along in regards to Al Qaeda. Obama for almost a year during 2012 lied to the American people claiming that Al Qaeda was being decimated and on the run. The truth is when Obama entered the White House Al Qaeda base of operations had been confined during the Bush administration to Yemen and the Horn of Africa. During the first four years of the Obama administration Al Qaeda spread throughout almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa.

By Obama admitting before the November elections that the attack in Benghazi was Al Qaeda would have revealed that Obama was a liar.
That's the cover up.

What we will probably be seeing during the Congressional hearings on Benghazi, that Obama knew while the attack on the consulate was in progress that he was informed that the attack was well planned and had nothing to do with a You Tube Video. That Obama was well informed before he went to bed that this was a terrorist attack.

The unanswered questions are, why didn't Obama do any thing while the attack was under way ?

I think what your going to hear Wednesday is that while the attack on the consulate was underway, U.S. quick reaction forces were ordered to stand down and disembark from the aircraft that was suppose to fly them to Benghazi to rescue the Americans.

I believe another thing which I first heard from someone in the Special Forces community a few months ago, that British Special Reaction Forces were in Tripoli while the attack was underway. They contacted the State Department and possibly the White House asking permission to go in and rescue the Americans. No response.

Send troops in to rescue the Americans, there's shooting and casualties and the American people find out six weeks before the elections that Al Qaeda is now operating in Libya !!! Not good for President Obama since he's been running on that he killed Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda is on the run and is being decimated.

Now with the Boston terrorist bombings it seems because the Obama administration refuses to enforce our nations immigration laws that Big Sis Department of Homeland Security allowed a terrorist to reenter the United States without a valid visa. I wonder if Obama and Janet Napolitano have apologised to the victims of the bombings for not enforcing our immigration laws ?Every potental future Democrat vote counts.

BTW: A week ago I listen to a DHS official being interviewed and he was asked how could the Boston bombings have been allowed to happen. He said "Political correctness."

MaggieD said:

I don't generally flip-flop. Unlike others, I'm not a one-trick pony -- and I occasionally change my mind.

Click to expand...

I am glad I have that power to make you change your mind by agreeing with you. Don't worry, you are not the first to succumb to my powers in that area.

tererun said:

You speak for the american people now? I guess that is why they elected obama because you spoke for them? Join us back in reality.

Click to expand...

One reason the American people voted for him because he was going around saying he had Alquiada on the run, then Alquiada killed our ambassador and several others in a terrorist attack. Nobody knows where obama was or what he was doing during these two separate attacks over seven hours and he won't say. The whole thing was handled terribly and then obama tried to cover this terrorism up by fabricating a story. When the truth comes out and people realized they voted for a president that covered up his inept response to a terrorist attack the American people will turn on him just as his fellow dem's are running from him now.

Sarcogito said:

Not going to happen. The People don’t care enough about this. And the more time that passes the less they will care.

Click to expand...

That is what obama is hoping and why he has been stalling as long as possible. The mantra of all defense attorneys who know their client is guilty is delay,delay, delay.

Anthony60 said:

I recently realized that we have been conditioned by the liberal media for decades to believe that Watergate was the utmost horrible event that ever occurred in the U.S. Presidency. It was a break in at a hotel room, that Nixon had no knowledge of.

Now, what happened in Libya? Obama didn't know, but we know that there were requests for more security months before it happened, right up to the SOS. No hotel room here. Hi level people died. More died in the hours after the event, left without any support. And so far it seems, without any attempt to help them. As far as we know at this point, Obama was informed of the dire situation, went to bed, then headed off to Vegas for a fundraiser.

And Nixon was impeached. Yeah, there's a potential for big trouble for our current president. Again, he's in way over his head, as he was the first day he stepped into that office.

Click to expand...

Very true, Nixon's "crime" was a bumbling attempt to cover up a burglary. Obama's crime is his bumbling response to a terrorist attack and his attempt to cover it up in order to win an election. If there is any justice in this world obama will last be seen sulking into Air Force one for his last ride too.

I simply fail to see why so many continue to talk about those deaths in Benghazi. The President and the SOS told us it was a movie on you tube that caused it. The evil person who made the movie is in jail. It's all been settled. Let's move forward.

sawyerloggingon said:

I tried this thread, nobody cared, maybe you will have better luck than I did. I do think as this cover up unravels it could be the undoing of obama's presidency though. I'm not talking impeachment but if he was elected on the basis of a cover up and a huge lie to the American people he may be considered an illegitimate president and may as well spend his second term playing more golf, more BB and taking more vacations because he will be more than a lame duck, he will be completely impotent.

Click to expand...

I think that maybe we've reached a point where the Obamanites are so utterly detached from reality that it's just tiresome to try to argue with them. It's like trying to get a deeply senile relative to understand their surroundings.

So, some of these threads languish. Those of us living in mere Reality enforce each others' correct sense of mental health, but that sort of conversation can get old fast.

On another board, I recently was discussing the Benghazi cover up. The Obama folks said that there is no evidence of a cover up. Never mind that the Benghazi Affair involves a major event in the life of the State, the massacre of diplomatic personnel by the citizens of the country they were assigned to after their concerns about security were dismissed by their superiors and so on. The fact that next to no information has been forthcoming from the responsible Administration and their clear lack of interest in producing or publishing that information is a text book example of an official cover up. How do you have a serious conversation with people so deeply, irrationally and willfully irrational?