• 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!

Republicans Altered Benghazi Emails, CBS News Report Claims [W:361]

ocean515 said:
Of course the context was vague, having said in in the third to last paragraph of his prepared statment, which contained over 800 words.

Add in the narative that played out afterwords, and I think it's a bit of a reach to claim President Obama at the time stated Stevens and others were killed by terrorists.
Click to expand...

Geez!! How many times is Obama going to forget about the "must be before the third to last paragraph" rule!! :lamo
 
sangha said:
Geez!! How many times is Obama going to forget about the "must be before the third to last paragraph" rule!! :lamo
Click to expand...

Every time when the words responsibility and accountability are being used.
 
sangha said:
Geez!! How many times is Obama going to forget about the "must be before the third to last paragraph" rule!! :lamo
Click to expand...

"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "
 
mac said:
"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "
Click to expand...

I don't see where the president denies that it was a terrorist attack

He agrees that he didn't use the word terrorism (which is not a denial that it was terrorism), and then he goes on to explain that we didn't "know exactly how this came about" which is also not a denial of terrorism
 
sangha said:
I don't see where the president denies that it was a terrorist attack

He agrees that he didn't use the word terrorism (which is not a denial that it was terrorism), and then he goes on to explain that we didn't "know exactly how this came about" which is also not a denial of terrorism
Click to expand...

He doesnt deny it, he also doesnt affirm it.
 
sangha said:
I forgot about the rule that says the president must affirm whatever the right wants at every opportunity. My bad! :roll:
Click to expand...

Ok. Stop. Your assertion is that he said it was terrorism. Only he didnt say whether it was or it wasnt.
Now you want to revise what he said in quotes and somehow interpret it to mean he did say it was terrorism.

Then you magically criticize me for somehow wanting the President to say something. So how about you stop trolling and derailing your own point?

Im only relying on the quote and what it does and does not say--its typical politician speak for "well, maybe". He doesnt confirm, he doesnt deny.
 
sangha said:
I don't see where the president denies that it was a terrorist attack

He agrees that he didn't use the word terrorism (which is not a denial that it was terrorism), and then he goes on to explain that we didn't "know exactly how this came about" which is also not a denial of terrorism
Click to expand...

the reich wingers are livid that again, they have no Obama scandal
so they continue to make **** up
 
justabubba said:
the reich wingers are livid that again, they have no Obama scandal
so they continue to make **** up
Click to expand...

Yeah well I doubt ya can count Bob Woodward as a Right Winger.....course in the realm of the Political it seems it just isn't going away, huh?

Woodward said the scrubbing of administration talking points in the days after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, reminded him of Watergate.

“I have it to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts of the conversations and he personally went through them and said, ‘let’s not tell this, let’s not show this,’ ” Woodward said. “I would not dismiss Benghazi. It’s a very serious issue. As people keep saying, four people were killed.”

Woodward said the federal government’s talking points as a whole should be done away with.

“Talking points, as we know, are like legal briefs. They’re an argument on one side. We need to get rid of talking points and they need to put out statements or papers that are truth documents.”

Read more: Woodward: IRS scandal 'a big mess' but
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
 
MMC said:
Yeah well I doubt ya can count Bob Woodward as a Right Winger.....course in the realm of the Political it seems it just isn't going away, huh?

Woodward said the scrubbing of administration talking points in the days after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, reminded him of Watergate.

“I have it to go back 40 years to Watergate when Nixon put out his edited transcripts of the conversations and he personally went through them and said, ‘let’s not tell this, let’s not show this,’ ” Woodward said. “I would not dismiss Benghazi. It’s a very serious issue. As people keep saying, four people were killed.”

Woodward said the federal government’s talking points as a whole should be done away with.

“Talking points, as we know, are like legal briefs. They’re an argument on one side. We need to get rid of talking points and they need to put out statements or papers that are truth documents.”

Read more: Woodward: IRS scandal 'a big mess' but
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
Click to expand...

no facts
just more unsubstantiated opinion
reich wingers make **** up because Obama has not given them anything to bitch about
 
justabubba said:
no facts
just more unsubstantiated opinion
reich wingers make **** up because Obama has not given them anything to bitch about
Click to expand...

No facts.....didn't know you needed facts to prove those of the liberal mindset that put stuff in print just said not more than 2 days ago. Carried by all news outlets and MSMedia sources. But do you think just saying otherwise as to what the left in the world of the Political cant stop talking about.....changes up the fact that it isn't just Ring Wingers anymore?
 
sangha said:
I don't see where the president denies that it was a terrorist attack
Click to expand...

I didn't say he did. What he did do was confirm that he did not call it a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden speech. You're shifting goal posts.

He agrees that he didn't use the word terrorism (which is not a denial that it was terrorism), and then he goes on to explain that we didn't "know exactly how this came about" which is also not a denial of terrorism
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with anything.
 
justabubba said:
the reich wingers are livid that again, they have no Obama scandal
so they continue to make **** up
Click to expand...

Uhm, no. Again you're trying to obfuscate the point. The claim has long been that Obama called it terrorism from the get go. He clearly did not. His administration made every possible attempt to call it something other than terrorism.
 
mac said:
Uhm, no. Again you're trying to obfuscate the point. The claim has long been that Obama called it terrorism from the get go. He clearly did not. His administration made every possible attempt to call it something other than terrorism.
Click to expand...

the video has been presented in this thread where he identified it as a possible terroristic act
why do the reich wingers continue to ignore facts which do not fulfill their anti-Obama agenda
 
justabubba said:
the video has been presented in this thread where he identified it as a possible terroristic act
Click to expand...

No, he did not. He specifically avoided calling it a terrorist attack.

why do the reich wingers continue to ignore facts which do not fulfill their anti-Obama agenda
Click to expand...

The only ones ignoring facts is your side. Obama did not call Benghazi a terror attack. He's on video mere hours after the infamous Rose Garden speech acknowledging that he did not call it a terrorist attack, and yet you left wingers ignore that in favor of your talking points.
 
mac said:
No, he did not. He specifically avoided calling it a terrorist attack.



The only ones ignoring facts is your side. Obama did not call Benghazi a terror attack. He's on video mere hours after the infamous Rose Garden speech acknowledging that he did not call it a terrorist attack, and yet you left wingers ignore that in favor of your talking points.
Click to expand...

read it and weep:
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”

— Obama, Rose Garden, Sept. 12
Click to expand...
 
justabubba said:
read it and weep:
Click to expand...

and then about two hours later he went on 60 minutes:

"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "


Weep yourself.
 
mac said:
and then about two hours later he went on 60 minutes:

"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "


Weep yourself.
Click to expand...

Yep.....you are correct Mac. No matter how much they play over the terminology.

Sept.12: Obama Labels Attack ‘Act of Terror,’ Not ‘Terrorism’

Sept. 12: Obama delivers a morning speech in the Rose Garden to address the deaths of U.S. diplomats in Libya. He said, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” He also makes reference to the anti-Muslim video when he says: “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None.” He uses the term “act of terror” later that night when talking about the attack at a campaign event in Las Vegas.

Sept. 12: After his Rose Garden speech, Obama tapes an interview for “60 Minutes.” Obama says he didn’t use the word “terrorism” in his Rose Garden speech because “it’s too early to know exactly how this came about.” Steve Kroft, the show’s host, wonders how the attack could be described as a “mob action” since the attackers were “very heavily armed.” Obama says “we’re still investigating,” but he suspects “folks involved in this . . . were looking to target Americans from the start.”

Sept. 13: ‘Clearly Planned’ or ‘Spontaneous’ Attack?
Sept. 14: White House Says No Evidence of Planned Attack
Sept. 18: Obama Says ‘Extremists’ Used Video As ‘Excuse’
Sept. 19: Olsen Calls It a ‘Terrorist Attack’
Sept. 20: W.H. Spokesman Calls It a ‘Terrorist Attack’ — Not Obama
Sept. 21: Clinton Calls It a ‘Terrorist Attack’
Sept. 24-25: Obama Refuses to Call It a Terrorist Attack
Sept. 26: ‘Let’s Be Clear, It Was a Terrorist Attack’

Oct. 9: ’Everything Calm’ Prior to Benghazi Attack, No Protests
Oct. 15: Clinton Blames ‘Fog of War’

FactCheck.org : Benghazi Timeline

It appears Now.....we have it up in 6 threads or more.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Ok. Stop. Your assertion is that he said it was terrorism. Only he didnt say whether it was or it wasnt.
Now you want to revise what he said in quotes and somehow interpret it to mean he did say it was terrorism.

Then you magically criticize me for somehow wanting the President to say something. So how about you stop trolling and derailing your own point?

Im only relying on the quote and what it does and does not say--its typical politician speak for "well, maybe". He doesnt confirm, he doesnt deny.
Click to expand...

You are lying. Obama said it was, and I quote, "an act of terror"

I have never said anything different than that, contrary to your dishonest claim
 
mac said:
I didn't say he did. What he did do was confirm that he did not call it a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden speech. You're shifting goal posts.



This has nothing to do with anything.
Click to expand...

No, he did not confirm that he did not call it a terrorist attack. He confirmed that he did not use the word "terrorism".
 
mac said:
"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "
Click to expand...

sangha said:
You are lying. Obama said it was, and I quote, "an act of terror"

I have never said anything different than that, contrary to your dishonest claim
Click to expand...

sangha said:
No, he did not confirm that he did not call it a terrorist attack. He confirmed that he did not use the word "terrorism".
Click to expand...

Im checking the quote....nope not seeing it.

So we have a quote from J-Mac, care to provide or your own or are you going to keep up this smokescreen?

Obama did say it was an act of terror---well after the fact and after there was plenty of misdirection and blame towards an internet video. Or do you care to put the timeline up of what statements were made when?
 
mac said:
and then about two hours later he went on 60 minutes:

"KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”
OBAMA: “Right.”
KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”
OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.” "


Weep yourself.
Click to expand...

weeping with laughter now that you have finally acknowledged Obama made the terror attack reference - something you and others have adamantly insisted did not happen
let's change the name of your cohort to the 'wrong' wing
 
justabubba said:
the reich wingers are livid that again, they have no Obama scandal
so they continue to make **** up
Click to expand...

justabubba said:
no facts
just more unsubstantiated opinion
reich wingers make **** up because Obama has not given them anything to bitch about
Click to expand...

justabubba said:
the video has been presented in this thread where he identified it as a possible terroristic act
why do the reich wingers continue to ignore facts which do not fulfill their anti-Obama agenda
Click to expand...

Why do you persist in putting that reich winger bull**** up?
All I can say is if you are in any way directing that at any member of this site, thats some highly dergatory language you are using.
So.....are you?
 
"Reich-winger" really is offensive, and I don't think anybody deserves to have such a term used against him or her. Just maybe, it might be okay to accept that others have differing views (obviously wrong, of course, LOL, if they disagree with yours) without resorting to a Godwin.
 
And I was so distracted--which is perhaps the purpose of derogatory terms such as "Reich-winger"--that I didn't mention that I think the claim that Obama hasn't given anybody anything to bitch about is just ludicrous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom