Author Topic: BENGHAZI  (Read 6864 times)

AD2100

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1338
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #50 on: May 09, 2014, 03:39:12 PM »

Goddam it must be great to go through life as a retard..no worries...a diaper...Obama stickers...


AbrahamG

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18249
  • Team Pfizer
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #51 on: May 09, 2014, 08:21:13 PM »
The families of 4 dead heroes gives a shit.  So do many others who want to know what choombama was doing partying w Jay Z on the Ann of 9/11 while this was happening. 

Normally, you insist that they are just leaches suckling the government teat.  Now, they are heroes? 

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59840
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #52 on: May 09, 2014, 08:46:41 PM »


Not even your president. If he did, he wouldn't have had them killed.

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #53 on: May 11, 2014, 08:44:51 PM »

Goddam it must be great to go through life as a retard..no worries...a diaper...Obama stickers...

Careful, wouldn't want to piss off Sarah Palin now... She might start taking her feigned rage to the talk show circuit
w

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #54 on: May 11, 2014, 09:02:10 PM »
100% correct to investigate Benghazi attacks.

100% WRONG for Boehnner to try to "cash in"?


Benghazi Committee Backfires as Boehner Refuses to Answer Fundraising Email Questions


By: Jason Easley
Thursday, May, 8th, 2014, 2:10 pm   

A sign that the latest House Republican Benghazi show investigation is backfiring grew when John Boehner refused to answer questions about why he won’t stop the Republicans from fundraising off of Benghazi.

 

Transcript:


Q: Four Americans died in Benghazi. Should the NRCC fundraise off of your efforts with the select committee?

Boehner: Our focus is on getting the answers to those families who lost their loved ones. Period.

Q: Should the NRCC, they’re fundraising off of it right now, is that a wise thing to do?

Boehner: Our focus is getting the truth for these four families and for the American people.

Q: You are very involved in the fundraising off of this. Why is that happening?

Boehner: Our focus is on getting the truth for the American people and these four families.

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #55 on: May 12, 2014, 03:18:58 AM »
100% correct to investigate Benghazi attacks.

100% WRONG for Boehnner to try to "cash in"?


Benghazi Committee Backfires as Boehner Refuses to Answer Fundraising Email Questions


By: Jason Easley
Thursday, May, 8th, 2014, 2:10 pm   

A sign that the latest House Republican Benghazi show investigation is backfiring grew when John Boehner refused to answer questions about why he won’t stop the Republicans from fundraising off of Benghazi.

 

Transcript:


Q: Four Americans died in Benghazi. Should the NRCC fundraise off of your efforts with the select committee?

Boehner: Our focus is on getting the answers to those families who lost their loved ones. Period.

Q: Should the NRCC, they’re fundraising off of it right now, is that a wise thing to do?

Boehner: Our focus is getting the truth for these four families and for the American people.

Q: You are very involved in the fundraising off of this. Why is that happening?

Boehner: Our focus is on getting the truth for the American people and these four families.

FINALLY SOMEONE IS LOOKING INTO THIS FOR THE RIGHT REASONS.

Seriously though, does that transcript not send chills up your spine? he gives no fucks at all, he is a stepford congressman. He couldn't give a sweet fuck about those that died, he is looking to profit. He is a girl.


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #56 on: May 12, 2014, 06:46:59 AM »
Boehner.  Fundraising off of the investigation.  Sickening.

Remove his ass from the investigation and bring in people who aren't cashing in BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION EVEN STARTS.

And yes, if ANY dems did this on 9/11/2001 investigation, please post it so we can trash them for it as well (before some ignorant fck comes up with "oh, dems did this a bunch in 2003" - share it if they did, don't just guess).


Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #57 on: May 12, 2014, 09:58:19 AM »
They had a drone up....unarmed but I think they were hoping for some hellfire love. If there had been one armed drone strike the whole thing would have changed. The douchbags were a big fat target and after the ambassador was dead it was open season on those guys.

This isn't rambo you fucking tard, they aren't sendin a drone in on limited info, having no idea what weapons/ground was, nor how many civilians were involved. They also had very limited time. Send in a drone, drop a few bombs in a foreign country, no big deal. An embassy could be torched and that wouldn't happen, it's not the US, embassies are risky as fuck, particularly in the aftermentioned area.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39790
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #58 on: May 12, 2014, 10:05:11 AM »
This isn't rambo you fucking tard, they aren't sendin a drone in on limited info, having no idea what weapons/ground was, nor how many civilians were involved. They also had very limited time. Send in a drone, drop a few bombs in a foreign country, no big deal. An embassy could be torched and that wouldn't happen, it's not the US, embassies are risky as fuck, particularly in the aftermentioned area.

Yet - O-chooms sends in drones on weddings all the time and you never say shit  . . . . .

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2014, 10:38:03 AM »
Yet - O-chooms sends in drones on weddings all the time and you never say shit  . . . . .

Planned? or on a whim like benghazi? there is a difference between a volatile situation and a co-ordinated strike.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39790
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #60 on: May 12, 2014, 10:44:57 AM »
Planned? or on a whim like benghazi? there is a difference between a volatile situation and a co-ordinated strike.



We all have our own theories on O-drone blasting weddings into kingdom come . . . .  ;D

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #61 on: May 12, 2014, 11:40:51 AM »
Yet - O-chooms sends in drones on weddings all the time and you never say shit  . . . . .

suddenly you're worried about the USA dropping bombs in other countries?

lol come on lib... I thought most conservatives were of the "kill em all!" mindset?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39790
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #62 on: May 12, 2014, 12:06:21 PM »
suddenly you're worried about the USA dropping bombs in other countries?

lol come on lib... I thought most conservatives were of the "kill em all!" mindset?

Nonsense - I don't believe in this reckless approach.  It creates more issues than it solves and can be done to us in the future as well. 

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #63 on: May 12, 2014, 12:23:23 PM »
Nonsense - I don't believe in this reckless approach.  It creates more issues than it solves and can be done to us in the future as well. 

Ok, so are you done with this shit now? nothing to see bro, it sucks but you are letting your hate get in the way of reason. You are a 9/11 truther on this.


What seperates this issue from previous attacks? what is so special about this one that another investigation need be done? what questions aren't answered reasonably?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39790
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #64 on: May 12, 2014, 12:31:18 PM »
Ok, so are you done with this shit now? nothing to see bro, it sucks but you are letting your hate get in the way of reason. You are a 9/11 truther on this.


What seperates this issue from previous attacks? what is so special about this one that another investigation need be done? what questions aren't answered reasonably?

I want to know who came up w the idea that it was the video and why they kept on that fake story for months on end.

I want to know why HITLERY didn't give the security they were begging for,.

I want to know why hitlery lied to the families at Dpver AFB

I want to know what O-FAG was doing that night during the attack. 

I want to know why after the attack and still to this day - still nothing has been done to get the terrorists.

etc etc etc

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #65 on: May 12, 2014, 12:36:27 PM »
I want to know who came up w the idea that it was the video and why they kept on that fake story for months on end.

I want to know why HITLERY didn't give the security they were begging for,.

I want to know why hitlery lied to the families at Dpver AFB

I want to know what O-FAG was doing that night during the attack. 

I want to know why after the attack and still to this day - still nothing has been done to get the terrorists.

etc etc etc

Anything else?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39790
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #66 on: May 12, 2014, 12:47:02 PM »
Anything else?

Yes - why didn't o-twink even TRY to help the people despite the fact that it was 7 hours firefight.

Why didn't the WH release the emails till only this month proving they were lying? 

Why didn't o-fag cancel the fundraiser the next day w Jay z   

Is Obama still on chooms?

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #67 on: May 12, 2014, 12:59:14 PM »
Lets look at point 1 libs......

It started at 3:40 east coast time 9:40 local. That's plenty of time to get people together in DC.
Between 125 and 150 gunmen. That's a big target and easily cannot be explained as a random group of dudes.
Fight ended sometime that next morning......past 5AM local time.

Just after midnight, an attack on the CIA annex began, which included machine gun, rocket and mortar fire. The CIA defenses held off the attack until the morning of September 12.[26]:45–46 Early in the morning, Libyan government forces met up with a group of Americans (reinforcements from Tripoli including Glen Doherty that had arrived at the Benghazi airport. The team, which included two active-duty JSOC operators and five CIA personnel, had commandeered a small jet in Tripoli by paying the pilots $30,000 and forcing them to fly the team to Benghazi. After being held up at the airport for a few hours, the Libyan forces and newly arrived Americans went to the CIA annex at about 5:00am to assist in transporting approximately 32 Americans at the annex back to the airport for evacuation. Minutes after they drove through the gates, the annex came under heavy fire.
L

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #68 on: May 12, 2014, 02:47:37 PM »
LOL @ anyone who gives a shit about benghazi but ignored all the holes in the 911 story.

if this is you, then you're a fcking partisan idiot.

if you support investigating each, then you're smart.
if you support investigating neither, keep your head buried in the sand.

it's so funny... the voices screaming about obama ignoring an attack that were very different when an (R) was in power.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #69 on: May 12, 2014, 04:33:51 PM »
Um.....one is some wingnut conspiracy that's been debunked point by point for years..... the other is gross incompetence by a guy or team that's far in over their heads. The conspiracy is their half assed attempt to blame some friggen utube video. This isn't even remotely the same. 
L

loco

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19106
  • loco like a fox
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #70 on: May 13, 2014, 05:59:31 AM »
Lets look at point 1 libs......

It started at 3:40 east coast time 9:40 local. That's plenty of time to get people together in DC.
Between 125 and 150 gunmen. That's a big target and easily cannot be explained as a random group of dudes.
Fight ended sometime that next morning......past 5AM local time.

Just after midnight, an attack on the CIA annex began, which included machine gun, rocket and mortar fire. The CIA defenses held off the attack until the morning of September 12.[26]:45–46 Early in the morning, Libyan government forces met up with a group of Americans (reinforcements from Tripoli including Glen Doherty that had arrived at the Benghazi airport. The team, which included two active-duty JSOC operators and five CIA personnel, had commandeered a small jet in Tripoli by paying the pilots $30,000 and forcing them to fly the team to Benghazi. After being held up at the airport for a few hours, the Libyan forces and newly arrived Americans went to the CIA annex at about 5:00am to assist in transporting approximately 32 Americans at the annex back to the airport for evacuation. Minutes after they drove through the gates, the annex came under heavy fire.

Anyone?  Anyone?  Bueller?  Bueller?  Bueller?  Bueller?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39790
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #71 on: May 13, 2014, 06:16:15 AM »
Benghazi Commission: The End Of Hillary Clinton’s Political Career
Story Leak blog ^  | May 11, 2014 | Michael Thomas

Posted on ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2014‎ ‎3‎:‎28‎:‎24‎ ‎AM by 2ndDivisionVet

There are very ‘good’ reasons why the House Democrats are making threats of boycotting the recently approved commission on the Benghazi attack. All of them know that President Obama and the Secretary of State at the time, Hillary Clinton, did not properly discharge their duties during the attack.

“Unforeseen consequences” and “unpredictable twists and turns” had nothing to do with her failure to secure the compound or to send adequate security to protect it. Rather, she got every sort of warning from her own ambassador, the State Department, the CIA and the Defense Department. She just failed to act on them.”[1] . Four Americans may have died needlessly including John Christopher Stevens, an American diplomat and lawyer who served as the U.S. Ambassador to Libya from June 2012 to September 12, 2012. His death was not only a humiliating defeat for the USA, it was a violent spectacle which most Americans do not understand how it could have happened.

Happen it did on Hillary Clinton’s watch, a prospective presidential candidate who just could become the Commander-in Chief. Her reaction to cross examination during the first Senate inquiry by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) is perhaps the best evidence that something very wrong happened during that fateful evening of September 11, 2012. Her behavior does not seem to be demonstrative of a future leader of the US Armed Forces. The following YouTube video captures the heart of her testimony which will surely come back to haunt her for years to come.

(VIDEO-AT-LINK)

Anyone watching this video can easily see the dissembling and evasion by which Secretary Clinton answered the questions put forth to her. Many of her former Senate colleagues were mortified by her conduct in light of the seriousness of the investigation. The Republican side is now fully aware that evidence exists which will incriminate Ms. Clinton in the mishandling of the whole affair. And that the ensuing cover-up is always what does the most political damage.

The Benghazi debacle is much more serious than the media has reported.

Time does have a way of revealing the truth of the matter, and the slow drip of Benghazi revelations will only increase until the midterm elections. Because Ms. Clinton has not come clean since the very beginning, she now sits in a very awkward and vulnerable position. How so?

Any political pundit would objectively observe that Ms. Clinton, based on all the information that is available in the public domain, appears to be guilty of criminal neglect in her capacity of Secretary of State. That verdict is based on the fact that the predicament was allowed to occur in the first place. Simply put, a US Ambassador’s many solicitations for protection were ignored by his boss in DC.

“When you read the various pieces and bits of information she received in the weeks and months prior to the attack, it is hard to see how they could have been any more blunt or explicit in warning of the likelihood of future terror attacks in Benghazi.”[1] . And that is the best case scenario for Secretary Clinton. The worst case is where she and her office ignored every plea for help up to and including the night of the attack on the American diplomatic mission at Benghazi, in Libya. Someone going even so far as to order available units to stand down makes this situation even worse.

Of course, the cover-up is where things have really gotten messy for Secretary Clinton. Which is why her Republican inquisitors are so determined to get to the bottom of things. They can only tolerate so much obfuscation, non-compliance and irresponsible behavior on the part of the White House before the American people start to call them on it. The longer this whole sordid affair drags on, the worse it’s going to be for everyone involved in the Obama Adminstration, especially Hillary Clinton.

Benghazi Hearing Promises to be Clinton’s Political Waterloo

As an aspiring presidential nominee, candidate Clinton will necessarily be held up to a much higher standard than she has been in her previous roles. Her stint at State is the only one she can point to as demonstrating her abilities to handle foreign affairs. In light of President Obama’s string of foreign affair fiascos, she will be hard-pressed to bring the necessary gravitas to the role of president in this particular regard.

Even for diehard Democrats, there is the distinct sentiment that Ms Clinton is not up to the task. Her responses to so many challenges, both personal and political, over the years reveal a woman who is often petty, vindictive and unaccountable. Truly, her place in the White House is as an ex First Lady who gave it her best.

“For Clinton now to say that she did the best she could on the basis of “imperfect information” and to blame the tragic outcome on “unforeseen consequences and unpredictable twists and turns” is such an act of distortion of the record that it takes one’s breath away.”[1] . Ms. Clinton ought to look at the Benghazi hearing as an opportunity to listen to the many reasons she should not even consider running for president. Undoubtedly, she will hear things that will embarrass her and her office at State. Truly, so many things happened that should not have under her watch. Just as many things did not occur in Benghazi that should have for the protection of four Americans who died.

Things have made much worse by the White House response.

Subsequent attempts to acquire pertinent correspondence from the White House about the Benghazi attack and US Government response have been met with continual stonewalling and denial. The Press Secretary has lost all credibility with the both the Press Corp and the public. The key players have only acted in a way which would lead those investigating this serious matter that a full scale cover-up has been operative since day one.

At the end of the day, both Secretary Clinton and President Obama will be held directly responsible for this cover-up, as well as the obvious negligence up to and including the attacks. Each ought to be held accountable for their actions by the Congress and the Mainstream Media (MSM). Unfortunately the MSM has both supported Secretary Clinton’s narrative and enabled her reprehensible conduct at every turn.

However, with the midterm elections around the corner pointing to a GOP landslide, the political chessboard is about to be rearranged in a way that will not bode well for Candidate Clinton. The US electorate is not so clueless that they would elect a nominee who has baggage of this serious nature. Truly, the whole Benghazi affair does not reflect well on anyone in the Obama Administration, especially the Secretary of State.

The question remains: Does Hillary Clinton understand that the powers that be are using the Benghazi Commission to send her a message? Perhaps she will get it before her first answers are rendered before a congressional inquiry that promises to be bigger and badder than Watergate. How do you spell C O V E R – U P ?

Benghazigate — here we come!

Michael Thomas May 10, 2014 StateoftheNation2012.com

Author’s Note:

When the New York Times publishes an article that goes by the title: Forget Benghazi. Clinton’s Real Problem Is Obama Fatigue., you know that Hillary Clinton has some problems – real problems. The MSM knows just how hard they have had to work to cover for the Obama Administration. The truth be told, the MSM has carried more water for Obama and his appointees than any other administration in US history. That has to be exhausting when there is so darn much to cover up on a daily basis.

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #72 on: May 13, 2014, 07:11:27 AM »
Benghazi Commission: The End Of Hillary Clinton’s Political Career
Story Leak blog ^  | May 11, 2014 | Michael Thomas

Posted on ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2014‎ ‎3‎:‎28‎:‎24‎ ‎AM by 2ndDivisionVet

There are very ‘good’ reasons why the House Democrats are making threats of boycotting the recently approved commission on the Benghazi attack. All of them know that President Obama and the Secretary of State at the time, Hillary Clinton, did not properly discharge their duties during the attack.

“Unforeseen consequences” and “unpredictable twists and turns” had nothing to do with her failure to secure the compound or to send adequate security to protect it. Rather, she got every sort of warning from her own ambassador, the State Department, the CIA and the Defense Department. She just failed to act on them.”[1] . Four Americans may have died needlessly including John Christopher Stevens, an American diplomat and lawyer who served as the U.S. Ambassador to Libya from June 2012 to September 12, 2012. His death was not only a humiliating defeat for the USA, it was a violent spectacle which most Americans do not understand how it could have happened.

Happen it did on Hillary Clinton’s watch, a prospective presidential candidate who just could become the Commander-in Chief. Her reaction to cross examination during the first Senate inquiry by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) is perhaps the best evidence that something very wrong happened during that fateful evening of September 11, 2012. Her behavior does not seem to be demonstrative of a future leader of the US Armed Forces. The following YouTube video captures the heart of her testimony which will surely come back to haunt her for years to come.

(VIDEO-AT-LINK)

Anyone watching this video can easily see the dissembling and evasion by which Secretary Clinton answered the questions put forth to her. Many of her former Senate colleagues were mortified by her conduct in light of the seriousness of the investigation. The Republican side is now fully aware that evidence exists which will incriminate Ms. Clinton in the mishandling of the whole affair. And that the ensuing cover-up is always what does the most political damage.

The Benghazi debacle is much more serious than the media has reported.

Time does have a way of revealing the truth of the matter, and the slow drip of Benghazi revelations will only increase until the midterm elections. Because Ms. Clinton has not come clean since the very beginning, she now sits in a very awkward and vulnerable position. How so?

Any political pundit would objectively observe that Ms. Clinton, based on all the information that is available in the public domain, appears to be guilty of criminal neglect in her capacity of Secretary of State. That verdict is based on the fact that the predicament was allowed to occur in the first place. Simply put, a US Ambassador’s many solicitations for protection were ignored by his boss in DC.

“When you read the various pieces and bits of information she received in the weeks and months prior to the attack, it is hard to see how they could have been any more blunt or explicit in warning of the likelihood of future terror attacks in Benghazi.”[1] . And that is the best case scenario for Secretary Clinton. The worst case is where she and her office ignored every plea for help up to and including the night of the attack on the American diplomatic mission at Benghazi, in Libya. Someone going even so far as to order available units to stand down makes this situation even worse.

Of course, the cover-up is where things have really gotten messy for Secretary Clinton. Which is why her Republican inquisitors are so determined to get to the bottom of things. They can only tolerate so much obfuscation, non-compliance and irresponsible behavior on the part of the White House before the American people start to call them on it. The longer this whole sordid affair drags on, the worse it’s going to be for everyone involved in the Obama Adminstration, especially Hillary Clinton.

Benghazi Hearing Promises to be Clinton’s Political Waterloo

As an aspiring presidential nominee, candidate Clinton will necessarily be held up to a much higher standard than she has been in her previous roles. Her stint at State is the only one she can point to as demonstrating her abilities to handle foreign affairs. In light of President Obama’s string of foreign affair fiascos, she will be hard-pressed to bring the necessary gravitas to the role of president in this particular regard.

Even for diehard Democrats, there is the distinct sentiment that Ms Clinton is not up to the task. Her responses to so many challenges, both personal and political, over the years reveal a woman who is often petty, vindictive and unaccountable. Truly, her place in the White House is as an ex First Lady who gave it her best.

“For Clinton now to say that she did the best she could on the basis of “imperfect information” and to blame the tragic outcome on “unforeseen consequences and unpredictable twists and turns” is such an act of distortion of the record that it takes one’s breath away.”[1] . Ms. Clinton ought to look at the Benghazi hearing as an opportunity to listen to the many reasons she should not even consider running for president. Undoubtedly, she will hear things that will embarrass her and her office at State. Truly, so many things happened that should not have under her watch. Just as many things did not occur in Benghazi that should have for the protection of four Americans who died.

Things have made much worse by the White House response.

Subsequent attempts to acquire pertinent correspondence from the White House about the Benghazi attack and US Government response have been met with continual stonewalling and denial. The Press Secretary has lost all credibility with the both the Press Corp and the public. The key players have only acted in a way which would lead those investigating this serious matter that a full scale cover-up has been operative since day one.

At the end of the day, both Secretary Clinton and President Obama will be held directly responsible for this cover-up, as well as the obvious negligence up to and including the attacks. Each ought to be held accountable for their actions by the Congress and the Mainstream Media (MSM). Unfortunately the MSM has both supported Secretary Clinton’s narrative and enabled her reprehensible conduct at every turn.

However, with the midterm elections around the corner pointing to a GOP landslide, the political chessboard is about to be rearranged in a way that will not bode well for Candidate Clinton. The US electorate is not so clueless that they would elect a nominee who has baggage of this serious nature. Truly, the whole Benghazi affair does not reflect well on anyone in the Obama Administration, especially the Secretary of State.

The question remains: Does Hillary Clinton understand that the powers that be are using the Benghazi Commission to send her a message? Perhaps she will get it before her first answers are rendered before a congressional inquiry that promises to be bigger and badder than Watergate. How do you spell C O V E R – U P ?

Benghazigate — here we come!

Michael Thomas May 10, 2014 StateoftheNation2012.com

Author’s Note:

When the New York Times publishes an article that goes by the title: Forget Benghazi. Clinton’s Real Problem Is Obama Fatigue., you know that Hillary Clinton has some problems – real problems. The MSM knows just how hard they have had to work to cover for the Obama Administration. The truth be told, the MSM has carried more water for Obama and his appointees than any other administration in US history. That has to be exhausting when there is so darn much to cover up on a daily basis.


ya all the evidence of cover ups is piling up dude.  good job you cracked the case.

you are on a witch hunt, keep going you will end up looking like an idiot as usual.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #73 on: May 13, 2014, 08:41:14 AM »
I hope benghazi investigation is about one thing - finding out what happened and who let it happen.

Not "fundraising" and "stop hilary 2016".

Cause when I see Boehnner FUNDRAISING off of this... and I see people saying "don't blame obama, he's already out of office in 2 years, let's blame HILARY for everything!"

As much as Hilary sucks - She wasn't the one making that call that day.  We know it was Obama.  You can't just shift blame down 2 levels because it helps you more politically.

I want to see an investigation because brave americans died, and maybe because obama didn't want a mess right before elections.  Anyone who is chasing an investigation because they hate hilary or to raise $ to get more house seats - they can eat a d1ck, post haste.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: BENGHAZI
« Reply #74 on: May 13, 2014, 08:44:53 AM »
This isn't rambo you fucking tard, they aren't sendin a drone in on limited info, having no idea what weapons/ground was, nor how many civilians were involved. They also had very limited time. Send in a drone, drop a few bombs in a foreign country, no big deal. An embassy could be torched and that wouldn't happen, it's not the US, embassies are risky as fuck, particularly in the aftermentioned area.

It would appear you don't understand combat in the 21sts century....have ever served...ever called in a drone or airstrike...understand how a drone works...ever sat and watched a hellfire armed drone attack a target...or a lot of other shit about what happened in Libya.
L