B-Man Posted February 24, 2014 Posted February 24, 2014 McCain Laughs at Rice’s Explanation for Benghazi Susan Rice’s steadfastness to her explanation of what happened in Benghazi drew laughs of disbelief from John McCain. “I’m almost speechless,” the Arizona senator told Face the Nation. Earlier in the morning, Rice told Meet the Press that it was “patently false” that she misled the American people when she blamed the Benghazi attacks on a spontaneous demonstration over an offensive YouTube video during Sunday show appearances in 2012. McCain, who has repeatedly called Rice’s appearances misleading, maintained that position. Not only was the little reason for Rice, who was serving as United States ambassador to the United Nation at the time, to make those appearances since she had no involvement on the issue, but McCain also pointed out that the CIA officials stated the attacks were not spontaneous prior to Rice going on television. “For Susan Rice to say such a thing, I think it’s a little embarrassing to tell you the truth,” he said. Rice’s “No Regrets” and Obama’s Arrogance by Jonathan S. Tobin It’s hard to understand exactly why Susan Rice is still refusing to admit fault about her lies about the Benghazi attack. When asked this morning on Meet the Press by David Gregory whether she had any regrets about appearing on four network news shows the Sunday after the 9/11/12 attacks that took the lives of four Americans and telling the nation that what happened was the result of a demonstration against a video, Rice said she had none: {snip} What point is served by this rearguard defense of the indefensible? We long since learned that senior intelligence officials, including the CIA station chief, had contradicted the demonstration myth before Rice made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows to convince Americans that what had happened was not an al-Qaeda terror attack. We know that the talking points were the result of a stormy battle involving the White House, the State Department, and the CIA that led to Rice being handed material that was more the product of the administration’s political needs than the truth Democrats and liberals who want to “move on” from Benghazi are right to the extent that this is a controversy rooted in a specific time and place rather than a possible ongoing threat to constitutional rule such as that demonstrated in the IRS scandal or the various instances of government spying on the press and the public. But the reason why the anger about Benghazi has never dissipated is due to statements such as that of Rice that feed the cynicism of an American people that only wanted the truth in the first place and would now settle for a full accounting that the administration still seems incapable of providing. Like Clinton’s infamous “what difference does it make?” retort when asked about these deceptions, Rice’s lack of regret demonstrates the arrogance of an administration that is unwilling to own up to its faults even if doing so would serve its interests. Rice should have regrets about being shoved into the public square with a false cover story. As Gregory noted in a follow-up question, the lies almost certainly made it impossible for President Obama to nominate her to be secretary of state. more at the link:
B-Man Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 POLL: 2/3 of American Voters Want A Congressional Investigation Into Benghazi. .
DC Tom Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 POLL: 2/3 of American Voters Want A Congressional Investigation Into Benghazi. . They're just misinformed. Obama needs to enlist the pajama-wearing cocoa-drinking hipster crowd to set the record straight.
Tiberius Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 They're just misinformed. Obama needs to enlist the pajama-wearing cocoa-drinking hipster crowd to set the record straight. You love propaganda boy! You suck up every total bs post he makes. If you really think that this poll seriously represents what the American people want you really need to look in the mirror and tell yourself today is the gay you stop with the glue sniffing.
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 You love propaganda boy! You suck up every total bs post he makes. If you really think that this poll seriously represents what the American people want you really need to look in the mirror and tell yourself today is the gay you stop with the glue sniffing. Pot today?
DC Tom Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 You love propaganda boy! You suck up every total bs post he makes. If you really think that this poll seriously represents what the American people want you really need to look in the mirror and tell yourself today is the gay you stop with the glue sniffing. You're an idiot. Not only do you conveniently ignore the times I have taken him to task for posting stories that were clearly bull ****, but you honestly believe I need to take the moonies seriously to take a random cheap shot? Hell, I hadn't even clicked on the link and realized it was from the Times until now.
B-Man Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 New evidence points to sophisticated and planned attack. Not "two guys out for a walk." Evidence casts doubt on ex-CIA leaders’ claims on Benghazi mortar attack If former CIA Director David Petraeus and his ex-deputy Michael Morell are recalled to testify on Benghazi, they can expect hard questions about the mortar attack on the CIA annex which killed two former Navy SEALs. Republican Mike Rogers, chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee, is weighing whether to recall one or both of those officials over their Benghazi congressional testimony. Rogers said the evidence suggests a highly skilled team carried out the mortar strike. Fox News has confirmed five rounds were fired in under a minute, with three hitting the annex roof -- a target roughly the size of two convenience stores more at the link: http://www.foxnews.c...tcmp=latestnews
3rdnlng Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 New evidence points to sophisticated and planned attack. Not "two guys out for a walk." more at the link: http://www.foxnews.c...tcmp=latestnews You keep bringing up Benghazi (as you should) but do you feel you need to keep Gatortard in stitches all the time?
B-Man Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 You keep bringing up Benghazi (as you should) but do you feel you need to keep Gatortard in stitches all the time? Thanks 3rd and long, I post for informational purposes.................from sources and authors that (maybe) not everyone has seen. Individual poster responses are not a consideration. .
DC Tom Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 Thanks 3rd and long, I post for informational purposes.................from sources and authors that (maybe) not everyone has seen. Individual poster responses are not a consideration. . Yeah, no one ever sees Fox News. Just sayin'...
B-Man Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 Yeah, no one ever sees Fox News. Just sayin'... Lol........well Tom, you're sure right with the last link (#887) being from Fox, but I was referring to a more general sense. WaPo, Wash. Times, N.R.O., and Law sites (Althouse, Legal Insurrection)
Joe Miner Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 Yeah, no one ever sees Fox News. Just sayin'... Fox News should always be seen. http://www.foxnewsgirls.com
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 As long as your beating a dead horse Sodumb has WMD, Al quieda is in Iraq, not enough body armor for our soldiers, vehicles proven unsafe against IED's, and the most premature boast of all Mission Accomplished.
DC Tom Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 As long as your beating a dead horse Sodumb has WMD, Al quieda is in Iraq, not enough body armor for our soldiers, vehicles proven unsafe against IED's, and the most premature boast of all Mission Accomplished. Those were never even horses. More like unicorns.
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 As long as your beating a dead horse Sodumb has WMD, Al quieda is in Iraq, not enough body armor for our soldiers, vehicles proven unsafe against IED's, and the most premature boast of all Mission Accomplished. I thought we had held two Presidential elections since then?
meazza Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 I thought we had held two Presidential elections since then? DailyKos probably posted an article about it recently.
OCinBuffalo Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 (edited) Don't people realize how dumb they make themselves sound, when they try to blame Bush? But, screw that. Who cares if they sound dumb? They are dumb. Here's something important: Don't they realize how badly they marginalize Obama, when they keep talking about Bush? If Obama, after 6 years, hasn't been able to surpass Bush, accomplish more, and hasn't been able to put Bush in the rear view by now? WTF has he been doing? If you are the man, and are in fact as good as you say you are? You don't need to keep bringing up supposedly "defeated" enemies/ideology. All this time? And Obama can't get out of Bush's shadow, or, everything he does is STILL seen in the context of Bush? Then Bush rules Obama. Bush steals his lunch money. This isn't the Obama Presidency, this is the Anti-Bush Presidency. Obama isn't even the star of his own Presidency. He can't even get his name to run before the title, in his own damn movie? Thus, it's simple: Marginalized. Apparently Obama supporters have to keep living in 2008. 2014 is just too tough for them. The price for living in 2008? Obama gets marginalized, along with every major D party initiative. All for the sake defending their idiotic choice to go with the inexperienced(and now clearly weak) guy, because he is black. That's the real reason why they need to live in 2008: that's before they found out just how dumb they were, via how horrible Obama is. As I said above: they are dumb. Rather than facing up to that awful choice: they'd rather talk about Bush....not realizing that they are only making it worse. Edited March 11, 2014 by OCinBuffalo
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 Don't people realize how dumb they make themselves sound, when they try to blame Bush? It's Bush's fault they sound dumb...
GG Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 I thought we had held two Presidential elections since then? Three
Koko78 Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 It's Bush's fault they sound dumb... It's Bush's fault they sound dumb because Romney has a horse and gave some woman cancer.
Recommended Posts