If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Fox News expert, Bill O'Reilly: "It's now clear Benghazi-gate is much worse than Watergate. The question is how much worse"   (video.foxnews.com) divider line 390
    More: Obvious, Bill O'Reilly, Fox News, Watergate, Libya, United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, secret documents  
•       •       •

2051 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Nov 2012 at 4:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



390 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-16 02:31:30 PM  
Is the Libyan situation another Watergate?

Short answer: no.
 
2012-11-16 02:40:40 PM  
The Truthers just don't give up, do they?
 
2012-11-16 02:42:41 PM  
They learned nothing on Election Day.
 
2012-11-16 02:43:22 PM  
They have crossed the line of irresponsibility and are moving directly into slander.
 
2012-11-16 02:53:43 PM  
Fark this guy and everyone on that farking network.

It is because of him, Glenn Beck, Hannity and all the other ridiculous derpers that we have people signing petitions to secede from the union because of a presidential election. This doesn't happen without these farkfaces screaming "socialism, communism, Marxism etc" ad nauseum and working their weak-thinking viewers into a santorum of paranoia.

It is because of these assholes that we get this incredible divide and even a guy committing suicide because of Obama's re-election. You don't have a network dedicated to unceasingly stoking the flames of hatred and fear, and you don't get anything near the levels of derp and stupidity we are witnessing these days.

So fark you, Bill O'Reilly, you liver-spotted old lying fool. I hope you experience the worst testicle pain imaginable, every second of the rest of your life.
 
2012-11-16 02:57:15 PM  
Keep raping those corpses you scum.
 
2012-11-16 02:59:28 PM  
I'm actually beginning to pity the average Fox News viewer a little. Brainwashing is hard to notice when it is happening and harder to break after it is done.
 
2012-11-16 03:08:08 PM  

Nadie_AZ: I'm actually beginning to pity the average Fox News viewer a little. Brainwashing is hard to notice when it is happening and harder to break after it is done.


It is getting more and more dangerous. People are gullible, especially when they feel threatened or are scared. Raising these fears higher and higher until they reach a breaking point is a terrible thing. Meanwhile, under the false guise of journalism, or even worse, patriotism, Beck and others laugh their asses off to the bank.

It really is disgusting. It is like picking on the retarded.
 
2012-11-16 03:09:53 PM  
Yes. The Ambassador to the UN (not to Libya) going on a Sunday talk show and giving out WHAT SHE TOLD US was incomplete information (and that we should expect more as more becomes available) that resulted in absolutely zero geopolitical consequences, zero loss of life, zero threat to US assets - really the only thing that resulted was massive GOP butthurt

- is totally the same as -

A sitting president's henchmen breaking into DNC HQ to steal files and then actively engaging in a coverup. Oh, and initially trying to frame at least 2 other people (John Dean and...Haldemann?) for that cover-up.
 
2012-11-16 03:10:07 PM  
What a Benghazi gate may look like
www.dailystar.com.lb

what a water gate may look like
www.ellemmphotography.com

I mean the water gate is much prettier
 
2012-11-16 03:16:04 PM  

Nadie_AZ: I'm actually beginning to pity the average Fox News viewer a little. Brainwashing is hard to notice when it is happening and harder to break after it is done.


You notice how more than a few of the GOP have said "Hey, we need to change course and adapt to changing conditions" and been drowned out by the mob who doesn't want to listen?
 
2012-11-16 03:16:54 PM  

Dr Dreidel: - is totally the same as -


NO.

It's worse! wake up sheeple!
 
2012-11-16 03:17:56 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-16 03:21:37 PM  
Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.
 
2012-11-16 03:29:04 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


By that metric, any time a government employee dies, it's worse than watergate.

President orders a hotel broken into because he's a paranoid loon- not a problem

American soil is attacked, 3,000 people die, intelligence failed to prevent it- PRESIDENT OBVIOUSLY NOT TO BLAME, says Fox. Network uses attack to promote culture of islamophobia and militarism
Embassy gets attacked, four people die, intelligence didn't prevent it- "SOME (our anchors) ARE SAYING"O BAMA KNEW AND DID NOTHING, says Fox. Network uses attack to promote culture of islamophobia and militarism
 
2012-11-16 03:31:25 PM  
I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.
 
2012-11-16 03:31:59 PM  
FOX News is just trying to make its most prolific talk show guest, John McCain, relevant again. He's the one who has some 'splaining to do.
 
2012-11-16 03:33:34 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


BUT THAT'S THE SCARIEST PART OF THIS WHOLE SCANDAL, DAMNYANKEES. WE JUST DON'T KNOW.

WE. JUST. DON'T. KNOW.

AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ASKING THESE CIRCULAR QUESTIONS UNTIL SOMEONE GIVES US AN ANSWER. THAT WE LIKE.
 
2012-11-16 03:35:01 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


I think this article explains fairly well what's going on here. Link Term limits are a biatch, aren't they, John?
 
2012-11-16 03:38:21 PM  
IMPEACH OR STFU, YOU NUTLESS WONDERS
 
2012-11-16 03:38:51 PM  

Nadie_AZ: I'm actually beginning to pity the average Fox News viewer a little. Brainwashing is hard to notice when it is happening and harder to break after it is done.


It's almost disturbing seeing how crazy some of my conservative friends went on their Facebook feeds after the election. One guy, who really is pretty bright otherwise, has practically gone insane. At the Y, there is an older guy who was a major Fox News guy who is at the gym the same time in the morning as me. Before the election he was talking up Romney to anyone who would listen to him, black or white. He didn't show at the gym for over a week after the election (finally saw him again yesterday).
 
2012-11-16 03:39:55 PM  

Aarontology: The Truthers just don't give up, do they?


This time it's gonna stick!!!
 
2012-11-16 03:42:26 PM  
When people say things are worse than Watergate, I get the impression they don't fully appreciate how farking bad Watergate was. Watergate was more than just the coverup of a break-in.
 
2012-11-16 03:48:41 PM  

Aarontology: The Truthers just don't give up, do they?


Interesting. Is this an extension of the 9/11 Truther movement?

I get more of Ruby Ridge, Waco, Texas vibe from the whole thing.
 
2012-11-16 03:50:15 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


Worse by 4 right? Or worse by potato?
 
2012-11-16 03:53:12 PM  

kingoomieiii: DamnYankees: I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.

BUT THAT'S THE SCARIEST PART OF THIS WHOLE SCANDAL, DAMNYANKEES. WE JUST DON'T KNOW.

WE. JUST. DON'T. KNOW.

AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ASKING THESE CIRCULAR QUESTIONS UNTIL SOMEONE GIVES US AN ANSWER. THAT WE LIKE.


It is really up to the Obama Administration to explain the cover-up and the conspiracy. The GOP have no clue why this is scandal because they are not the ones who made it a scandal.
 
2012-11-16 03:54:43 PM  

mrshowrules: jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.

Worse by 4 right? Or worse by potato?


3.403 kiloderps worse.
 
2012-11-16 03:55:18 PM  

mrshowrules: It is really up to the Obama Administration to explain the cover-up and the conspiracy. The GOP have no clue why this is scandal because they are not the ones who made it a scandal.


Also, it's opposite day.
 
2012-11-16 03:56:58 PM  
none more worse.
 
2012-11-16 04:01:16 PM  
If anyone is curious, they should check out this video of the Congressional hearings (link is to the Rachel Maddow Show, but its just a clip of Congressional hearings):

Link

Eni Faleomavaega is awesome.
 
2012-11-16 04:01:32 PM  

mrshowrules: It is really up to the Obama Administration to explain the cover-up and the conspiracy. The GOP have no clue why this is scandal because they are not the ones who made it a scandal.


This is a troll post, right?

It's not a scandal.

The GOP is insisting it's a scandal because they want people to be mad at a scandal. They have absolutely no reason to call it a scandal, and somehow they've twisted that COMPLETE LACK OF ANY SCANDAL into proof positive of a 100% perfect coverup.

THIS WAS A TERRORIST ATTACK.
 
2012-11-16 04:03:42 PM  

kingoomieiii: This is a troll post, right?


I don't think its a troll post as much as its just sarcasm.
 
2012-11-16 04:04:58 PM  
This just needs to be posted repeatedly in all Benghazi threads:

i18.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-16 04:10:01 PM  
At the end of the day no matter how much bullshiat the talking heads spew it's not going to change the election results.
 
2012-11-16 04:11:37 PM  

DamnYankees: kingoomieiii: This is a troll post, right?

I don't think its a troll post as much as its just sarcasm.


This but I should no better because of Poe's Law and such.
 
2012-11-16 04:12:02 PM  
This is Obama's Whitewater, um, er, Watergate, yeah!!11!
 
2012-11-16 04:13:08 PM  
This is Obama's Waterloo.
 
2012-11-16 04:14:52 PM  
This is Obama's Thermopylae.
 
2012-11-16 04:16:00 PM  
This is Obama's Second Battle of El Alamein.
 
2012-11-16 04:19:33 PM  
This is Obama's Little Big Horn
 
2012-11-16 04:19:42 PM  
This is today's reason I want an amendment banning the media from using "-gate" to describe every last goddamned thing that happens to a politician.
 
2012-11-16 04:20:10 PM  
This is Obama's Pultowa.
 
2012-11-16 04:22:28 PM  
This is Obama's second chance to fail at the claw crane.
 
2012-11-16 04:23:48 PM  
I'm sure it's not worse than Fox Shiat.
 
2012-11-16 04:24:13 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


The President is near? the President is blah? The President is a demmycrat?
 
2012-11-16 04:24:21 PM  
This is really gonna hurt Obama come November.
 
2012-11-16 04:24:44 PM  
This just killed Obama's chances for reelection.
 
2012-11-16 04:25:05 PM  
This is Obama's Battle of Tours
 
2012-11-16 04:25:21 PM  
This is Obama's Dunkirk
 
2012-11-16 04:25:36 PM  
So, this is the October Surprise. Man, he's toast, no way he's gonna win enough Electoral Colleges now.
 
2012-11-16 04:25:57 PM  
Remember these?

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-16 04:26:30 PM  

Hanky: They have crossed the line of irresponsibility and are moving directly into slander.


Normally I would say that they have "crossed the Rubicon." In this case, they have "crossed the Derpicon."
 
2012-11-16 04:26:40 PM  
This is Obama's Kobayashi Maru
 
2012-11-16 04:27:33 PM  
The scandals Republicans believe to make themselves feel better.
 
2012-11-16 04:27:51 PM  
Goddamn that obama, presidentin' while being a negro. the nerve.
 
2012-11-16 04:27:56 PM  
This is Obama's Battle of Balaclava.
 
2012-11-16 04:27:59 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


OMG, Obama actually killed those 4 people in Benghazi?! I ALWAYS KNEW HE WAS A MUSLIM!!!!
 
2012-11-16 04:28:30 PM  
It was also clear that Mitt Romney was going to be our next President, according to luminaries such as he.

You can't explain that.
 
2012-11-16 04:28:37 PM  
500.the400club.org
 
2012-11-16 04:28:45 PM  
This is Obama's Ypres 1914
 
2012-11-16 04:29:09 PM  
This is Obama's Kin-Strife.
 
2012-11-16 04:29:19 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


Obama raped a baby goat, slit it's throat, then forced it to declare loyalty to Keny (the god of Kenya). After that, N0bama raped the God's lamb again, taking breaks to shove soshulism down it's throat. All this while screaming "Muhammad!!!"

What is there not to be outraged about?
 
2012-11-16 04:29:38 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: [i.imgur.com image 625x323]


static.ddmcdn.com
 
2012-11-16 04:29:40 PM  
Dear Baby Boomers,

The world is not all about you. We know you were young and thought you were totally changing the world with flower power when the original watergate scandal hit, but you weren't. You'd all eventually sell out and vote for the successors of nixon, happily pillage the environment and repeatedly vote and agitate to screw anyone who did not "get theirs already." As such, you need to just get the hell over yourselves and stop appending the term "gate" to every freaking thing that happens.

thanks

Every other human on the planet
 
2012-11-16 04:29:59 PM  
You have to give them credit. After the dismal failure of both the GOP and the right-wing media in the election, normal people might take a step back, but no - they're plowing on, full steam ahead.
 
2012-11-16 04:30:01 PM  
Derpers gonna derp, can't derp that. Derp.
 
2012-11-16 04:32:33 PM  
There. Are Luke 4 Libya threads active. I don't know which one the pick a fight in.
 
2012-11-16 04:32:37 PM  
It's exactly like Watergate.

Republicans are going to be in deep shiat over what they did. Just like Watergate.
 
2012-11-16 04:33:17 PM  
Benghazi is a huge sandal
 
2012-11-16 04:33:33 PM  
So Obama used his time machine to break into the Embassy before the election and killed 4 people just to bolster his Electoral College count.

I knew it.
 
2012-11-16 04:34:10 PM  
Hi, I'm Joe Republican, seeking to reestablish relevance for my Party. I disavow: 1) Mitt Romney's divisive speech 2) Donald Trump 3) This farcical nonsense about a terrorist attack being a "Watergate" style cover up. It is outrageous and irresponsible.

I'm not holding my breath.
 
2012-11-16 04:34:47 PM  
This is Obama's 9/11
 
2012-11-16 04:35:12 PM  
There's an easy way for Obama to get out of this. Pull a Reagan and say "I don't recall"

Worked for Iran-Contra, it can work for you too!
 
2012-11-16 04:35:12 PM  

Hanky: Hi, I'm Joe Republican, seeking to reestablish relevance for my Party. I disavow: 1) Mitt Romney's divisive speech 2) Donald Trump 3) This farcical nonsense about a terrorist attack being a "Watergate" style cover up. It is outrageous and irresponsible.

I'm not holding my breath.


Welcome to the Left Side, comrade!
 
2012-11-16 04:35:17 PM  

Iblis824: This is Obama's 9/11


I see what you did there.
 
2012-11-16 04:35:20 PM  
Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?
 
2012-11-16 04:35:46 PM  
This is Obama's sophomore slump....and it is very very bad for him.
 
2012-11-16 04:35:52 PM  

FarkedOver: There's an easy way for Obama to get out of this. Pull a Reagan and say "I don't recall"

Worked for Iran-Contra, it can work for you too!


We call it "pulling a Gonzalez" these days.
 
2012-11-16 04:36:30 PM  

DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents


No, none of the Bush years stuff counts. He was protecting this country. From turrorists.
 
2012-11-16 04:36:32 PM  
This is Obama's Shaka, when the walls fell.
 
2012-11-16 04:36:33 PM  

JerseyTim: When people say things are worse than Watergate, I get the impression they don't fully appreciate how farking bad Watergate was. Watergate was more than just the coverup of a break-in.


They know. They are just trying to do two things: minimize watergate and if that doesn't work, pin the biggest scandal ever on Obama.
 
2012-11-16 04:36:46 PM  
Obama and Benghazi, when the walls fell
 
2012-11-16 04:37:14 PM  
i18.photobucket.com

Still not sticking, guys.
Fling moar.
 
2012-11-16 04:37:22 PM  
*shakes tiny fist*
 
2012-11-16 04:37:43 PM  
Is it just me or does O'Reily seem more unhinged as of late?
 
2012-11-16 04:38:04 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: *shakes tiny fist*


14 seconds, but yours was better, if that helps.
 
2012-11-16 04:38:06 PM  
Is Benghazi-gate worse than Watergate In the same sense that crack cocaine is worse than powder?

/I'm just asking questions.
 
2012-11-16 04:38:26 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Is it just me or does O'Reily seem more unhinged as of late?


They're all more unhinged as of late. Started about, oh, a week, maybe ten days ago?
 
2012-11-16 04:38:41 PM  

Hector Remarkable: This is Obama's Shaka, when the walls fell.


Hector Remarkable: This is Obama's Shaka, when the walls fell.


OReilly and Obama at Tanagra
 
2012-11-16 04:38:42 PM  

St_Francis_P: Is the Libyan situation another Watergate?

Short answer: no.


How can you ignore the obvious? The administration pretended, after the death of 4 Americans, that everything you saw was the result of some video posed on YouTube 6 months prior. That shiat is supposed to happen in North Korea, not the United States.
 
2012-11-16 04:39:01 PM  
Obama quit smoking and didn't gain any weight. You can't explain that.
 
2012-11-16 04:39:08 PM  
This is Obama's Han Solo frozen in carbonite.
 
2012-11-16 04:39:17 PM  
This is Obama's Wolf 359.
 
2012-11-16 04:39:26 PM  
This is Obama's Nirnaeth Arnoediad.
 
2012-11-16 04:39:29 PM  

Wheyfaring Stranger: Is Benghazi-gate worse than Watergate In the same sense that crack cocaine is worse than powder?

/I'm just asking questions.


Will Benghazi finally expose Obama as the Muslim he secretly is?

/I'm just asking questions
 
2012-11-16 04:39:45 PM  
This is Obama's Battle of Serenity Valley.
 
2012-11-16 04:39:54 PM  

qorkfiend: FarkedOver: There's an easy way for Obama to get out of this. Pull a Reagan and say "I don't recall"

Worked for Iran-Contra, it can work for you too!

We call it "pulling a Gonzalez" these days.


THAT'S what pulling a Gonzalez means?

:::::zips fly:::

Well, the workday just got embarrassing...
 
2012-11-16 04:40:05 PM  
This is Obama's Brain on Drugs.
 
2012-11-16 04:40:52 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: This is Obama's Battle of Balaclava.


Mmm...battla of balaclava

i19.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-16 04:40:53 PM  

Vacation Bible School: qorkfiend: FarkedOver: There's an easy way for Obama to get out of this. Pull a Reagan and say "I don't recall"

Worked for Iran-Contra, it can work for you too!

We call it "pulling a Gonzalez" these days.

THAT'S what pulling a Gonzalez means?

:::::zips fly:::

Well, the workday just got embarrassing...


Yeah, that's "pulling a speedy". Understandable mistake.
 
2012-11-16 04:41:19 PM  
Benghazi!

Hell even the trolls aren't buying it. The repubs better retool or 2016 could be really ugly.
 
2012-11-16 04:41:24 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: Hanky: Hi, I'm Joe Republican, seeking to reestablish relevance for my Party. I disavow: 1) Mitt Romney's divisive speech 2) Donald Trump 3) This farcical nonsense about a terrorist attack being a "Watergate" style cover up. It is outrageous and irresponsible.

I'm not holding my breath.

Welcome to the Left Side, comrade!


I've been here with you all along, comrade. I'm just trying to help some GOP tool who needs some coaching on how to transcend this crap.
 
2012-11-16 04:41:41 PM  

stewmadness: St_Francis_P: Is the Libyan situation another Watergate?

Short answer: no.

How can you ignore the obvious? The administration pretended, after the death of 4 Americans, that everything you saw was the result of some video posed on YouTube 6 months prior. That shiat is supposed to happen in North Korea, not the United States.


OK sure, but uhhh to what gain? To hide the attackers true motivations?
 
2012-11-16 04:41:49 PM  

FriarReb98: This is today's reason I want an amendment banning the media from using "-gate" to describe every last goddamned thing that happens to a politician.


I can get behind this.
 
2012-11-16 04:42:09 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


I've been asking that question since day one, and I STILL haven't gotten an answer I understand. Maybe if more of us start asking, we'll get a response?
 
2012-11-16 04:42:12 PM  
The tire fire at Fox continues to smolder and smoke.
 
2012-11-16 04:42:27 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Is it just me or does O'Reily seem more unhinged as of late?


Well, his future isn't looking to good, what with Obama getting re-elected and passing sharia laws saying that his granddaughters have to fark Ni**ers from now on, outlawing guns and Pork, and then there's that whole thousand years of darkness thing.
 
2012-11-16 04:43:17 PM  
This is Obama's Malachor V.

/bound to be at least a little obscure
 
2012-11-16 04:43:17 PM  
I lost count: How many fists full of bloody feathers are we up to?
 
2012-11-16 04:43:38 PM  

kidgenius: balaclava


Balaclava:
oxford-shop.com

Baklava:
www.simplyrecipes.com

/maybe that's the joke
 
2012-11-16 04:43:45 PM  

Gyrfalcon: DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.

I've been asking that question since day one, and I STILL haven't gotten an answer I understand. Maybe if more of us start asking, we'll get a response?


President Obama could tell us all what the scandal is, but thus far he refuses to admit that a scandal exists, proving that he is covering something up.
 
2012-11-16 04:43:52 PM  
Fear leads to anger.

Anger leads to hate.

Hate leads to screaming uncontrollably at purely imaginary specters, shadows, sprinkler rainbows,
and cirrus clouds literally every waking moment of every single day of one's adult life.

Why do some Americans enjoy existing in a state of constant high-pitched hysteria?
 
2012-11-16 04:44:06 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


How do you feel about the Iraq war and the lack of WMD's?
 
2012-11-16 04:44:27 PM  

stewmadness: St_Francis_P: Is the Libyan situation another Watergate?

Short answer: no.

How can you ignore the obvious? The administration pretended, after the death of 4 Americans, that everything you saw was the result of some video posed on YouTube 6 months prior. That shiat is supposed to happen in North Korea, not the United States.


How can you ignore the fact that the Republicans in Congress yanked the security funding from our embassies shortly before this happened, and are now yelling at Obama because they say he didn't use the right words to describe the deaths that THEY caused?
 
2012-11-16 04:44:34 PM  
This is Obama's Black Album.
 
2012-11-16 04:45:16 PM  
This is Obama's c-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.
 
2012-11-16 04:45:20 PM  
This is Obama's "he would've gotten away with it to if it hadn't been for those meddling tea partiers!"
 
2012-11-16 04:45:28 PM  

Bag of Hammers: Mrtraveler01: Is it just me or does O'Reily seem more unhinged as of late?

Well, his future isn't looking to good, what with Obama getting re-elected and passing sharia laws saying that his granddaughters have to fark Ni**ers from now on, outlawing guns and Pork, and then there's that whole thousand years of darkness thing.


We never got the Death Panels or the FEMA Re-education Camps, but I'm holding him to his 1,000 Years of Darkness promise.
 
2012-11-16 04:46:27 PM  

sophus_tree: This is Obama's c-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.


"I've done... Questionable things..."

"Nothing the God of politics won't let you into heaven for."
 
2012-11-16 04:46:31 PM  
This is Obama's Twinkie
 
2012-11-16 04:46:46 PM  
This is Obama's dog Beau.
i229.photobucket.com
He's cute.
 
2012-11-16 04:47:06 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: This is Obama's Black Album.


I would lean more toward Obama's, "Revolver" or "Master of Puppets"
 
2012-11-16 04:47:09 PM  
This is Obama's Order 1066.
 
2012-11-16 04:47:23 PM  
Fark should just make a 24-7 Benghazi tab - would make it easier to keep track of the crazy.
 
2012-11-16 04:47:36 PM  

Kittypie070: Fear leads to anger.

Anger leads to hate.

Hate leads to screaming uncontrollably at purely imaginary specters, shadows, sprinkler rainbows,
and cirrus clouds literally every waking moment of every single day of one's adult life.

Why do some Americans enjoy existing in a state of constant high-pitched hysteria?


you forgot chairs.
 
2012-11-16 04:48:38 PM  
This is Obama's Whispering Wood.
 
2012-11-16 04:48:40 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Fark this guy and everyone on that farking network.

It is because of him, Glenn Beck, Hannity and all the other ridiculous derpers that we have people signing petitions to secede from the union because of a presidential election. This doesn't happen without these farkfaces screaming "socialism, communism, Marxism etc" ad nauseum and working their weak-thinking viewers into a santorum of paranoia.

It is because of these assholes that we get this incredible divide and even a guy committing suicide because of Obama's re-election. You don't have a network dedicated to unceasingly stoking the flames of hatred and fear, and you don't get anything near the levels of derp and stupidity we are witnessing these days.

So fark you, Bill O'Reilly, you liver-spotted old lying fool. I hope you experience the worst testicle pain imaginable, every second of the rest of your life.


It's worth keeping in mind that a significant number of people signing the petitions are likely people like me, who live in states that AREN'T trying to secede, but would love it if the "socialism, communism, Marxism etc" retards were no longer a barrier to actual progress, a better standard of living, and a stronger union.

We're less of a "well, bye" crowd than a "here, let me get the door, maybe call a cab, for you" crowd.
 
2012-11-16 04:49:12 PM  
Benghazi put the EMPTY milk jug back in the fridge
 
2012-11-16 04:49:36 PM  

Karne: Fark should just make a 24-7 Benghazi tab - would make it easier to keep track of the crazy.


More like popping Benghazi tabs 24-7
 
2012-11-16 04:49:53 PM  
Oh damn it. I DID forget the empty chairs.

Do I need to re-write my poast?

I'm craving junk food at the moment.
 
2012-11-16 04:49:57 PM  

kingflower: This is Obama's sophomore slump....and it is very very bad for him.


Are you concerned? I guess you wont be voting for him now =(
 
2012-11-16 04:50:17 PM  
It's not Watergate, it's Monicagate. As in, what can we gin up to impeach Obama and keep him from getting anything done in his second term?
 
2012-11-16 04:50:19 PM  

kingoomieiii: jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.

By that metric, any time a government employee dies, it's worse than watergate.

President orders a hotel broken into because he's a paranoid loon- not a problem

American soil is attacked, 3,000 people die, intelligence failed to prevent it- PRESIDENT OBVIOUSLY NOT TO BLAME, says Fox. Network uses attack to promote culture of islamophobia and militarism
Embassy gets attacked, four people die, intelligence didn't prevent it- "SOME (our anchors) ARE SAYING"O BAMA KNEW AND DID NOTHING, says Fox. Network uses attack to promote culture of islamophobia and militarism


It almost kinda sorta maybe looks like there's a pattern there doesn't it?
 
2012-11-16 04:50:25 PM  

Snark Shark II: FriarReb98: This is today's reason I want an amendment banning the media from using "-gate" to describe every last goddamned thing that happens to a politician.

I can get behind this.


CSB: when I was a wee lad just starting to listen to the news this was such a thing that I assumed that -gate was just a suffix meaning "scandal about" and hearing watergate mentioned in passing later assumed it was some sort of kerfufel over water rights.
 
2012-11-16 04:50:40 PM  

Nadie_AZ: They learned nothing on Election Day.


Just let them cry themselves to sleep. They're inconsolable.
 
2012-11-16 04:50:51 PM  

stewmadness: How can you ignore the obvious? The administration pretended, after the death of 4 Americans, that everything you saw was the result of some video posed on YouTube 6 months prior. That shiat is supposed to happen in North Korea, not the United States.


Can we start the impeachment hearings after the impeachment hearings for Fast and Furious?

Sooooo sweeeet!
 
2012-11-16 04:51:27 PM  
This is Obama's Mind of Mencia.
 
2012-11-16 04:51:43 PM  

Solid Muldoon: It's not Watergate, it's Monicagate. As in, what can we gin up to impeach Obama and keep him from getting anything done in his second term?


I'm still waiting for Whiteygate.
 
2012-11-16 04:52:05 PM  
Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?
 
2012-11-16 04:52:20 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: [500.the400club.org image 850x439]


OK. I don't get the Lebowski references. Anybody want to explain?
 
2012-11-16 04:52:28 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Is it just me or does O'Reily seem more unhinged as of late?


I think you can pinpoint the exact moment he snapped. It was on election night... that clip where he's explaining that white males are now in the minority. And all those [shudder] other people want THINGS. They want STUFF.

This clip right here, that is.

You can hear it in his voice, and see it behind his eyes. He's actually trying to offer objective analysis of strategy and demographics one moment... and the next moment he seizes up with the stark realization that IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT. And you can hear the panic strike his voice, and you can see him age 15 years in 5 seconds.
 
2012-11-16 04:52:56 PM  

Kittypie070: Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?


TWINKIES! They're gonna be gone forever!
 
2012-11-16 04:53:09 PM  
This is Obama's second invasion of the Mushroom Kingdom
 
2012-11-16 04:53:11 PM  
This is an honest question:

Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?

Or is there something else?

/I'm not saying it is true, but let's just assume so for argument's sake
//yes, I know the President is blah, but I'm really trying to figure out why folks are so upset about the handling of this tragedy.
 
2012-11-16 04:53:36 PM  
Benghazi is much worse of a "media" fabrication.
 
2012-11-16 04:53:49 PM  

stewmadness: St_Francis_P: Is the Libyan situation another Watergate?

Short answer: no.

How can you ignore the obvious? The administration pretended, after the death of 4 Americans, that everything you saw was the result of some video posed on YouTube 6 months prior. That shiat is supposed to happen in North Korea, not the United States.


And just imagine that if they wouldn't have "pretended", those 4 Americans would have gloriously become reanimated and would have voted for Romney and tipped the election in Mitt's favor.
 
2012-11-16 04:54:19 PM  
The Benghazi attack took place on September 11th. There was obviously a meeting at Fox where they said "It happened on September 11th! That is so symbolic! This is our best chance! Run with it!"

And they have. The best outcome at this point would be for Rep. King to blurt out some secret to Fox News, Fox News to run with it, and King and Roger Ailes both to be arrested for treason.
 
2012-11-16 04:55:20 PM  

Kittypie070: Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?


farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2012-11-16 04:55:23 PM  

RedT: This is an honest question:

Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?

Or is there something else?

/I'm not saying it is true, but let's just assume so for argument's sake
//yes, I know the President is blah, but I'm really trying to figure out why folks are so upset about the handling of this tragedy.


We've been asking Right Wingers this for days and all the can say is someone, possibly the President, lied about something, somewhere, so it's officially a cover up or something.

They won't explain it to us, apparently it's for Right Wingers only, and if they told us, we'd take it from them and dispel all the myths and lies and they wouldn't have it anymore.
 
2012-11-16 04:55:34 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: Kittypie070: Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?

TWINKIES! They're gonna be gone forever!


HoHos are the superior Hostess product.
 
2012-11-16 04:56:04 PM  
This is Obama's XFL.
 
2012-11-16 04:56:19 PM  

clambam: The Benghazi attack took place on September 11th. There was obviously a meeting at Fox where they said "It happened on September 11th! That is so symbolic! This is our best chance! Run with it!"

And they have. The best outcome at this point would be for Rep. King to blurt out some secret to Fox News, Fox News to run with it, and King and Roger Ailes both to be arrested for treason.


I wonder if they'll start calling Benghazi "the 9/11 attack". I thought of it, so you can be sure some hack over at Fox News has thought of it, too.
 
2012-11-16 04:56:48 PM  
This is Obama's Shores of Tripoli.
 
2012-11-16 04:57:03 PM  
This is Obama's c-beams glittering in the darkness at Tannhauser Gate.
 
2012-11-16 04:57:34 PM  
Just a reminder, G. Gordon Libby actually had a show on Fox. Yes, one of the perpetrators of Watergate was rewarded by Fox News with his very own radio program.
 
2012-11-16 04:57:46 PM  

Boxcutta: This is Obama's XFL.


He Hate Me
 
2012-11-16 04:58:05 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


X = Obama purposely lied about the reasons for the attack on Beghazi because he wanted to cover up the real reason as part of his nefarious agenda to something something.
 
2012-11-16 04:58:07 PM  
This is OBama's Hostess Union.
 
2012-11-16 04:58:15 PM  

Kittypie070: Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?



Shopping mall cinnamon rolls with extra cream cheese frosting
 
2012-11-16 04:58:43 PM  
"The press has been largely negligent in..."

ARE YOU FARKING KIDDING ME?

They have been blathering on about this nonstop. Although there were close to FORTY killed at embassies under Bush, and something like 100 under Clinton, these FOUR apparently trump them all. The press has been flogging this dead horse and farking this chicken so hard and so frequently that I keep expecting PETA to protest every single news agency in the planet. Hell, even Praeteus' testimony didn't give you any evidence, but you are acting like the attacks happened because Obama needed a security detail to watch the door while he molested children and allowed the Gays to run amok at the local Children's Hospital Burn Wing.

I've got news for you, Bill. The definition of "negligent" isn't "Doesn't side with Fox News 100%".

Farking moron. God, someone needs to shut this asshat up. It's people like him who have led the Right to believe that reality is only reality when they agree, fact checking is a "liberal plot", and polls are "skewed" any time they don't show the DESIRED results.
 
2012-11-16 04:58:49 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: This just needs to be posted repeatedly in all Benghazi threads:

i18.photobucket.com


2002 - Satanic Verses released in coloring book form
2004, Uzbekistan - Burned Koran found in dumpster outside Tashkent Wendy's
2004, Saudi Arabia - See-through burka introduced
2006 - Muhammad bobbleheads handed out at Toledo Mud Hens game
2007 - Marmaduke comic strip features madcap adventures in Mecca
2008, Serbia - Katy Perry's "I Kissed a Girl" mistakenly translated in Arabic to say "I Educated a Girl"
2008, Yemen - Obama administration denies the new president is a Muslin
 
2012-11-16 04:59:05 PM  

DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?


Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.
 
2012-11-16 04:59:07 PM  
This is Obama's dingleberry that gets caught in anal fuz and sticks to his underwear.
 
2012-11-16 04:59:25 PM  
Twinkies sound good, but I have a tremendous weakness for cheese puffs. I can't get enough of the bedamned things.

Maybe I shall get both.

Thanks, Farkers!!
 
2012-11-16 05:00:10 PM  
This is Obama's AfterM*A*S*H*
 
2012-11-16 05:00:19 PM  

Cletus C.: HST's Dead Carcass: This just needs to be posted repeatedly in all Benghazi threads:

[i18.photobucket.com image 480x480]

2002 - Satanic Verses released in coloring book form
2004, Uzbekistan - Burned Koran found in dumpster outside Tashkent Wendy's
2004, Saudi Arabia - See-through burka introduced
2006 - Muhammad bobbleheads handed out at Toledo Mud Hens game
2007 - Marmaduke comic strip features madcap adventures in Mecca
2008, Serbia - Katy Perry's "I Kissed a Girl" mistakenly translated in Arabic to say "I Educated a Girl"
2008, Yemen - Obama administration denies the new president is a Muslin


Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.
 
2012-11-16 05:00:52 PM  

RedT: Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?


Some Republicans believe that the Obama administration was trying to cover up the fact that there was a terrorist attack on our Libyan consulate on 9/11/12, because it would mean that Romney would really have something to lord over Obama during the election and debates.

No, seriously, lots of people would have said, "Well...Obama did kill bin Laden, but...four people died from a terrorist attack on Obama's watch so...I just don't know if I can trust Obama to protect us from terrorists anymore. I think I'll vote for Romney."

This is what they're clinging to, like a four-year-old kid clinging onto a security blanket that should have been put in the trash two years ago.
 
2012-11-16 05:02:15 PM  

RedT: .......Or is there something else?



We should as the 4 guys if there was anything else. But we can't.

....because they're dead.
 
2012-11-16 05:02:46 PM  
There is also the allegation that the administration denied the requests from the consulate for military support during the attack that lasted several hours.
 
2012-11-16 05:02:48 PM  
It's Scandal Envy:
http://www.salon.com/2012/11/15/gops_scandal_envy/
 
2012-11-16 05:02:58 PM  
FOX has a lot of gall implying it had an active criminal part in the break in at a US Embassy and subsequent crimes while being paid by a partisan Republican cabal. Maybe they've just hired Erlichmann or Haldemann or Colsonmann as news interpreters and are going all nostalgia.
 
2012-11-16 05:03:02 PM  

Holocaust Agnostic: Snark Shark II: FriarReb98: This is today's reason I want an amendment banning the media from using "-gate" to describe every last goddamned thing that happens to a politician.

I can get behind this.

CSB: when I was a wee lad just starting to listen to the news this was such a thing that I assumed that -gate was just a suffix meaning "scandal about" and hearing watergate mentioned in passing later assumed it was some sort of kerfufel over water rights.


Same here. I remember when I was five that I thought Reagan was president for life. We think dumb things when we're kids.
 
2012-11-16 05:03:05 PM  

andrewagill: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: [500.the400club.org image 850x439]

OK. I don't get the Lebowski references. Anybody want to explain?


Check the name of the image.
 
2012-11-16 05:03:07 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: RedT: This is an honest question:

Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?

Or is there something else?

/I'm not saying it is true, but let's just assume so for argument's sake
//yes, I know the President is blah, but I'm really trying to figure out why folks are so upset about the handling of this tragedy.

We've been asking Right Wingers this for days and all the can say is someone, possibly the President, lied about something, somewhere, so it's officially a cover up or something.

They won't explain it to us, apparently it's for Right Wingers only, and if they told us, we'd take it from them and dispel all the myths and lies and they wouldn't have it anymore.



Really?!
Damn, that makes me feel better because I like to think of myself as mostly not stupid, but I am having the hardest time seeing the other side of this.
 
2012-11-16 05:03:10 PM  

Karne: Fark should just make a 24-7 Benghazi tab - would make it easier to keep track of the crazy.


That was how we got Nightline. But I don't see Drew as Ted Koppel.
 
2012-11-16 05:03:25 PM  

Summoner101:

/maybe that's the joke


It is ;)
 
2012-11-16 05:03:33 PM  
For two months I was the lone voice in the wilderness here on Fark. Now I'm the only one with all the credibility. And yet everyone continues to let me be the sole credible voice here. Not that I don't enjoy the sweet sweet redemption here. Its just that I am shocked by how many people would rather be part of the majority than be right. You guys can be an echo chamber. It doesn't make you any less wrong.
 
2012-11-16 05:03:47 PM  

Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


Let's pretend, for a moment, I accept your premise.

Exactly what motivation or reason would there have been for him doing that?
 
2012-11-16 05:04:21 PM  
The Right learned after the last election: No matter what, never play defense, always attack.

Unless Obama et al. go on and stay on the offensive, Democrats are going to get rolled again.
 
2012-11-16 05:04:24 PM  
This...is Obama's boom stick!
 
2012-11-16 05:04:44 PM  

netcentric: RedT: .......Or is there something else?


We should as the 4 guys if there was anything else. But we can't.

....because they're dead.


Wait. What?

/not sure if troll/kidding/serious
 
2012-11-16 05:04:48 PM  

TheOther: The Right learned after the last election: No matter what, never play defense, always attack.

Unless Obama et al. go on and stay on the offensive, Democrats are going to get rolled again.


The last election? You mean 2012?
 
2012-11-16 05:04:48 PM  
The incumbent administration downplayed a terrorist attack during the last month of a presidential campaign. This is entirely predictable.

Is it a mark against Obama? Yes. By any objective standard, though, he's done a solid job of protecting the country. He's kept up all the questionable defense measures (Guantanamo/drones) against the desires of the left because he knows at the end of the day we are cowards who won't stand behind him if a big attack hits.

If you don't want our government officials to treat us like we "can't handle the truth", then step up and learn to handle the truth. The terrorist win not by killing us, but by convincing us destroy ourselves. Whether we do it by divisiveness or war debt is no concern of theirs.

Democrats stood behind Bush when 3000 died on 9/11. If the right wants to use 4 deaths to sink Obama then they can kiss my proud American ass.
 
2012-11-16 05:05:29 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: This just needs to be posted repeatedly in all Benghazi threads:

[i18.photobucket.com image 480x480]


It would be nice if the list included Bush normalizing relations with the terrorist state of Libya in 2004 and putting our embassy there in 2006.
 
2012-11-16 05:06:01 PM  
Solid proof, eh? The only thing solid here is O'Reilly's persistent bowel obstruction.
 
2012-11-16 05:06:02 PM  
Saying Bengazhi is worse than Watergate is just stupid. Nixon was ordering the FBI to stop an active criminal investigation and AG John Mitchell later went to prison over it. Benghazi is a colossal incompetent clusterf*, and now a coverup, but it doesn't rise to that level, or at least it hasn't yet. There's still time and probably lots of still-unseen crap that hasn't come out.
 
2012-11-16 05:06:30 PM  
Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.

Cool, show me where statements would have brought back all of the American lives that were lost in the embassy attacks. Show me that what Clinton, Bush, or Obama said after any attack that would have retroactively beefed up security at the installations and saved the lives and then we can start talking.

Until then, they are just farking words that won't bring back 4 dead guys. Stop giving a fark about the video, Obama's statements, and Susan Rice on the morning shows. Start giving a fark if anyone dropped the ball prior to or during the attack and how any mistakes will be corrected in order to avoid further attacks.

Until then, stop talking about the statements in the days after the attack.
 
2012-11-16 05:06:48 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: TheOther: The Right learned after the last election: No matter what, never play defense, always attack.

Unless Obama et al. go on and stay on the offensive, Democrats are going to get rolled again.

The last election? You mean 2012?


Sorry. Presidential election before last. 2008
 
2012-11-16 05:07:09 PM  
This is Obama's Heartbreak of Psoriasis
 
2012-11-16 05:07:17 PM  

jjorsett: Saying Bengazhi is worse than Watergate is just stupid. Nixon was ordering the FBI to stop an active criminal investigation and AG John Mitchell later went to prison over it. Benghazi is a colossal incompetent clusterf*, and now a coverup, but it doesn't rise to that level, or at least it hasn't yet. There's still time and probably lots of still-unseen crap that hasn't come out.


In what farking world? Or is this one of those "there is no evidence of wrongdoing, so it HAS to be a coverup" things?
 
2012-11-16 05:07:39 PM  

Hetfield: For two months I was the lone voice in the wilderness here on Fark. Now I'm the only one with all the credibility. And yet everyone continues to let me be the sole credible voice here. Not that I don't enjoy the sweet sweet redemption here. Its just that I am shocked by how many people would rather be part of the majority than be right. You guys can be an echo chamber. It doesn't make you any less wrong.


I'm going to need to see a detailed list of the fark thread numbers if I'm going to believe it.
 
2012-11-16 05:07:47 PM  
"The break in at the Watergate hotel was not nearly as important as failing to define a terrorist attack that killed four Americans"

Wait, the President of the United States active covers up a burglary at the opposing political party's headquarters is not as bad as how the President words a farking statement? Jesus Tap Dancing Christ, you aren't even trying to accuse him of ignoring evidence or covering up the attack in the first place. YOu are saying that the words that he said need a Congressional investigation, but being an accessory to felonies after the fact is just water under the bridge?

Fark, I give up, I can't even begin to guess what's the logic he's using. Is it possible that he has started borrowing some of Limbaugh's Hillbilly Heroin? This shiat makes even less sense than it did eve a week ago, and I thought they'd hit the pinnacle of crazy at that point.
 
2012-11-16 05:07:56 PM  
If President.Color !== Caucasian
System.out.print("This is a scandal!")
Else
System.out.print("what great weather we are having")
 
2012-11-16 05:08:16 PM  
Just imagine this kind of loose talk and spurious allegations in the days after 9/11/01. The country and even Congress would not have stood for it.
 
2012-11-16 05:08:29 PM  

kidgenius: Marcus Aurelius: This is Obama's Battle of Balaclava.

Mmm...battla of balaclava

[i19.photobucket.com image 500x375]


I don't think that's balaclava, I think that's Bastilla
 
2012-11-16 05:09:38 PM  

goatleggedfellow: The incumbent administration downplayed didn't use a terrorist attack for personal gains and scaring "security moms" during the last month of a presidential campaign into things Achmed was going convert their kids. This is entirely predictable.


ftfy
 
2012-11-16 05:09:51 PM  

Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.


Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.
 
2012-11-16 05:09:57 PM  

Felgraf: Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.

Let's pretend, for a moment, I accept your premise.

Exactly what motivation or reason would there have been for him doing that?


B-B-B-BECAUSE HES A SEKRIT MUZLIM SOCIALIZT, DUH
 
2012-11-16 05:09:57 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


Well, BIll's assertion seems to be that Obama didn't word his statement correctly. I think that might be all they have left at this point, but I'm a little lost as well. Maybe we're missing something?
 
2012-11-16 05:10:01 PM  

kidgenius: Summoner101:

/maybe that's the joke

It is ;)


Figured as much

/Thanks for making me hungry, jerk
 
2012-11-16 05:10:33 PM  
This is Obama's Heavens Gate
 
2012-11-16 05:10:42 PM  

zedster: If President.Color !== Caucasian Republican
System.out.print("This is a scandal!")
Else
System.out.print("what great weather we are having")


Vince Foster!

Ron Brown!

Whitewater-gate!

Chicks!

Millions for Ken Starr!
 
2012-11-16 05:10:56 PM  

andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.


It wasn't an embassy.
 
2012-11-16 05:11:42 PM  
This is Obama's Battletoads.
 
2012-11-16 05:11:49 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: andrewagill: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: [500.the400club.org image 850x439]

OK. I don't get the Lebowski references. Anybody want to explain?

Check the name of the image.


Ah! Light has dawned over Marblehead.
 
2012-11-16 05:11:56 PM  

Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


Show us where in THIS incident all blame got pawned off by the president on a video?

Yeah, you're a moron.
 
2012-11-16 05:12:04 PM  
Guys, give it up. There is absolutely no way at this point to convince the Republican base that Benghazi isn't Watergate. No matter how much proof you give them, it just means the cover-up is even more nefarious than anyone could have imagined.

/Yes, they aren't very bright.
 
2012-11-16 05:12:10 PM  

andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.


We should probably start by asking why Congressional Republicans voted to cut funding from embassy security, then.
 
2012-11-16 05:13:56 PM  
At this point the only thing that will stop the outrage from Benghazi is the next "outrageous" event that happens to occur during Obama's watch.
 
2012-11-16 05:13:57 PM  

Hetfield: For two months I was the lone voice in the wilderness here on Fark. Now I'm the only one with all the credibility. And yet everyone continues to let me be the sole credible voice here. Not that I don't enjoy the sweet sweet redemption here. Its just that I am shocked by how many people would rather be part of the majority than be right. You guys can be an echo chamber. It doesn't make you any less wrong.


Sloth's alt?
 
2012-11-16 05:14:16 PM  

qorkfiend: andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.

We should probably start by asking why Congressional Republicans voted to cut funding from embassy security, then.


That's EASY. Anything foreign policy other than bombing people without asking questions is appeasement. Having an embassy is appeasement.
 
2012-11-16 05:14:18 PM  

Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


Because there were riots going on over the "obscure online video" at the time.Does it bother you so much that the blame originally was on religious fanatics in the Middle East? Here's something else that was unheard of up until this incident, the opposing party coming out and accusing the farking President of the United States of siding with the terrorists. Sickening.
 
2012-11-16 05:14:21 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


No, the President of the United States was an active participant in multiple felonies, while acting in his official duty, that's all. As opposed to the whole 'Obama didn't SAY it right.' thing. Watch the clip, that's O'Reilly's entire platform, that Obama didn't say it the way BIll wanted.
 
2012-11-16 05:14:41 PM  

andrewagill: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: [500.the400club.org image 850x439]

OK. I don't get the Lebowski references. Anybody want to explain?


Ben Gazzara
 
2012-11-16 05:15:41 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.

It wasn't an embassy.


Sorry.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for a diplomatic facility was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Still not a gate.
 
2012-11-16 05:16:45 PM  

Karne: Hetfield: For two months I was the lone voice in the wilderness here on Fark. Now I'm the only one with all the credibility. And yet everyone continues to let me be the sole credible voice here. Not that I don't enjoy the sweet sweet redemption here. Its just that I am shocked by how many people would rather be part of the majority than be right. You guys can be an echo chamber. It doesn't make you any less wrong.

I'm going to need to see a detailed list of the fark thread numbers if I'm going to believe it.


And that farker had better be notarized as well.
 
2012-11-16 05:17:06 PM  

Summoner101: At this point the only thing that will stop the outrage from Benghazi is the next "outrageous" event that happens to occur during Obama's watch.


Your standards are too high. Whatever it is doesn't have to actually occur.
 
2012-11-16 05:17:12 PM  

andrewagill: Philip Francis Queeg: andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.

It wasn't an embassy.

Sorry.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for a diplomatic facility was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Still not a gate.


Particularly when the CIA requested a low-profile for their covert ops.
 
2012-11-16 05:17:15 PM  
This is Obama's Obama's first debate.
 
2012-11-16 05:17:19 PM  
Let's all pretend conservative media didn't just get caught with their pants down in front of the entire nation. These farks got EVERYTHING wrong, and this will be no different.
 
2012-11-16 05:18:22 PM  
This is Obama's Crimson Editor vs EditPlus
 
2012-11-16 05:18:30 PM  

Summoner101: kidgenius: balaclava

Balaclava:
[oxford-shop.com image 300x271]

Baklava:
[www.simplyrecipes.com image 400x268]

/maybe that's the joke


Balaclava was where they did that whole "Charge of the Light Brigade" thing. It was quite a scandal.
 
2012-11-16 05:18:37 PM  

Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


Wait, so you think the POTUS took the blame off of terrorists and put it onto an online video. Are you suggesting Obama is in cahoots with the terrorists to reduce their liability or what? What exactly do you see as the problem with pointing the finger at the wrong group purposefully or accidentally?
 
2012-11-16 05:18:46 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: zedster: If President.Color !== Caucasian Republican
System.out.print("This is a scandal!")
Else
System.out.print("what great weather we are having")

Vince Foster!

Ron Brown!

Whitewater-gate!

Chicks!

Millions for Ken Starr!


point taken

Pre-Clinton was the right this crazy?

I mean I know the hate they have for JFK now, but during JFK, LBJ, and Carter were they this off their rockers? I'm a little young to truly have grasped the Clinton years (b. 1987) but I remember some of the crazy with things like the 1996 Olympic bombing and people calling him the first ni**er president
 
2012-11-16 05:18:52 PM  

qorkfiend: andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.

We should probably start by asking why Congressional Republicans voted to cut funding from embassy security, then.


You know what? That is an excellent question. I would love to see the faces of the reps at an inquiry when someone brings that up.
 
2012-11-16 05:18:53 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Let's all pretend conservative media didn't just get caught with their pants down in front of the entire nation. These farks got EVERYTHING wrong, and this will be no different.


You kinda have to admire the sheer consistency of their incompetence. Everyone's wrong sometimes, but it takes effort to be that wrong all of the time.
 
2012-11-16 05:19:50 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Let's all pretend conservative media didn't just get caught with their pants down in front of the entire nation. These farks got EVERYTHING wrong, and this will be no different.


But saying that is proof of the liberal media being complicit in the demands of the socialist elite.
 
2012-11-16 05:20:00 PM  

qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: Let's all pretend conservative media didn't just get caught with their pants down in front of the entire nation. These farks got EVERYTHING wrong, and this will be no different.

You kinda have to admire the sheer consistency of their incompetence. Everyone's wrong sometimes, but it takes effort to be that wrong all of the time.


It takes effort yet skill to be that wrong all of the time and yet still have people listen to you.
 
2012-11-16 05:20:15 PM  
i900.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-16 05:20:17 PM  
i262.photobucket.com

It's... It's Libbener! Libbener!
 
2012-11-16 05:20:35 PM  

Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


In what sense chief? The attackers motivation doesn't change how defended the embassy was. They don't show up with RPGs and shout "we're here about the video!" And then half the marines or whoever clocked out.

That leave "the actual motivation was something that would embarrass Obama with a substantial part of the electorate.

So what was the real motivation? I can think of two possibilities. (1)The CIA prison or (2)Obama's war in Libya.

(1)Secret prisons are a matter of bipartisan consensus.

(2)Conservative object to the Libyan war but it is nakedly in a "because Obama did it" sense so there's no ground to lose. Liberals support all war.

So why would they bother?
 
2012-11-16 05:20:37 PM  

shastacola: Because there were riots going on over the "obscure online video" at the time.Does it bother you so much that the blame originally was on religious fanatics in the Middle East? Here's something else that was unheard of up until this incident, the opposing party coming out and accusing the farking President of the United States of siding with the terrorists. Sickening.


No, they've been accusing him of that for four years.
 
2012-11-16 05:21:03 PM  
This is Obama's HD-DVD
 
2012-11-16 05:21:07 PM  

kingoomieiii: The GOP is insisting it's a scandal because they want people to be mad at a scandal. They have absolutely no reason to call it a scandal, and somehow they've twisted that COMPLETE LACK OF ANY SCANDAL into proof positive of a 100% perfect coverup.

THIS WAS A TERRORIST ATTACK.


They're actually doing two things. First, the short plan is to plant a seed in the public's mind that Obama couldn't stop terrorism which was important during the campaign to counter the killing of Bin Laden narrative, and remains important as Republicans realize they desperately need to reestablish their tough on terror bona fides. That is difficult to do when the sitting president killed the guy who perpetrated the most spectacular terrorist attack in the history of the world, on their watch, so they have this shiny object and want everyone to look at it.

The longer plan is the insistence of coverup/scandal in order to minimize the scandals that have followed every Republican president since Nixon like the dirt cloud follows Pigpen. It's the old both sides are bad, so vote Republican, except it's in the context of historical relativism rather than political relativism.
 
2012-11-16 05:22:14 PM  

Polly Ester: DeaH: Okay, I am game. Let's turn Benghazi into a thing. Let's also open the books on the ten previous consulate and embassy incidents that resulted in injury and loss of life. And, since it resulted in more deaths than all the embassy/consulate killings combined, lets declassify all the 9/11 stuff. Let's see who exactly was notified before all those incidents. The public has a right to know, eh, Bill? I predict it will be HUGE in a scorched-earth kind of way that would sink one of our two parties for generations to come. Want to lay bets as to which party I'm talking about?

Cool. I'm game. But first show me where, in these ten previous incidents, the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


Sure, you find me a tape that shows the commander in chief doing just that in the present case - level of difficulty is there are three different speeches from the next day where he calls it an act of terror.
 
2012-11-16 05:22:42 PM  
This is Obama's Pelennor Fields.
 
2012-11-16 05:22:52 PM  

qorkfiend:
We should probably start by asking why Congressional Republicans voted to cut funding from embassy security, then.


Done asking questions. Time to impeach the Congressional Republicans that voted to cut funding for embassy security.
 
2012-11-16 05:23:43 PM  

zedster: Pre-Clinton was the right this crazy?

I mean I know the hate they have for JFK now, but during JFK, LBJ, and Carter were they this off their rockers? I'm a little young to truly have grasped the Clinton years (b. 1987) but I remember some of the crazy with things like the 1996 Olympic bombing and people calling him the first ni**er president


Pre-Clinton/Post-Reagan, they relied on Religion for their craziness.

Then the GOP discovered the magical behavioral control available through AM radio and, later, a dedicated Cable News network. That's when they let the derp out of the bag.
 
2012-11-16 05:23:45 PM  

mrshowrules: Aarontology: The Truthers just don't give up, do they?

Interesting. Is this an extension of the 9/11 Truther movement?

I get more of Ruby Ridge, Waco, Texas vibe from the whole thing.


well its like the truthers in that, they have taken the fact that there was a confusing situation with an information flow that was sometimes contradicted itself to the logical conclusion of.... Elvis faked the moon landings to cover up for Benghazi.
 
2012-11-16 05:23:54 PM  

andrewagill: Philip Francis Queeg: andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.

It wasn't an embassy.

Sorry.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for a diplomatic facility was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Still not a gate.


How much security do you think we should have at every diplomatic office on the planet? Should every foreign consulate within the United States have the level off security to hold off a mob of well armed American citizens?
 
2012-11-16 05:24:34 PM  

Polly Ester: the Commander in Chief tried to pawn off all blame and liability onto some obscure online video.


"And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people." -Obama, Rose Garden remarks, 9/12/12

Hmm. I don't see any pawning or shifting of liability here. I see him stating that justice will be served for the criminals that committed murder. I don't see any reference to their possible motivation. Look how stupid you are.
 
2012-11-16 05:24:50 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Summoner101: kidgenius: balaclava

Balaclava:
[oxford-shop.com image 300x271]

Baklava:
[www.simplyrecipes.com image 400x268]

/maybe that's the joke

Balaclava was where they did that whole "Charge of the Light Brigade" thing. It was quite a scandal.


All I know is I used to get high listening to Balaklava.
 
2012-11-16 05:24:53 PM  
This will make it tough for Obama to get re-elected, that's for wure.
 
2012-11-16 05:26:19 PM  

andrewagill: Philip Francis Queeg: andrewagill: Dimensio: Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.

Sure.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for an embassy was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Benghazi is not a gate.

It wasn't an embassy.

Sorry.

It should scandalize you that our standard level of protection for a diplomatic facility was overcome by a mob that we should have known was being organized based on the level of organization and coordination in the attack.

Now, that's not to say that heads need to roll, but I do think it means that we should take a very close look at our policies to see if we need to make some changes.

/Still not a gate.


Why? It's already obvious you have no grasp of foreign countries our or presence there. A consulate is a HOUSE. Did you expect there to be 20 armed soldiers guarding it at all times? Because if so, I have news for you. The republicans cut that funding because they deemed it unnecessary. There were days long protests across the entire middle east and as far as we know, one terror cell used that as cover to engage an attack. There is no possible way to know the protests would happen to give them that cover.

So in short, you're an uninformed, partisan idiot. Let me know when you get a passport, let alone ever cross an ocean, and maybe I'll consider your ignorant rage something more than just pure ignorance.
 
2012-11-16 05:26:33 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: This is Obama's Battle of Tours


But Obama's a Seekrit Mooslim conspirator! Why would he stop the Mooslim advance into Europe? He'd SUPPORT IT I TELL YOU! HE'S OUT TO KILL EUROPE WITH HIS EUROPEAN MOOSLIM SOCIALIZMS!
 
2012-11-16 05:26:59 PM  
This is Obama's Jar-Jar Binks.
 
2012-11-16 05:27:00 PM  
The walls of the American embassy in Cairo also were overcome that day. An American flag was lost. Where's the outrage?
 
Bf+
2012-11-16 05:27:04 PM  
This is worse than 9/11 and the holocaust combined...times a thousand!
 
2012-11-16 05:27:56 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: How much security do you think we should have at every diplomatic office on the planet? Should every foreign consulate within the United States have the level off security to hold off a mob of well armed American citizens?


Isn't external security for all diplomatic missions the duty and responsibility of the host country?
 
2012-11-16 05:28:29 PM  

kingoomieiii: DamnYankees: I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.

BUT THAT'S THE SCARIEST PART OF THIS WHOLE SCANDAL, DAMNYANKEES. WE JUST DON'T KNOW.

WE. JUST. DON'T. KNOW.

AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ASKING THESE CIRCULAR QUESTIONS UNTIL SOMEONE GIVES US AN ANSWER. THAT WE LIKE.


Colbert nailed it.
 
2012-11-16 05:30:26 PM  
This is worse than CAIDS (Cancer x AIDS).
 
2012-11-16 05:30:29 PM  
This is a president that gets an itchy trigger finger when he hears the phrases "credible intelligence", "Al Qaeda", and "drone strike" in the same sentence.

He has a hit list and he has ordered the deaths of guys on that list.

And he is a freaking terrorist sympathizer?
 
2012-11-16 05:31:23 PM  

TheOther: Philip Francis Queeg: How much security do you think we should have at every diplomatic office on the planet? Should every foreign consulate within the United States have the level off security to hold off a mob of well armed American citizens?

Isn't external security for all diplomatic missions the duty and responsibility of the host country?


Yes, I believe it is.
 
2012-11-16 05:31:46 PM  

ghare: Guys, give it up. There is absolutely no way at this point to convince the Republican base that Benghazi isn't Watergate. No matter how much proof you give them, it just means the cover-up is even more nefarious than anyone could have imagined.

/Yes, they aren't very bright.


One of them has Fark thread numbers.

THREAD. NUMBERS.
 
2012-11-16 05:33:12 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: How much security do you think we should have at every diplomatic office on the planet? Should every foreign consulate within the United States have the level off security to hold off a mob of well armed American citizens?


Dude, I don't know. Maybe we should see if there's another way to deploy the same number and stay safer, or maybe we should look at increasing our intelligence efforts to disrupt an attack or bring in reinforcements. Should we have had reinforcements available or would we need to have intelligence too far in advance? You might reasonably expect to need reinforcements on Sept 11. Maybe it was too soon to put a diplomatic facility there.

There are a lot of questions. We do not have answers. At least, I do not have answers. That's why we have hearings.
 
2012-11-16 05:33:49 PM  
This is Obama's Nutella squeeze bottle.
 
2012-11-16 05:34:30 PM  

ladodger34: This is a president that gets an itchy trigger finger when he hears the phrases "credible intelligence", "Al Qaeda", and "drone strike" in the same sentence.

He has a hit list and he has ordered the deaths of guys on that list.

And he is a freaking terrorist sympathizer?


See how devious he is? He's lulling us into a false sense of security, and then *WHAM*! The next day he's coming for your guns and your trans fats.
 
2012-11-16 05:36:39 PM  
This is Obama's Pepsi and Pop-Rocks
 
2012-11-16 05:37:34 PM  
So 'impeachment' is now what Republicans do when they don't get their way?
 
2012-11-16 05:37:40 PM  

andrewagill: Philip Francis Queeg: How much security do you think we should have at every diplomatic office on the planet? Should every foreign consulate within the United States have the level off security to hold off a mob of well armed American citizens?

Dude, I don't know. Maybe we should see if there's another way to deploy the same number and stay safer, or maybe we should look at increasing our intelligence efforts to disrupt an attack or bring in reinforcements. Should we have had reinforcements available or would we need to have intelligence too far in advance? You might reasonably expect to need reinforcements on Sept 11. Maybe it was too soon to put a diplomatic facility there.

There are a lot of questions. We do not have answers. At least, I do not have answers. That's why we have hearings.


So let's be clear, you think any nation should be able to station whatever forces they desire to defend their consulates and be free to dispatch whatever additional military forces they desire into the country when they feel they are threatened?

Would that apply to say, the Russian Consulate in LA? Should they be allowed to dispatch as many Special Forces into the US as they feel is necessary?
 
2012-11-16 05:38:56 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


damnyankees: X is that obama knew about the attack in time to send reinforcements and failed to do so for political reasons. I read breitbart so that these things make "sense."
 
2012-11-16 05:39:41 PM  

andrewagill: Philip Francis Queeg: How much security do you think we should have at every diplomatic office on the planet? Should every foreign consulate within the United States have the level off security to hold off a mob of well armed American citizens?

Dude, I don't know. Maybe we should see if there's another way to deploy the same number and stay safer, or maybe we should look at increasing our intelligence efforts to disrupt an attack or bring in reinforcements. Should we have had reinforcements available or would we need to have intelligence too far in advance? You might reasonably expect to need reinforcements on Sept 11. Maybe it was too soon to put a diplomatic facility there.

There are a lot of questions. We do not have answers. At least, I do not have answers. That's why we have hearings.


Or maybe the House should have increased funding for embassy security.

Link

O'BRIEN: Is it true that you voted to cut the funding for embassy security?

CHAFFETZ: Absolutely. Look, we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have - think about this - 15,000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, private army there for President Obama in Baghdad.

And we're talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces? When you're in tough economic times, you have to make difficult choices how to prioritize this.
 

We have to make priorities and choices. We have to cut funding for security, then set our priority on blaming the president for any deaths that result from a lack of security.
 
2012-11-16 05:39:55 PM  
This is Obama's Rafalca's olympic debut.
 
2012-11-16 05:40:36 PM  
Obama Administration may not have specifically labeled a terrorist act was a "Terrorist act" in the first day after it happened!!!

Two questions need to be answered for that:

1) Worse than Hitler?
2) When does the impeachment start?
 
2012-11-16 05:41:40 PM  

sabreWulf07: "And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people." -Obama, Rose Garden remarks, 9/12/12

Hmm. I don't see any pawning or shifting of liability here. I see him stating that justice will be served for the criminals that committed murder. I don't see any reference to their possible motivation. Look how stupid you are


I think I just figured it out... bear with me here and follow the pattern.

Remember how the Republicans talked a big game about avenging 9/11, attacked Iraq, and conveniently declared that Osama bin Laden wasn't worth worrying about despite being the self-avowed mastermind behind it?

And remember how they complained about the misuse of power when Obama got him?

Here they are talking a big game about avenging Benghazi.

If the pattern holds, they'll attack someone else (likely Iran) and then play down the culprit behind Benghazi because deep down, they want him alive. And why not? He's useful for fear-mongering.
 
2012-11-16 05:42:26 PM  
(My quote button and Fark classification icons disappeared when I upgraded Firefox, what's up widdat?)

The RW derp is worse than that. The RW narrative is that (the original) 9/11 is WJ Clinton's fault, for knowing about OBL and not dealing with him during his presidency. 

And let me just add here the thing that any halfway sentient person knows: this is absolutely not about "finding the truth", "honoring Ambassador Stevens" in any way, shape or form. This is attempted payback for Obama presidenting while blah and beating R$ like the soulless opportunist he most transparently is.

Or, I most fervently pray, was.
 
2012-11-16 05:43:37 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Summoner101: At this point the only thing that will stop the outrage from Benghazi is the next "outrageous" event that happens to occur during Obama's watch.

Your standards are too high. Whatever it is doesn't have to actually occur.


Fair enough.
 
2012-11-16 05:43:42 PM  

rufus-t-firefly: We have to make priorities and choices. We have to cut funding for security, then set our priority on blaming the president for any deaths that result from a lack of security.


You have to admit for them it's win-win. Save money, blame the black guy. What's not to like?
 
2012-11-16 05:43:55 PM  
I am not even sure how an attack on a strategic target is "terrorism" but that through the looking glass ship left a decade ago.
 
2012-11-16 05:44:01 PM  
All you had to do was follow the damn train, Obama!
 
2012-11-16 05:44:28 PM  

Flaming Yawn: The RW narrative is that (the original) 9/11 is WJ Clinton's fault, for knowing about OBL and not dealing with him during his presidency.


Of course, when Clinton did "do something" like the Sudan aspirin factory bombing fiasco, he was routinely mocked by Republicans. It's amazing how short the attention span of Republicans is.
 
2012-11-16 05:45:15 PM  

killermartinis: I read breitbart so that these things make "sense."


People suffering severe dementia brought on by fact-deprivation think a lot of things make sense.
 
2012-11-16 05:46:00 PM  
This is Obama's Kirstie Alley's Dancing With The Stars: All Stars
 
2012-11-16 05:46:30 PM  

qorkfiend: You have to give them credit. After the dismal failure of both the GOP and the right-wing media in the election, normal people might take a step back, but no - they're plowing on, full steam ahead.


I'm looking forward to 2014 already. I'm really happy they're continuing on with this bullshiat because we have a real opportunity to own the entire legislative branch. I applaud these assholes I don't deride them. Just like the rest of the upper echelon of the Republican celebrities they're raping their party for their own profit. They won't stop until it looks like the remains of a Bain Capital acquisition.
 
2012-11-16 05:47:51 PM  

justtray: Why? It's already obvious you have no grasp of foreign countries our or presence there. A consulate is a HOUSE. Did you expect there to be 20 armed soldiers guarding it at all times? Because if so, I have news for you. The republicans cut that funding because they deemed it unnecessary. There were days long protests across the entire middle east and as far as we know, one terror cell used that as cover to engage an attack. There is no possible way to know the protests would happen to give them that cover.

So in short, you're an uninformed, partisan idiot. Let me know when you get a passport, let alone ever cross an ocean, and maybe I'll consider your ignorant rage something more than just pure ignorance.


OK. Let's go over this really quickly.

What I can say is that a terrorist attack happened and some people who were representatives of the US government died. I would like some people look at it and see if there's anything we could have done better to prevent or mitigate the situation.

Republicans are dickbags; they cut the budget for diplomatic security because it wasn't money we were spending on killing people or corporate welfare over here. Their modus operandi seems to be to try to slash everything that isn't.

Now they're trying to make Obama suffer politically for something that wasn't his fault, no matter how you slice it. Because, as said before, they're dickbags. And their other modus operandi for the past 4 years (and the next 2, before people will hopefully get sick of their shiat and they lose the house) has been to stick anything to Obama. Even if it's not his fault, even if it's not really bad, they'll try to impeach him over it. Because, y'know, dickbags.

/Again, nowhere near a gate.
//Honestly, scandal doesn't really seem right
///But I don't think I can come up with the correct word.
 
2012-11-16 05:47:57 PM  
This is Obama's Daily Show with Craig Kilborn.
 
2012-11-16 05:48:08 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: Flaming Yawn: The RW narrative is that (the original) 9/11 is WJ Clinton's fault, for knowing about OBL and not dealing with him during his presidency.

Of course, when Clinton did "do something" like the Sudan aspirin factory bombing fiasco, he was routinely mocked by Republicans. It's amazing how short the attention span of Republicans is.


Republican leadership counts on the stupid of their base.
 
2012-11-16 05:49:29 PM  
i105.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-16 05:49:34 PM  

HST's Dead Carcass: So, this is the October Surprise. Man, he's toast, no way he's gonna win enough Electoral Colleges now.


It doesn't matter. He probably won't show the transcripts if he DOES win.

Commie bastard...
 
2012-11-16 05:51:29 PM  

rufus-t-firefly: Or maybe the House should have increased funding for embassy security.

Link


Did you get that link from my post at 2012-11-16 05:18:52 PM where I said that I'd love to see the look on the faces of Republicans when someone asked them that? Because I'd still love to see them squirm when someone asks them that.
 
2012-11-16 05:51:35 PM  
This is Obama's Pricipal caught sayof.
 
2012-11-16 05:51:45 PM  

FloydA: [i105.photobucket.com image 360x324]


No kidding. It tastes fowl.
 
2012-11-16 05:54:14 PM  

zedster: goatleggedfellow: The incumbent administration downplayed didn't use a terrorist attack for personal gains and scaring "security moms" during the last month of a presidential campaign into things Achmed was going convert their kids. This is entirely predictable.

ftfy


To be fair, that tactic only works for the GOP. It's not the nature of the left to think that 'the more hated we are, the more right we must be'. Our delusional idiosyncracies are completely different.
 
2012-11-16 05:54:48 PM  
This is Obama's Klendathu.

We can ill afford another Klendathu.
 
2012-11-16 05:54:53 PM  

Summoner101: FloydA: [i105.photobucket.com image 360x324]

No kidding. It tastes fowl.


Don't duck your true feelings.
 
2012-11-16 05:57:27 PM  
This is Obama's Chair with Slightly Spaced-out Planks.
 
2012-11-16 05:58:39 PM  
This is Obama's Mists Of Pandaria
 
2012-11-16 05:59:18 PM  
This is Obama's website redesign.
He won't get over it.
 
2012-11-16 05:59:33 PM  
It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.
 
2012-11-16 05:59:42 PM  

Corvus: I am not even sure how an attack on a strategic target is "terrorism" but that through the looking glass ship left a decade ago.


But the attack on the USS Cole was totally terrorism!

And Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't terrorism!

Loud Noises!!
 
2012-11-16 06:02:22 PM  

scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.


What's being covered up?
 
2012-11-16 06:03:14 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: What's being covered up?


Someone hasn't been watching their Fox News.
 
2012-11-16 06:03:34 PM  

Crabs_Can_Polevault: sabreWulf07: "And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people." -Obama, Rose Garden remarks, 9/12/12

Hmm. I don't see any pawning or shifting of liability here. I see him stating that justice will be served for the criminals that committed murder. I don't see any reference to their possible motivation. Look how stupid you are

I think I just figured it out... bear with me here and follow the pattern.

Remember how the Republicans talked a big game about avenging 9/11, attacked Iraq, and conveniently declared that Osama bin Laden wasn't worth worrying about despite being the self-avowed mastermind behind it?

And remember how they complained about the misuse of power when Obama got him?

Here they are talking a big game about avenging Benghazi.

If the pattern holds, they'll attack someone else (likely Iran) and then play down the culprit behind Benghazi because deep down, they want him alive. And why not? He's useful for fear-mongering.


I like it. While they'll get zero traction on spinning this as a failure of the administration, they can still gin themselves up a new boogieman. Even after the perpetrators are caught, tried and executed they can carry right on as before -- their people won't know because nobody in the rightwing media will dare to report that justice has been served and the administration has been vindicated. They'll scaremonger this one forever. Sure the locals got together, stormed the camps of Ansar al-Sharia and kicked them out of town, but I defy you to find a single Republican who knows who they are. They're the new, shadowy terrorist org hiding under your bed, they don't even need a name beyond "Benghazi".
 
2012-11-16 06:03:45 PM  

RedT: Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?


Well, first some background from before September 11th

A1) There is a really offensive anti-islamic video on youtube that has been associated with riots in 20 different countries, resulting in about a dozen deaths.

A2) There are a number militias that were armed and organized during the Libyan civil war. Some of those militias are organized under the loose banner of Ansar al-Sharia (Fighters for Islamic Law, or something like that) and possibly associated with Al Qaeda. The methods by which the United States keeps track of these militant groups is heavily classified, and any release of information about these militias threatens operational security (i.e., makes our spies very dead very fast).

A3) There are many American civilian and military assets in Libya, including CIA employees, private security contractors working for the State Department, and probably some military as well. The existence of most of these assets is heavily classified.

Then the actual events of September 11th:

B1) There were riots in Egypt associated with the film.

B2) There may have been riots in Libya associated with the film. I honestly don't know.

B3) Some of the Ansar Al-Sharia militant groups decided to attack the consulate in Benghazi; I do know know how long they planned the attack (minutes, hours, days, or what) or what level of coordination existed between the different groups (did they just find each other there, or text each other on the way over, or do more careful coordination). The people at the CIA probably do have a very good idea, but if they released this information, people would quickly figure out how they got it, and more than a few of our spies would find themselves very dead.

B4) A bunch of American military and civilian quick reaction forces, combined with Libyan pro-US militants, engaged with the anti-US militants and won some quick victories. The existence of these strike forces, and their relationships with the pro-US militants, is probably classified, although information about many of them has been released.

B5) Sadly, four Americans died from the attacks.

And here is what happened after September 11:

C1) Obama went on television and said it was a terrorist attack

C2) The CIA scrubbed through the information they had available, and helped prepare a list of talking points that would not compromise operational security for continuing operations in Libya

C3) The administration tried to answer questions posed by the American public using the talking points prepared in C2

C4) As new information and analysis has become available, the CIA has refined the talking points, leading to the American public knowing more about the attack.

C5) The American public has learned more about the attacks from other channels.

And then finally the scandal:

D1) Many of the talking points approved by the CIA in step C2 above turned out to be misleading, especially during the first few days after the attack.

D2) The fact that the talking points in C2 were misleading could be construed as evidence of political manipulation of the press by the Obama administration (although, I do believe that misinformation was primarily due to Operational Security concerns)

D3) Yelling forcefully about imagined evidence of political manipulation of the press by the Obama administration is a good way to get yourself on TV. Congressmen and Senators really, really love to be on TV. They love it more than they love money or sex or anything else in the whole world.

D4) Fox News and Rush Limbaugh really like to sell advertising, and letting Congressmen and Senators yell forcefully things sells a lot of advertising.

There is a little more to this; a number of people have come out and said things that are totally, completely, and 100% verified false, and you're still seeing some of that just. But the major part of the scandal seems to be that there was a set of talking points created shortly after this attack, and in retrospect some of those talking points appear to have been somewhat vague or misleading.
 
2012-11-16 06:04:48 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?


The scandal. Pay attention.
 
2012-11-16 06:07:07 PM  
This is Bill O'Reilly's sharing falafel with Camilla the chicken.
 
2012-11-16 06:07:21 PM  
i915.photobucket.com">


Better find a hobby before the crippling depression really takes hold.
 
2012-11-16 06:07:39 PM  

scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.


What's the scandal?
 
2012-11-16 06:09:10 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.

What's the scandal?


The scandal is the cover-up. Duh.
 
2012-11-16 06:09:55 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.

What's the scandal?


The scandal is that they're covering it up! Don't you understand anything?
 
2012-11-16 06:10:05 PM  

goatleggedfellow: Corvus: I am not even sure how an attack on a strategic target is "terrorism" but that through the looking glass ship left a decade ago.

But the attack on the USS Cole was totally terrorism!

And Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't terrorism!

Loud Noises!!


I agree. that makes no sense. "Terrorism" is now a term we put on a certain team now. we had hundreds of "terrorists" in GITMO that never committed any act of terrorism in their lives or even directly were involved.
 
2012-11-16 06:10:27 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.

What's the scandal?


I think I've explained this enough times.
 
2012-11-16 06:10:30 PM  

RedT: This is an honest question:

Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?

Or is there something else?

/I'm not saying it is true, but let's just assume so for argument's sake
//yes, I know the President is blah, but I'm really trying to figure out why folks are so upset about the handling of this tragedy.


Because they want to deflect attention away from the fact that the Republican Congress gutted security funding for the embassies a while back, probably ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTING to this tragedy.
 
2012-11-16 06:10:38 PM  

Crabs_Can_Polevault: killermartinis: I read breitbart so that these things make "sense."

People suffering severe dementia brought on by fact-deprivation think a lot of things make sense.


My dad thinks that buying gold will spare his retirement from the ravages of obamacare. So there's that.
 
2012-11-16 06:11:23 PM  

The Larch: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.

What's the scandal?

The scandal is that they're covering it up! Don't you understand anything?


And that there is nothing actually to make a scandal of is PROOF that there is a cover up!!!
 
2012-11-16 06:13:58 PM  
Why isn't anybody talking about the 241 Marines that were personally murdered by Ronald Reagan in Beirut in 1983? This seems like the real scandal.
 
2012-11-16 06:14:16 PM  

Hetfield: For two months I was the lone voice in the wilderness here on Fark. Now I'm the only one with all the credibility. And yet everyone continues to let me be the sole credible voice here. Not that I don't enjoy the sweet sweet redemption here. Its just that I am shocked by how many people would rather be part of the majority than be right. You guys can be an echo chamber. It doesn't make you any less wrong.


Is this "lone credible voice" thing a new meme?
 
2012-11-16 06:14:43 PM  

Corvus: The Larch: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.

What's the scandal?

The scandal is that they're covering it up! Don't you understand anything?

And that there is nothing actually to make a scandal of is PROOF that there is a cover up!!!


We're through the looking glass, people!!!
 
2012-11-16 06:16:17 PM  
One thing about O'Reilly's show since the election is that you can see how agitated he is about who won. How dare he get reelected! Moocher nation! Benghazi! Then gets his feathers ruffled when he gets called on on being a right wing shill.

The only thing the network cares about is trying to go after Obama. Everyone knows good and well that if there was a Republican in office they would not give it a thought

Also its funny how they have yet to mention that the GOP denied funding for extra security. Seems like its been their MO, Slash funding, blame democrats when something goes wrong from their fark ups

//FOX is always on at work. I dont mind only reinforces why I dont vote for the right
 
2012-11-16 06:19:24 PM  

scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.


Uh, what coverup?
 
2012-11-16 06:20:31 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


i51.tinypic.com
 
2012-11-16 06:21:28 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

Uh, what coverup?


We don't know. Obama is covering up the coverup.
 
2012-11-16 06:22:24 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: This is Obama's Battle of Balaclava.


His Battle of Falafel.

/apologies if someone already said that.
 
2012-11-16 06:24:02 PM  

TheOther: cameroncrazy1984: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

Uh, what coverup?

We don't know. Obama is covering up the coverup.


Is his time machine involved somehow?
 
2012-11-16 06:24:46 PM  
t1.gstatic.com
 
2012-11-16 06:24:51 PM  

TheOther: cameroncrazy1984: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

Uh, what coverup?

We don't know. Obama is covering up the coverup.


This guy knows whats up
 
2012-11-16 06:25:25 PM  
The real question is how it ranks compared to Solyndra.
 
2012-11-16 06:25:35 PM  

ItchyMcDoogle: The only thing the network cares about is trying to go after Obama profit.


FTFY
 
2012-11-16 06:29:13 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Well, nobody died in Watergate. So, yes...it is worse.


By that metric, literally every hour of every day is worse than Watergate.
 
2012-11-16 06:30:13 PM  
"The Obama administration will not define exactly what happened"

What the fark does this even mean for fark's sake!!!!! "define"?

i.qkme.me
 
2012-11-16 06:30:58 PM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?


The scandal. Duh!
 
2012-11-16 06:31:53 PM  
This is Obama's Half-Hour News Hour.
 
2012-11-16 06:34:31 PM  

theknuckler_33: This is Obama's Half-Hour News Hour.


Dude...too far.
 
2012-11-16 06:35:25 PM  
I guess since Beck is long since gone...O'Rly needs to turn up the nuttiness. He was dangerously close to seeming moderately right wing there for a while, but he took a right turn back to crazy-town the past few months.
 
2012-11-16 06:35:27 PM  

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Corvus: The Larch: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: YoungSwedishBlonde: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

What's being covered up?

The scandal. Pay attention.

What's the scandal?

The scandal is that they're covering it up! Don't you understand anything?

And that there is nothing actually to make a scandal of is PROOF that there is a cover up!!!

We're through the looking glass, people!!!


t is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma!
 
2012-11-16 06:39:45 PM  
Since no one seems to know what the scandal is, except that it has obviously been covered up, I have to wonder if this whole thing is a retaliatory troll on Obama voters.
 
2012-11-16 06:42:12 PM  
This is Obama's Romney.
 
2012-11-16 06:42:38 PM  

Snark Shark II: Holocaust Agnostic: Snark Shark II: FriarReb98: This is today's reason I want an amendment banning the media from using "-gate" to describe every last goddamned thing that happens to a politician.

I can get behind this.

CSB: when I was a wee lad just starting to listen to the news this was such a thing that I assumed that -gate was just a suffix meaning "scandal about" and hearing watergate mentioned in passing later assumed it was some sort of kerfufel over water rights.

Same here. I remember when I was five that I thought Reagan was president for life. We think dumb things when we're kids.


This, This, This, Thissity-This This, THIS!!

Unlike Shark Shark II and Holocaust Agnostic, I remember Watergate. It was news on TV in my youth. Now, every time I hear a new scandal or wannabe-scandal being suffixed with ‶−gate" I wanna yell, ‶Hey, news media! It′s been about four decades since Watergate! Can we puh-lease come up with a new suffix already!? Must the fine, luxurious Watergate Hotel forever have its name associated with the very concept of political scandals!? Have you guys no imagination at all!? (Okay, I admit, ‴Whitewatergate′ was kinda clever, but none of the others have been, and besides, even that one was decades ago!)"
 
2012-11-16 06:45:38 PM  
This is Obama's Bosworth Field.
 
2012-11-16 06:50:47 PM  

The Larch: RedT: Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?

Well, first some background from before September 11th

A1) There is a really offensive anti-islamic video on youtube that has been associated with riots in 20 different countries, resulting in about a dozen deaths.

A2) There are a number militias that were armed and organized during the Libyan civil war. Some of those militias are organized under the loose banner of Ansar al-Sharia (Fighters for Islamic Law, or something like that) and possibly associated with Al Qaeda. The methods by which the United States keeps track of these militant groups is heavily classified, and any release of information about these militias threatens operational security (i.e., makes our spies very dead very fast).

A3) There are many American civilian and military assets in Libya, including CIA employees, private security contractors working for the State Department, and probably some military as well. The existence of most of these assets is heavily classified.

Then the actual events of September 11th:

B1) There were riots in Egypt associated with the film.

B2) There may have been riots in Libya associated with the film. I honestly don't know.

B3) Some of the Ansar Al-Sharia militant groups decided to attack the consulate in Benghazi; I do know know how long they planned the attack (minutes, hours, days, or what) or what level of coordination existed between the different groups (did they just find each other there, or text each other on the way over, or do more careful coordination). The people at the CIA probably do have a very good idea, but if they released this information, people would quickly figure out how they got it, and more than a few of our spies would find themselves very dead.

B4) A bunch of American military and c ...


If I remember correctly, there was a report that one of the terrorists involved in that attack was killed in a firefight with Egyptian security forces not long afterward. And knowing how the CIA works, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they told the Egyptians where to find him.

We probably won't know for sure for at least a few decades, though.
 
2012-11-16 06:56:38 PM  

Shvetz: Just a reminder, G. Gordon Libby actually had a show on Fox. Yes, one of the perpetrators of Watergate was rewarded by Fox News with his very own radio program.


this
 
2012-11-16 06:58:27 PM  
Ollie North
and this tool is a regular guest on faux nudes
 
2012-11-16 06:58:58 PM  

Dimensio: Cletus C.: HST's Dead Carcass: This just needs to be posted repeatedly in all Benghazi threads:

[i18.photobucket.com image 480x480]

2002 - Satanic Verses released in coloring book form
2004, Uzbekistan - Burned Koran found in dumpster outside Tashkent Wendy's
2004, Saudi Arabia - See-through burka introduced
2006 - Muhammad bobbleheads handed out at Toledo Mud Hens game
2007 - Marmaduke comic strip features madcap adventures in Mecca
2008, Serbia - Katy Perry's "I Kissed a Girl" mistakenly translated in Arabic to say "I Educated a Girl"
2008, Yemen - Obama administration denies the new president is a Muslin

Please explain, specifically, the "scandal" involved with the Benghazi attacks.


That blank has already been filled in.
 
2012-11-16 06:59:47 PM  
Republicans shilled - Americans got killed.
 
2012-11-16 07:03:57 PM  

TheOther: cameroncrazy1984: scavenger: It's not so much the scandal, as it is the coverup.

Uh, what coverup?

We don't know. Obama is covering up the coverup.


i21.photobucket.com
WE'RE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS HERE PEOPLE
 
2012-11-16 07:18:08 PM  

Cletus C.: That blank has already been filled in


With what? Conjecture?
 
2012-11-16 07:18:45 PM  
I'm not wading through all the previous comments. Just dropping in to say: part of America has lost its collective shiat, and, [FredThompsonOnABoat.jpg].

Seriously, these are truly strange times.
 
2012-11-16 07:24:22 PM  
was the cover up undercover? undercover of the night?

thefunniestvideos.com
 
2012-11-16 07:41:44 PM  
Is it worse than Hitler yet?
 
2012-11-16 07:56:42 PM  
Just keep on graspin, GOP. Keep on graspin.
 
2012-11-16 08:00:27 PM  
whatthehayell.com
Why won't Obama answer questions about his time machine?!?!?! The louder I yell, the more correct I become!!!!!
 
2012-11-16 08:02:38 PM  
This is Obama's Battle of Hoth.
 
2012-11-16 08:09:57 PM  
i.imgur.com 

HEY NEOCONS! SUCK IT! SUCK IT LONG, SUCK IT HARD.
 
2012-11-16 08:11:15 PM  
Bill's freaking out. He sees the future. His audience is literally going to dies of old age in the next few years - and not be replaced.
 
2012-11-16 08:17:47 PM  
I love the evolution of this story and how Republicans are slowly easing their way into this position. Like, they need to look around first and make sure other Republicans will stand with them when they spout off such knowingly crazy libel.
 
2012-11-16 08:21:48 PM  
O'Reilly is full of Al Adeen.
 
2012-11-16 08:24:59 PM  

tlchwi02: Dear Baby Boomers,

The world is not all about you. We know you were young and thought you were totally changing the world with flower power when the original watergate scandal hit, but you weren't. You'd all eventually sell out and vote for the successors of nixon, happily pillage the environment and repeatedly vote and agitate to screw anyone who did not "get theirs already." As such, you need to just get the hell over yourselves and stop appending the term "gate" to every freaking thing that happens


Dear you.
Not every Baby Boomer was a hippie. Millions upon millions of clean-cut, uptight squares (and their ladies) had no desire to go to Woodstock or smoke dope and thought that things would have been great if Goldwater had won.
 
2012-11-16 08:27:31 PM  
This is Obama's Romney campaign.
 
2012-11-16 08:47:53 PM  

Nadie_AZ: I'm actually beginning to pity the average Fox News viewer a little. Brainwashing is hard to notice when it is happening and harder to break after it is done.


Don't pity the dead.... 

image.guim.co.uk
 
2012-11-16 08:50:37 PM  

Karma Curmudgeon: kingoomieiii: The GOP is insisting it's a scandal because they want people to be mad at a scandal. They have absolutely no reason to call it a scandal, and somehow they've twisted that COMPLETE LACK OF ANY SCANDAL into proof positive of a 100% perfect coverup.

THIS WAS A TERRORIST ATTACK.

They're actually doing two things. First, the short plan is to plant a seed in the public's mind that Obama couldn't stop terrorism which was important during the campaign to counter the killing of Bin Laden narrative, and remains important as Republicans realize they desperately need to reestablish their tough on terror bona fides. That is difficult to do when the sitting president killed the guy who perpetrated the most spectacular terrorist attack in the history of the world, on their watch, so they have this shiny object and want everyone to look at it.

The longer plan is the insistence of coverup/scandal in order to minimize the scandals that have followed every Republican president since Nixon like the dirt cloud follows Pigpen. It's the old both sides are bad, so vote Republican, except it's in the context of historical relativism rather than political relativism.


What I don't quite get is this: The only people they're going to convince are those that already have faith in the GOP. That group has proven to be too small win Presidencies, so what's the point of pushing like this?
 
2012-11-16 08:56:26 PM  

stewmadness: St_Francis_P: Is the Libyan situation another Watergate?

Short answer: no.

How can you ignore the obvious? The administration pretended, after the death of 4 Americans, that everything you saw was the result of some video posed on YouTube 6 months prior. That shiat is supposed to happen in North Korea, not the United States.


How can you ignore that a witness stated that the terrorists were recruiting people pissed about the movie to riot, and using that riot as a cover for the actual attack? The dumbass movie was involved, whether you like hate speech having consequences or not.
 
2012-11-16 08:56:44 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: IMPEACH OR STFU, YOU NUTLESS WONDERS


What would happen if a Democratic senator or representative drafted articles of impeachment?

I mean, the GOP *has* to jump on that shiat, because if they don't and it gets defeated it's that much harder to do it again, politically speaking. If they lose, and they will, because there's nothing there they take the hit of losing. If they press the investigation then it opens the door to charge Darrell Issa with leaking classified info and drags all the dirty laundry of what congress has been doing to obstruct and undermine.
 
2012-11-16 09:18:24 PM  

jso2897: RedT: This is an honest question:

Can someone please explain to me like I am a 6th Grader what the big controversy is that, assuming it is true*, the government knew but didn't tell everyone this was a terrorist attack for two weeks or a week or whatever the time period was?

Or is there something else?

/I'm not saying it is true, but let's just assume so for argument's sake
//yes, I know the President is blah, but I'm really trying to figure out why folks are so upset about the handling of this tragedy.

Because they want to deflect attention away from the fact that the Republican Congress gutted security funding for the embassies a while back, probably ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTING to this tragedy.


THAT'S THE SCANDAL. Those dunderheaded bumblefarks are projecting YET AGAIN for the 47,863rd time and really do think the 'Net forgets everything that they do.

And these are Obama's cheese puffs.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-16 09:55:13 PM  
So how many "Watergates" is this now? 20-30?

I'm mean, Nixon can't even handle one watergate, yet Obama deals with 1 nearly every other month...
 
2012-11-16 09:55:34 PM  
I like baked cheese puffs
 
2012-11-16 10:13:53 PM  
Obama and the kitty will happily share baked cheese puffs with Hanky.
 
2012-11-16 10:35:44 PM  

Bag of Hammers: Mrtraveler01: Is it just me or does O'Reily seem more unhinged as of late?

Well, his future isn't looking to good, what with Obama getting re-elected and passing sharia laws saying that his granddaughters have to fark Ni**ers from now on, outlawing guns and Pork, and then there's that whole thousand years of darkness thing.


They'll take my bacon out of my cold dead hand!!!!!
 
2012-11-16 10:40:10 PM  
Oops. He accidentally admitted that GOPers are desperately trying to repay the Dems for Watergate. Nixon was just misunderstood you know.
 
2012-11-16 10:41:52 PM  
I could have been Obama's Gulf of Tonkin but they took their damned time to figure out what happened and what response made sense.

In some roles, such as Air Traffic Control or firefighting YOU MUST ACT AND KEEP ACTING, even if you make a wrong move you can correct as long as you are moving. In politics you can take a little time to react.

Obama can forget about the nitpickers and figure out what actually needs to be done. And the State Department can think about how much security they actually need.
 
2012-11-16 10:59:02 PM  

Kittypie070: Obama and the kitty will happily share baked cheese puffs with Hanky.


I like cheese popcorn better.
 
2012-11-16 11:10:44 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: HST's Dead Carcass: Kittypie070: Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?

TWINKIES! They're gonna be gone forever!

HoHos are the superior Hostess product.


Heathen. Heretic. For truly you are lost in the wilderness and have never tasted the perfection of the Hostess Chocolate cupcake.
 
2012-11-16 11:51:55 PM  

sparkeyjames: Philip Francis Queeg: HST's Dead Carcass: Kittypie070: Does anyone have any suggestions for Kitty's Junk Food of the Day?

TWINKIES! They're gonna be gone forever!

HoHos are the superior Hostess product.

Heathen. Heretic. For truly you are lost in the wilderness and have never tasted the perfection of the Hostess Chocolate cupcake.



You misspelled Apple Spice.

/don't even want to think about how many late shifts those got me through back in the day
 
2012-11-17 12:05:01 AM  
Dammit, I didn't buy any cheese popcorn.

[shares club crackers & cheese with Gyrfalcon]
 
2012-11-17 12:28:02 AM  
If this is worse than Watergate, they must have hit the roof when 60 ambassadorial staff members and guards were killed during the Bush administration. What that? There wasn't a word about it? That we just hearing the same partisan hackery over and over again because they don't have a real reason to go after Obama? That would be crazy talk!
 
2012-11-17 12:34:31 AM  

Dr Dreidel: This is Obama's Order 1066.


This is Obama's England's year 1066.
 
2012-11-17 12:57:26 AM  

Kittypie070: Dammit, I didn't buy any cheese popcorn.

[shares club crackers & cheese with Gyrfalcon]


Oo, yummy.
 
2012-11-17 01:51:33 AM  

Githerax: Karma Curmudgeon: kingoomieiii: The GOP is insisting it's a scandal because they want people to be mad at a scandal. They have absolutely no reason to call it a scandal, and somehow they've twisted that COMPLETE LACK OF ANY SCANDAL into proof positive of a 100% perfect coverup.

THIS WAS A TERRORIST ATTACK.

They're actually doing two things. First, the short plan is to plant a seed in the public's mind that Obama couldn't stop terrorism which was important during the campaign to counter the killing of Bin Laden narrative, and remains important as Republicans realize they desperately need to reestablish their tough on terror bona fides. That is difficult to do when the sitting president killed the guy who perpetrated the most spectacular terrorist attack in the history of the world, on their watch, so they have this shiny object and want everyone to look at it.

The longer plan is the insistence of coverup/scandal in order to minimize the scandals that have followed every Republican president since Nixon like the dirt cloud follows Pigpen. It's the old both sides are bad, so vote Republican, except it's in the context of historical relativism rather than political relativism.

What I don't quite get is this: The only people they're going to convince are those that already have faith in the GOP. That group has proven to be too small win Presidencies, so what's the point of pushing like this?


It's a Psy-Ops campaign. All they need is a constant buzz of of something not being right. Even if it's only arugula and Dijon mustard.
 
2012-11-17 02:53:06 AM  

The Larch: A1) There is a really offensive anti-islamic video on youtube that has been associated with riots in 20 different countries, resulting in about a dozen deaths.


Excellent summation but there is one more thing that needs to be included to counter the Fox crowd's skepticism on how a video that was languishing on youtube for months suddenly caused an explosion of violence. The answer (and the source I'm using for it is Glenn Beck's website since the Fox crowd seems to have a fondness for him) is that the video was translated into Arabic and sent to Egyptian media on September 6th and broadcast by Egyptian news on Sept 8. And it was done so as part of a promotional fark you to the Muslim world that was to culminate in Terry Jones (not the Monty Python guy) burning a Koran on... September 11th.

Somehow this sequence of events seems to get drowned out in all the harrumphing over how the video could possibly have contributed to any of the violence in that region, let alone whether it contributed to Benghazi.

The part that should be most embarrassing to the devotees of Fox on this one? The guy in Egypt who aired the video on Egyptian TV is, essentially, an Islamist Sean Hannity.

"part of a school of particularly shrill religious demagogues who turn every possible event into an attack on Islam," quoting Egyptian-British journalist Sarah Carr.
 
2012-11-17 05:55:07 AM  
After watching Obama lie about Benghazi and throwing a guy in jail pretending to bring him to justice for the attacks, you can't even remember what Watergate was supposed to be. He made some tapes where he said mean things about Democrats or something?

How do you hold future presidents accountable for crimes if Obama isn't impeached and jailed?
 
2012-11-17 08:31:23 AM  
This is Obama's Monicaghazi.
 
2012-11-17 09:27:46 AM  
I propose that we make the suffix -ghazi mean "faux scandal", just as -gate has come to mean a real one.
 
2012-11-17 10:50:35 AM  

lilbjorn: I propose that we make the suffix -ghazi mean "faux scandal", just as -gate has come to mean a real one.


FU-GHAZI?
 
2012-11-17 11:33:15 AM  

lilbjorn: I propose that we make the suffix -ghazi mean "faux scandal", just as -gate has come to mean a real one.


So the Lewinski thing would have been Blow-ghazi? I like it.
 
2012-11-17 11:46:34 AM  

Noam Chimpsky: After watching Obama lie about Benghazi and throwing a guy in jail pretending to bring him to justice for the attacks, you can't even remember what Watergate was supposed to be. He made some tapes where he said mean things about Democrats or something?

How do you hold future presidents accountable for crimes if Obama isn't impeached and jailed?


What was the lie? Remember, he said that the attacks were an 'act of terror' the day after the attacks, and we have multiple accounts (including from the attackers) that they started a riot over the video and used it as cover, so the video WAS involved, like it or not.

And if Obama is "impeached and jailed" for 'lying' about an attack that killed 4, should Bush II be jailed for lying about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11/01 attacks?
 
2012-11-17 12:12:19 PM  
Bill O'Reilly is such a pecker head.
 
2012-11-17 12:16:59 PM  
First of all, whether or not Obama said this was an "act of terror" (which he did) is irrelevant. Bush and the media have conditioned us to call any and every act of violence an act of "terror". The Batman shooting was an act of terror. So it's a meaningless expression at this point.

Second, STFU. You lost the election and no one but the lunatic fringe believes this is an issue.
 
2012-11-17 12:50:44 PM  
It's SO MUCH WORSE that one of the PRIMARY governmental advocates FOR the scandal had to keep hyping up how bad it was and bemoan his lack of information instead of going to a closed-door congressional hearing on exactly what had happened!! THAT'S HOW BAD IT IS!!!
 
2012-11-17 01:09:54 PM  

BitwiseShift: FOX has a lot of gall implying it had an active criminal part in the break in at a US Embassy and subsequent crimes while being paid by a partisan Republican cabal. Maybe they've just hired Erlichmann or Haldemann or Colsonmann as news interpreters and are going all nostalgia.


I first read this as "hired Eichmann" and it made even MORE sense.
 
2012-11-17 01:22:43 PM  

LordJiro: Noam Chimpsky: After watching Obama lie about Benghazi and throwing a guy in jail pretending to bring him to justice for the attacks, you can't even remember what Watergate was supposed to be. He made some tapes where he said mean things about Democrats or something?

How do you hold future presidents accountable for crimes if Obama isn't impeached and jailed?

What was the lie? Remember, he said that the attacks were an 'act of terror' the day after the attacks, and we have multiple accounts (including from the attackers) that they started a riot over the video and used it as cover, so the video WAS involved, like it or not.

And if Obama is "impeached and jailed" for 'lying' about an attack that killed 4, should Bush II be jailed for lying about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11/01 attacks?


Bush didn't lie and your beloved Saddam wasn't a US citizen. It's not a question of whether it was an "act of terror", which it certainly was by any definition, it's a matter of blaming some video for causing a spontaneous-protest-demonstration- terrorist-attack and throwing the guy in jail for mocking the prophet of Islam. I suspect that there was a time in the lives of most Democrats where they would have kind of opposed that sort of thing. Actually, there was a time in most Democrats lives where they would have thought that was the worst thing imaginable.

What would Obama have to do before you wouldn't want to excuse him by using strawman arguments about Bush? That's not a rhetorical question.

See what you've become?
 
2012-11-17 01:48:53 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm just gonna keep asking this until someone gives me an actual answer - can someone please give me an actual summary of what the accusation is? Like, what's the claim here? What is the X in the sentence "If X is true, then this is a huge scandal and Obama should be impeached".

I'm not asking if its true or false. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell the accusation is.


Jebus Jumping Christ on a Pogo Stick, I've explained repeatedly:

~tinfoilhat~The best one so far that I've heard goes like this:

Obama in conjunction with the CIA and/or State Dept. and/or Pentagon was trying to stage a positive (for O) October Surprise. The idea was to get US embedded plants amongst the Arab Springers to rile up enough outrage over a comically bad US gov't made counter-propaganda film that a large but mostly non-violent spectacle of a protest would form outside the consulate. In the ensuing 'storming' of the consulate, the Ambassador et al. would be 'taken hostage' by said US friendly plants. Then conveniently, right before the election, the O man would send in the USS Drone SEAL Team Infinity Rangers Rambo part XI squad to liberate them and play that up as foreign policy kick-ass vote for me cred.

Of course this all got botched when some unexpected real terror types showed up with rocket launchers and shiat.

The evidence for this being that the CIA was holding a couple Al Qaidas already during the raid, whom would conveniently have their brains splattered during said rescue mission. Also, the evidence that after the botched 'kidnapping' went wrong, the supposedly pissed off protesters tried like hell to keep the Ambassador alive. Also, also, the Administration had the half-assed 'it was all about a shiatty movie no one has seen' story ready to go, and stupidly rolled it out even after it was obvious that real terrorists were involved.

Alternatively; the Clintons and/or CIA and/or State Dept. and/or Pentagon intentionally botched the mission to make O look bad and lose, so when Mittens took helm of the US headed for a double dip depression, Hilary would be a shoo in come 2016.

Oh, and Petraeus something something knew too much something something fell on his biographer, er, sword something something, or something.

~/tinfoilhat~
 
2012-11-17 01:56:32 PM  

Noam Chimpsky: LordJiro: Noam Chimpsky: After watching Obama lie about Benghazi and throwing a guy in jail pretending to bring him to justice for the attacks, you can't even remember what Watergate was supposed to be. He made some tapes where he said mean things about Democrats or something?

How do you hold future presidents accountable for crimes if Obama isn't impeached and jailed?

What was the lie? Remember, he said that the attacks were an 'act of terror' the day after the attacks, and we have multiple accounts (including from the attackers) that they started a riot over the video and used it as cover, so the video WAS involved, like it or not.

And if Obama is "impeached and jailed" for 'lying' about an attack that killed 4, should Bush II be jailed for lying about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11/01 attacks?

Bush didn't lie and your beloved Saddam wasn't a US citizen. It's not a question of whether it was an "act of terror", which it certainly was by any definition, it's a matter of blaming some video for causing a spontaneous-protest-demonstration- terrorist-attack and throwing the guy in jail for mocking the prophet of Islam. I suspect that there was a time in the lives of most Democrats where they would have kind of opposed that sort of thing. Actually, there was a time in most Democrats lives where they would have thought that was the worst thing imaginable.

What would Obama have to do before you wouldn't want to excuse him by using strawman arguments about Bush? That's not a rhetorical question.

See what you've become?


Your hateful hero was thrown in jail for violating his parole, dumbass. And again, without the video, the attackers wouldn't have had the opportunity to attack the embassy; they used a riot ABOUT THE VIDEO as cover.
 
2012-11-17 03:11:21 PM  
Yup and it's eleventy times worse than 9/11.
 
2012-11-17 03:56:39 PM  

LordJiro: Noam Chimpsky: LordJiro: Noam Chimpsky: After watching Obama lie about Benghazi and throwing a guy in jail pretending to bring him to justice for the attacks, you can't even remember what Watergate was supposed to be. He made some tapes where he said mean things about Democrats or something?

How do you hold future presidents accountable for crimes if Obama isn't impeached and jailed?

What was the lie? Remember, he said that the attacks were an 'act of terror' the day after the attacks, and we have multiple accounts (including from the attackers) that they started a riot over the video and used it as cover, so the video WAS involved, like it or not.

And if Obama is "impeached and jailed" for 'lying' about an attack that killed 4, should Bush II be jailed for lying about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11/01 attacks?

Bush didn't lie and your beloved Saddam wasn't a US citizen. It's not a question of whether it was an "act of terror", which it certainly was by any definition, it's a matter of blaming some video for causing a spontaneous-protest-demonstration- terrorist-attack and throwing the guy in jail for mocking the prophet of Islam. I suspect that there was a time in the lives of most Democrats where they would have kind of opposed that sort of thing. Actually, there was a time in most Democrats lives where they would have thought that was the worst thing imaginable.

What would Obama have to do before you wouldn't want to excuse him by using strawman arguments about Bush? That's not a rhetorical question.

See what you've become?

Your hateful hero was thrown in jail for violating his parole, dumbass. And again, without the video, the attackers wouldn't have had the opportunity to attack the embassy; they used a riot ABOUT THE VIDEO as cover.


Your defense of Obama's crimes is pretty weak. Obama and Hillary better have more than this to work with at their trials.
 
2012-11-17 04:17:51 PM  

Noam Chimpsky: LordJiro: Noam Chimpsky: LordJiro: Noam Chimpsky: After watching Obama lie about Benghazi and throwing a guy in jail pretending to bring him to justice for the attacks, you can't even remember what Watergate was supposed to be. He made some tapes where he said mean things about Democrats or something?

How do you hold future presidents accountable for crimes if Obama isn't impeached and jailed?

What was the lie? Remember, he said that the attacks were an 'act of terror' the day after the attacks, and we have multiple accounts (including from the attackers) that they started a riot over the video and used it as cover, so the video WAS involved, like it or not.

And if Obama is "impeached and jailed" for 'lying' about an attack that killed 4, should Bush II be jailed for lying about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11/01 attacks?

Bush didn't lie and your beloved Saddam wasn't a US citizen. It's not a question of whether it was an "act of terror", which it certainly was by any definition, it's a matter of blaming some video for causing a spontaneous-protest-demonstration- terrorist-attack and throwing the guy in jail for mocking the prophet of Islam. I suspect that there was a time in the lives of most Democrats where they would have kind of opposed that sort of thing. Actually, there was a time in most Democrats lives where they would have thought that was the worst thing imaginable.

What would Obama have to do before you wouldn't want to excuse him by using strawman arguments about Bush? That's not a rhetorical question.

See what you've become?

Your hateful hero was thrown in jail for violating his parole, dumbass. And again, without the video, the attackers wouldn't have had the opportunity to attack the embassy; they used a riot ABOUT THE VIDEO as cover.

Your defense of Obama's crimes is pretty weak. Obama and Hillary better have more than this to work with at their trials.


What are you disputing? That the bigot was thrown in jail for violating his parole (fact), or that the attackers admitted to using a riot over the video as cover (also fact)?
 
2012-11-17 05:16:29 PM  

tlchwi02: Dear Baby Boomers,

The world is not all about you. We know you were young and thought you were totally changing the world with flower power when the original watergate scandal hit, but you weren't. You'd all eventually sell out and vote for the successors of nixon, happily pillage the environment and repeatedly vote and agitate to screw anyone who did not "get theirs already." As such, you need to just get the hell over yourselves and stop appending the term "gate" to every freaking thing that happens.

thanks

Every other human on the planet


This is what idiots actually believe.

Here's a handy handful of clues: Most Boomers were not hippies. Many hippies did not "sell out."

John Kerry was an anti-war protestor. The Boomers did not vote for him.

Study it out.
 
2012-11-17 06:04:54 PM  

knobmaker: tlchwi02: Dear Baby Boomers,

The world is not all about you. We know you were young and thought you were totally changing the world with flower power when the original watergate scandal hit, but you weren't. You'd all eventually sell out and vote for the successors of nixon, happily pillage the environment and repeatedly vote and agitate to screw anyone who did not "get theirs already." As such, you need to just get the hell over yourselves and stop appending the term "gate" to every freaking thing that happens.

thanks

Every other human on the planet

This is what idiots actually believe.

Here's a handy handful of clues: Most Boomers were not hippies. Many hippies did not "sell out."

John Kerry was an anti-war protestor. The Boomers did not vote for him.

Study it out.


You need to study out the post you were commenting on.
 
2012-11-17 09:37:56 PM  
No one died because of Watergate.
 
2012-11-18 08:08:00 AM  

SlothB77: No one died because of Watergate.


And Watergate was a crime committed by presidential re-election committee staffers that was covered up by the president himself. So what's Bill O'Reilly huffing?

/Does G. Gordon Liddy still work for Fox?
 
2012-11-18 12:56:57 PM  

Noam Chimpsky: Your defense of Obama's crimes is pretty weak. Obama and Hillary better have more than this to work with at their trials.


One more Goddammed time,. what the fark did Obama lie about?
 
2012-11-19 01:04:48 AM  
Bill O'Reilly? The same war crimes expert who accused the US soldiers taken prisoner and murdered by the SS at Malmedy of war crimes?
That Bill O'Reilly?

/The claim makes sense now.
 
Displayed 390 of 390 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report