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  
•       •       •

2050 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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
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.
 
Displayed 50 of 390 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report