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.

(The Raw Story)   State Department spokesperson calls out Fox News reporter for asking exactly why Hillary Clinton can't seem to testify about Bengazi. She even suggested the appropriate tag   (rawstory.com) divider line 689
    More: Asinine, Fox News, State Department, key dates, journalists  
•       •       •

25329 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jan 2013 at 3:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-03 02:06:29 PM
Oh, lighten up.. They're Just Asking Questions...
 
2013-01-03 02:08:50 PM
What, it's not like blood clots in your brain are life threatening, eh?
 
2013-01-03 02:10:58 PM
Morons crying about how this is somehow a 1st Amendment violation in 3...2...
 
2013-01-03 02:16:20 PM
Clinton looked actually, literally blue in that picture of her leaving the hospital yesterday.

But yes, Fox, please keep floating your whacknuttery about her faking being ill.  That can't possibly make you look stupid obtuse and callous.
 
2013-01-03 02:18:04 PM
The network that honestly thought Mitt Romney was going to win in a romp is now playing Master Detective.

www.diabetesmine.com
 
2013-01-03 02:19:25 PM

gilgigamesh: whacknuttery


Thank you, my vocabulary has a new addition.
 
2013-01-03 02:27:55 PM
thepatriotperspective.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-03 02:28:05 PM
When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?
 
2013-01-03 02:30:05 PM
For the last time someone please explain to me worst case scenario-wise why this is a thing. I mean short of Obama and Hillary actually leading the attack on the embassy what is it they supposedly did. Was there actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent that was ignored?
 
2013-01-03 02:31:19 PM

NuttierThanEver: short of Obama and Hillary actually leading the attack on the embassy


BUT IF THEY WON'T LET US ASK THE QUESTIONS HOW WILL WE BE INFROMED
 
2013-01-03 02:31:25 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


June 22, 2004
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-03 02:32:55 PM

Shadowknight: What, it's not like blood clots in your brain are life threatening, eh?


Well, some people don't have that problem to worry about.
 
2013-01-03 02:52:58 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?

June 22, 2004


The earthquake in Central Maine?
 
2013-01-03 02:54:57 PM
Reines continued by pointing out that there was no way "an informed reporter" would compare testifying before Congress with appearing an Sunday morning talk shows as Fishel seemed to do by asking why Clinton had "not been available to testify" in an interview on Fox News on the Sunday

Fox News scum.
 
2013-01-03 02:59:08 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?

June 22, 2004


I'd say July 4, 1776
 
2013-01-03 03:02:15 PM

NuttierThanEver: For the last time someone please explain to me worst case scenario-wise why this is a thing. I mean short of Obama and Hillary actually leading the attack on the embassy what is it they supposedly did. Was there actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent that was ignored?


We know of no specific intelligence that an attack was planned on the Benghazi embassy on September 11 of last year. That said, we do have specific evidence that the embassy and staff were already targeted, due to the three attacks against that were made against perceived (by terrorists) Western-aligned organizations (the US embassy, a British embassy motorcade, the local Red Cross offices) starting that previous June. We also have repeated requests from US Ambassador Stevens for more security, all of which were denied. And finally, of course, there's that date again.

This is a thing not because the spy network failed (though it might have), but because: A) the State Department fell down on the job of doing the most basic security for an embassy in a country in turmoil, B) four US citizens on the government payroll died because of it, and C) the executive branch spent weeks telling the US and the world that it was our fault for inciting those wacky Mooslems with a Monty Python-level quality YouTube video. Like the kids say, it's not the crime that gets you; it's the cover-up.
 
2013-01-03 03:10:07 PM
Let's see, off the top of my head, here are the current rabble of Benghazi conspiracy theories regarding Obama and his staff:

* He intentionally delayed a rescue operation while he watched terrorists burn the embassy live on dronecam, probably whilst laughing manically
* He ordered Susan Rice to lie about the fact that it was a terrorists attack, instead insisting it was anti-Islam video protesters
* He funneled Libyan arms after Ghaddafi's assassination into terrorist cells based in Lybia, which were then quickly smuggled out of the country
* Hillary knows too much and was prepared to spill the beans, therefore she conveniently got a "concussion" and subsequent "blood clot"
* Genera lPetraeus, seeing the handwriting on the wall, concocted a phony story about him farking some hotsy-totsy journalist as cover to remove himself from the spotlight so as to avoid having to testify before Congress
 
2013-01-03 03:11:22 PM
gerrymander: DERP


For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department's Worldwide Security Protection program -- well below the $2.15billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administration's request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration's request.) Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans' proposed cuts to her department would be "detrimental to America's national security" -- a charge Republicans rejected.
Ryan, Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan's budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security.

 
2013-01-03 03:15:27 PM

gerrymander: he executive branch spent weeks telling the US and the world that it was our fault for inciting those wacky Mooslems with a Monty Python-level quality YouTube video.


This is absolutely not true, but lets just say it was: In what possible world is it a problem for the Executive branch to actually do some research and get all the facts before telling everyone what happened? I know you like to stay infromed, but why should the Obama administration burn potential security assets on the ground to satisfy your immediate need to know?
 
2013-01-03 03:33:11 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


muslin usurper
 
2013-01-03 03:49:25 PM

gerrymander: YouTube video


DRINK!
 
2013-01-03 03:52:32 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


January 20, 2009.
 
2013-01-03 03:52:39 PM

gilgigamesh: Clinton looked actually, literally blue in that picture of her leaving the hospital yesterday.

But yes, Fox, please keep floating your whacknuttery about her faking being ill.  That can't possibly make you look stupid obtuse and callous.


This; Fox News can keep being derpy and looking ridiculous and I'll keep laughing at them.
 
2013-01-03 03:53:27 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


October 7, 1996
 
2013-01-03 03:54:08 PM
I have suspected that Hillary has had a brain clot for the past 23 years at least.
 
2013-01-03 03:54:08 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


the second George W and Cheney started saying "fark you" on the Senate floor and to reporters in the open
 
2013-01-03 03:55:01 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?

June 22, 2004


The assassination of Francisco Ortiz Franco hit us all, but I don't think it really contributed to ginandbacon's question.
 
2013-01-03 03:55:08 PM

calm like a bomb: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


July 2, 1947
 
2013-01-03 03:55:10 PM

gerrymander: NuttierThanEver: For the last time someone please explain to me worst case scenario-wise why this is a thing. I mean short of Obama and Hillary actually leading the attack on the embassy what is it they supposedly did. Was there actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent that was ignored?

We know of no specific intelligence that an attack was planned on the Benghazi embassy on September 11 of last year. That said, we do have specific evidence that the embassy and staff were already targeted, due to the three attacks against that were made against perceived (by terrorists) Western-aligned organizations (the US embassy, a British embassy motorcade, the local Red Cross offices) starting that previous June. We also have repeated requests from US Ambassador Stevens for more security, all of which were denied. And finally, of course, there's that date again.

This is a thing not because the spy network failed (though it might have), but because: A) the State Department fell down on the job of doing the most basic security for an embassy in a country in turmoil, B) four US citizens on the government payroll died because of it, and C) the executive branch spent weeks telling the US and the world that it was our fault for inciting those wacky Mooslems with a Monty Python-level quality YouTube video. Like the kids say, it's not the crime that gets you; it's the cover-up.


This thread is going to go very badly for you.
 
2013-01-03 03:55:23 PM
fark John Kerry and Susan Rice, promote this Reines guy to secretary when Clinton exits.
 
2013-01-03 03:55:36 PM
She fell so hard it knocked the Bengazi right out of her.
 
2013-01-03 03:55:45 PM

ChipNASA: calm like a bomb: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


Sept 11, 2001

/derp
 
2013-01-03 03:56:23 PM

boinkingbill: I have suspected that Hillary has had a brain clot for the past 23 years at least.


Your username makes this post hilarious.
 
2013-01-03 03:57:08 PM
zing
 
2013-01-03 03:57:12 PM
Lying liars lie... This White House is just as dirty as the others. No change or hope of change.

/Independent
 
2013-01-03 03:57:40 PM
Sidenote: Why are all the Politics tab threads being greened here instead?
 
2013-01-03 03:57:59 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


December 25, 0
 
2013-01-03 03:58:00 PM

gerrymander: Like the kids say, it's not the crime that gets you; it's the cover-up.


Call me when there's a crime, or a cover-up.
 
2013-01-03 03:58:15 PM

Pockafrusta: Lying liars lie... This White House is just as dirty as the others. No change or hope of change.

/FARKTM Independent


FTFY
 
2013-01-03 03:58:23 PM
Tonight on Fox News:

Just what are the big, meanie, poopyheads at the State Department hiding?

We'll report, you decide.
 
2013-01-03 03:58:41 PM

ginandbacon



When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?



I think this is where we are heading to or regressing back to. The level of disrespect and vitriol among the opposing parties is degrading rapidily.

I remember years ago when a very similar exchange happened between David Gregory and Bush spokesperson, Bush spokesperson had to apologize.

Reid calls Boehner a dictator, Boehner tells Ried to F--- off.

I expect dueling to be back in fashion in 2 years.
 
2013-01-03 03:59:00 PM

calm like a bomb: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?

October 7, 1996


I think we have a winner...
 
2013-01-03 03:59:26 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


Idus Martiae 710 ab urbe condita.
 
2013-01-03 03:59:55 PM

Buffalo77: I expect dueling to be back in fashion in 2 years.


We can only hope!
 
2013-01-03 03:59:58 PM
In the very least, asking for and then providing a specific date for when her testimony was rescheduled would be an appropriate request and response . If that had already been provided and he then asked the question, a snarky column in the Washington Post would be a lame response. Having him wake up in a lion cage would be cool.
 
2013-01-03 04:00:09 PM

gerrymander: NuttierThanEver: For the last time someone please explain to me worst case scenario-wise why this is a thing. I mean short of Obama and Hillary actually leading the attack on the embassy what is it they supposedly did. Was there actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent that was ignored?

We know of no specific intelligence that an attack was planned on the Benghazi embassy on September 11 of last year. That said, we do have specific evidence that the embassy and staff were already targeted, due to the three attacks against that were made against perceived (by terrorists) Western-aligned organizations (the US embassy, a British embassy motorcade, the local Red Cross offices) starting that previous June. We also have repeated requests from US Ambassador Stevens for more security, all of which were denied. And finally, of course, there's that date again.


There was as much intelligence suggesting a terrorist attack would occur on September 11, 2012 (in Benghazi or anywhere else), as there was for September 11 in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. Clearly Obama should have seen this coming.
 
2013-01-03 04:00:18 PM

ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?


I'm not exactly sure when Fox News started broadcasting, some time around 1997 I think?
 
2013-01-03 04:00:33 PM

gerrymander: the executive branch spent weeks telling the US and the world that it was our fault for inciting those wacky Mooslems with a Monty Python-level quality YouTube video.


Sorry, but I thought this week we were busy blaming violence in movies for causing school shootings. Did I miss a newsletter explaining how Americans can be influenced to violence by movies but Libyans are immune?

/trying to keep up with latest GOP talking points is hard
 
2013-01-03 04:01:38 PM

Zasteva: gerrymander: the executive branch spent weeks telling the US and the world that it was our fault for inciting those wacky Mooslems with a Monty Python-level quality YouTube video.

Sorry, but I thought this week we were busy blaming violence in movies for causing school shootings. Did I miss a newsletter explaining how Americans can be influenced to violence by movies but Libyans are immune?


American Exceptionalism.
 
2013-01-03 04:02:54 PM
Just another coverup.. only ones that can't see it are libtards.
 
Displayed 50 of 689 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report