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  
•       •       •

25337 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 05:07:46 PM  
Jesus christ already.  The report. Link, .pdf
 
2013-01-03 05:07:56 PM  

rufus-t-firefly: No way that could have any effect on a BLOOD CLOT IN YOUR FARKING BRAIN.


detriotgirl.com
 
2013-01-03 05:08:11 PM  

MyRandomName: unexplained bacon: Gentoolive: Just another coverup.. only ones that can't see it are libtards.

what was covered up?

/libtard

4 state officials were removed from office for gross negligence according to the white house. By removed I mean still working.

Even the state department internal audit found gross incompetence. Do you not follow the news at all or did daily kos miss that report?


You mean people responsible for security resigned over a tragic event involving a security lapse???  OMG!!!!! IMPEACH OBAMA!!!!
 
2013-01-03 05:09:16 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: ccundiff: [pagead2.googlesyndication.com image 300x250]
The internet seems to think that I am a single christian these days. And that I would find her attractive.

You don't have a forehead fetish?


www.reocities.com
How YOU doin'?
 
2013-01-03 05:10:27 PM  
The facts are not in dispute:

The consulate was under seige for more than 8 hours, both Obama and Clinton were notified in 90 minutes + or - 15 minutes, and did nothing. Two Navy SEALS who were nearby were ordered to stand down, and both died when they disobeyed orders and defended the consulate anyway.

There never was a protest over that film, and at the time only 300 people had seen the trailer, about what you woud expect for the number of people who made it.

Both Clinton and Obama knew all this, but maintained a false cover story for at least two weeks.

Four men died because they screwed up, and they have some mighty hard questions to answer.
 
2013-01-03 05:10:40 PM  

halfof33: Weaver95: so again i'm left with this vague impression.......

Sigh. Thanks for posting, Weaves.


you haven't answered a single gotdamn question.  just changed the subject and ran away.  which, I suppose, is probably the safest thing for you to do.  the only conclusion I can draw here is that you WANT to blame Obama for something, but you know this Benghazi issue isn't a winning horse.  so you play it vague, and gain...what?  nothing, far as I can tell.  But I guess it's better than confronting Romney's electoral ass whipping or the GOP failure to respond to hurricane victims in New York and New Jersey.  plus, it's not a gun control thread, which can only be a bonus from your perspective.
 
2013-01-03 05:11:01 PM  

Weaver95: halfof33: Weaver95: I can't tell what it is you think it is they did wrong, or why its bad. can you shed some light on that for me?

I'll just let the facts speak for themselves, how's that? That work for you? Good.

Tell us more about the mean Republicans some other time, hmmmkay?

so again i'm left with this vague impression that you blame Obama for something.  You can't tell me what that something is, or why its bad...but that you really believe that Obama screwed up something somewhere along the line.  you can't tell me what should be done about it either.  i'm not allowed to ask you to clarify any of this because...well, you won't talk about that, so I don't know.  further, you imply that I should somehow mystically already know all these things to be true and not ask any questions about it.

And that's basically where I'm at with you.


Shills these days..... No creativity no verve. I mean you can kind of see why. They really have nothing to work with. They must miss the old days when they could whine about a BJ that actually happened instead of just having to make shiat up like they do now.
 
2013-01-03 05:11:33 PM  
So people still watch fox, eh?
 
2013-01-03 05:12:18 PM  

Arumat: FTDA: Arumat: H31N0US: Buffalo77: I expect dueling to be back in fashion in 2 years.

We can only hope!

Now THAT's change we can believe in.

/mandatory pistol marksmanship training for all congresscritters
//if they're going to duel they'd better not farking miss
///third slashy tells me that they should still be charged with murder if they win

What if they choose the sword as their dueling weapon?

Someone should sell tickets? I don't think it's all that likely though, given how old a lot of these people (and I use the term loosely) are. Most of them probably couldn't even lift an actual combat-ready sword, let alone swing it for any length of time.


Drat the luck! That would be a serious money maker on pay per view. What if they used sword canes? I don't think those blades are too heavy. Hold on a sec, I just had a crazy thought. What if they used those inflatable sockem-boppers instead? I would still pay to see that!
 
2013-01-03 05:12:49 PM  

halfof33: strathmeyer: But it was always the media saying the attacks were protests that got out of hand, not the government. Hell Susan Rice's story was straight from the media. If she's guilty of anything it's being so stupid she believes the 'news'.

That is completely untrue.There were no protesters at the Benghazi consulate prior to the attack, even though Obama and others repeatedly said the attackers joined an angry mob that had formed in opposition to the anti-Muslim film that had triggered protests in Egypt and elsewhere. The State Department disclosed this fact Oct. 9 - nearly a month after the attack. the first time it was mentioned:

9/11/12:

Clinton: Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.


Hey, it's the guy upset that information wasn't immediately disseminated to the general public fast enough and is outraged!  How you doin'?
 
2013-01-03 05:13:26 PM  

olddinosaur: The facts are not in dispute:

The consulate was under seige for more than 8 hours, both Obama and Clinton were notified in 90 minutes + or - 15 minutes, and did nothing. Two Navy SEALS who were nearby were ordered to stand down, and both died when they disobeyed orders and defended the consulate anyway.


Also a true fact: both of these SEALS were the last living members of the team Obama claimed to have used to kill bin Laden, finishing the coverup he started by shooting down that helicopter.
 
2013-01-03 05:13:31 PM  

Weaver95: halfof33: Weaver95: so again i'm left with this vague impression.......

Sigh. Thanks for posting, Weaves.

you haven't answered a single gotdamn question.  just changed the subject and ran away.  which, I suppose, is probably the safest thing for you to do.  the only conclusion I can draw here is that you WANT to blame Obama for something, but you know this Benghazi issue isn't a winning horse.  so you play it vague, and gain...what?  nothing, far as I can tell.  But I guess it's better than confronting Romney's electoral ass whipping or the GOP failure to respond to hurricane victims in New York and New Jersey.  plus, it's not a gun control thread, which can only be a bonus from your perspective.


He's got the ass burgers, man. Let it go.
 
2013-01-03 05:14:01 PM  
quickdraw:
Shills these days..... No creativity no verve. I mean you can kind of see why. They really have nothing to work with. They must miss the old days when they could whine about a BJ that actually happened instead of just having to make shiat up like they do now.

our GOP types here on fark really don't have a lot to work with, do they?  the Republican party has come down on the wrong side of so many issues lately that defending the stupidity and insanity has to be emotionally draining.  to be a Republican True Believer these days is to rebel against logic and common sense, and wage war against yourself in the name of party unity and ideological purity.  that's gotta take a toll on your psyche.
 
2013-01-03 05:14:35 PM  

sprawl15: olddinosaur: The facts are not in dispute:

The consulate was under seige for more than 8 hours, both Obama and Clinton were notified in 90 minutes + or - 15 minutes, and did nothing. Two Navy SEALS who were nearby were ordered to stand down, and both died when they disobeyed orders and defended the consulate anyway.

Also a true fact: both of these SEALS were the last living members of the team Obama claimed to have used to kill bin Laden, finishing the coverup he started by shooting down that helicopter.


Have they confirmed yet that they were the team Hillary used to kill Vince Foster?
 
2013-01-03 05:15:06 PM  

Weaver95: Romney's electoral ass whipping or the GOP failure


Here let me buy you a drink:

sfappeal.com

If you have any substantive questions, let me know. Take care.
 
2013-01-03 05:15:09 PM  

rufus-t-firefly: ginandbacon: When did this level of crass vitriol become socially acceptable in public?

1796

Perhaps the most notorious attacks came from Benjamin Franklin Bache, grandson of the famous Founder. Bache led the anti-Adams charge with a new pro-Republican newspaper, Philadelphia's General Advertiser, later the Aurora. Lambasting the Jay Treaty only eight days after Washington signed it, Bache compared President Washington to a certain absolutist across the Atlantic-King Louis. Bache relentlessly criticized the President. He insisted that Washington had "debauched" the nation. Another prominent Republican and co-editor of the Aurora, William Duane, thought Washington's final address to the nation was "fraught with incalculable evils" and the President was stricken with a "sick mind." The American Mercury levied the first "elitist" charge in the history of American presidential politics, asking, "Does the President fancy himself the grand Lama of this country that we are to approach him with superstitious reverence or religious regard?" Later, the Mercury proclaimed, "We have been guilty of idolatry for far too long."

...

The Republican paper derided Adams and his ideology. Bache championed Jefferson as a sort of Messiah, here to eradicate the evils of Federalism. As such, Bache was ruthless in his attacks against Adams, claiming that he "would deprive you of a voice in choosing your president and senate, and make both hereditary." Bache questioned his readers if they wanted, "this champion of kings, ranks, and titles to be your president."

The Federalists, however, were not to be outdone. In their attacks of Jefferson, they commonly referred to him as atheistic, anarchistic, and cowardly, claiming he'd rather plunge the country into bloody French chaos then push forward with a strong central government. A famous Federalist description of the Jeffersonians proclaimed that they were "cut-throats who walk in rags and sleep amidst filth and vermin," which, frankly, mak ...


You forgot the 1780s.

John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich: "Sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox."

John Wilkes: "That depends, my lord, on whether I embrace your lordship's principles or your mistress."
 
2013-01-03 05:15:41 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: sprawl15: olddinosaur: The facts are not in dispute:

The consulate was under seige for more than 8 hours, both Obama and Clinton were notified in 90 minutes + or - 15 minutes, and did nothing. Two Navy SEALS who were nearby were ordered to stand down, and both died when they disobeyed orders and defended the consulate anyway.

Also a true fact: both of these SEALS were the last living members of the team Obama claimed to have used to kill bin Laden, finishing the coverup he started by shooting down that helicopter.

Have they confirmed yet that they were the team Hillary used to kill Vince Foster?


Vince Foster is just the CIA code name for bin Laden, who is still alive.
 
2013-01-03 05:17:41 PM  
halfof33:
If you have any substantive questions, let me know. Take care.

i've asked you quite a number of substantive questions and you've ignored each and every one of 'em.  I can't even tell what it is you're upset about and you won't even drop a clue to help me figure it out.

hmm.  waitaminute....are you my ex-girlfriend?
 
2013-01-03 05:17:48 PM  

theknuckler_33: Hey, it's the guy upset that information wasn't immediately disseminated to the general public fast enough and is outraged! How you doin'?


I was just pointing out an obviously false statement.

Sorry that bothers you.

Have a slurpee.
 
2013-01-03 05:17:51 PM  

halfof33: Weaver95: so again i'm left with this vague impression.......

Sigh. Thanks for posting, Weaves.


Typical non-answer. Admit it, you are upset that the most recent information available wasn't made public. This constitutes a 'lie' to you and that is outrageous... despite the fact that the 'lie' didn't have any effect on anything whatsoever.

But hey, they LIED!!!!! It's as outrageous as when my daughter told me she didn't spill that milk.
 
2013-01-03 05:17:54 PM  

sprawl15: olddinosaur: The facts are not in dispute:

The consulate was under seige for more than 8 hours, both Obama and Clinton were notified in 90 minutes + or - 15 minutes, and did nothing. Two Navy SEALS who were nearby were ordered to stand down, and both died when they disobeyed orders and defended the consulate anyway.

Also a true fact: both of these SEALS were the last living members of the team Obama claimed to have used to kill bin Laden, finishing the coverup he started by shooting down that helicopter.


I see where this is going. Hillary Clinton is Osama bin Laden.

i147.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-03 05:17:57 PM  

Carn: vudutek: gilgigamesh: whacknuttery

Thank you, my vocabulary has a new addition.

File it right next to wingbattery.


I now have you favorited as "made good point, whacknuttery and winbattery "
 
2013-01-03 05:18:15 PM  

Weaver95: quickdraw:
Shills these days..... No creativity no verve. I mean you can kind of see why. They really have nothing to work with. They must miss the old days when they could whine about a BJ that actually happened instead of just having to make shiat up like they do now.

our GOP types here on fark really don't have a lot to work with, do they?  the Republican party has come down on the wrong side of so many issues lately that defending the stupidity and insanity has to be emotionally draining.  to be a Republican True Believer these days is to rebel against logic and common sense, and wage war against yourself in the name of party unity and ideological purity.  that's gotta take a toll on your psyche.


Only if you have a functioning one to start with.
 
2013-01-03 05:18:45 PM  

WTFDYW: Hung Like A Tic-Tac: [i51.photobucket.com image 475x474]

That PS always sends chills up my spine for some reason.


Because anyone that ever skateboarded in their youth knows that even if you made it down the hill without speed wobbling all over the place and eating pavement; there is no damn way to transition your momentum through that 45 degree bend at the bottom of the hill. Even if you pulled off an ollie that would make Tony Hawks jaw drop, you're still boned.
 
2013-01-03 05:19:08 PM  

Weaver95: Silly Jesus: Weaver95: Silly Jesus:
The report said that there was never any reason to believe that it was not a terrorist attack. From the first second, nobody thought it was about the video. What's so hard to understand that? The administration knew that from the beginning. Are you arguing that it took them two weeks to verify that they knew from the start and that they needed to make up a lie in the interim?

no, the administration DIDN'T know that from the beginning. they had to verify that for themselves...and they were right to do so, and when things became clear they followed up and changed their view of the situation.  you make some very interesting (and extremely incorrect) assumptions about how this played out.

Just saying what the report said.

um...what report?


The one by Lieberman. Points out that everyone on the ground was immediately saying that there were no protests whatsoever and Obama continued to blame a guy in California for days.
 
2013-01-03 05:20:24 PM  
Oh yeah, the State Department really called him out! O snap! Har har. Faux news! Teabaggers!

/Meanwhile, if we replace Hillary Clinton in this situation with say, Condi Rice...acerbic left-wingers would scream that she's either stalling, faking or both. By all means, take the administration entirely at its word and wallow in righteous indignation. Hillary needs your support. Pffffffft.
 
2013-01-03 05:21:06 PM  
Syrian "rebels" with al qaeda links on our payroll? Nonsense! Just some sloppiness. Nothing to see here, move along.


/anyone seen Petraeus lately?
 
2013-01-03 05:21:29 PM  

unyon: Silly Jesus: Huh? Even in the report after the fact that came out recently they stated clearly that there was no reason whatsoever to ever believe that the attacks were related to the video. The idea that it was ever a rational thought or seriously considered by those in the know has been discredited.

Other than them occurring on the same day and in the same manner as protests in other muslim cities.  But still, why does this even matter?  So it took a few days to sort out in the chaos what went down.  Is that seriously scandal-worthy?  In fact, what you've just said supports the idea that they may have been intentionally vague on the reasons as they investigated.

So you're either saying that they either exercised due dilligence in investigating, were harmlessly incompetent but well meaning, or we should hold those people who ignored pleas for extra security over the volcano.  If it's the latter, then of course you would mean congress who denied extra funding for exactly this purpose.

/nevermind that Benghazi would be a smouldering crater under Ghadaffi's heel if Republicans had their way a year ago


I don't know why they lied, but they clearly did. According to Lieberman's report, everyone on the ground immediately confirmed that there were no protests, much less ones regarding a video. Yet, that remained the talking point for two weeks. I don't know the reason behind it, but I suspect it was to save face in election season. I do know, though, that if Dubya had similarly lied in the wake of a terror attack the lib reaction wouldn't be "meh."
 
2013-01-03 05:21:31 PM  

theknuckler_33: Typical non-answer. Admit it, you are upset that the most recent information available wasn't made public. This constitutes a 'lie' to you and that is outrageous... despite the fact that the 'lie' didn't have any effect on anything whatsoever.

But hey, they LIED!!!!! It's as outrageous as when my daughter told me she didn't spill that milk.


as you know, I've been in LOTS of Benghazi threads. I get that lots of Administration Apologists don't care that they lied. I GET IT.

But your claim that the "most recent information wasn't made available" is false. They actually told a lie, and didn't stop until a week after being ridiculed by the President of Libya for telling it.
 
2013-01-03 05:22:14 PM  

theknuckler_33: Silly Jesus: The report said that FROM THE BEGINNING they knew it was a terrorist attack. It says that thinking that it was about the video was at no time legitimate. The only thing that evolved was the lie.

Just curious, but how did these dastardly lies a) harm the US, b) benefit Obama or the administration, c) have any effect whatsoever on anything. I mean, I get that you are upset that Rice said 5 days later that "the best information we have at this time" while stating about half a dozen caveats was a bunch of information that was not accurate... I really do. Is that shocking though?  I mean, for goodness sakes... 5 days. It took a YEAR before they even set up a friggin' commission to investigate the original 9/11 attacks and you are losing your shiat over stuff said on a TV news show 5 days after the event happened. AND... the 'lies' benefitted noone. What in good God's name are you so farking upset about??!?!?


Lol

3/10
 
2013-01-03 05:22:15 PM  

halfof33: theknuckler_33: Hey, it's the guy upset that information wasn't immediately disseminated to the general public fast enough and is outraged! How you doin'?

I was just pointing out an obviously false statement.

Sorry that bothers you.

Have a slurpee.


Statements made by administration representatives that in retrospect turn out to be obviously false. Well, there certainly is a long history of such things. On the outrage meter, this one doesn't even register. You are outraged over the fact that it was a false statement... that's it... not over what the false statement did or what it meant or anything... it was false, so  OUTRAGE! Hey man, I get it. Obama bad! Totally. But hanging your hat on this is about the thickness of a piece of paper step above birth certificate. But hey, keep fighting the good fight, freedom loving patriot!
 
2013-01-03 05:22:26 PM  

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


Why?
 
2013-01-03 05:22:30 PM  

mizchief: And not to forget that the "terrorist" responsible were the same "freedom fighters" that Obama support under the direction of the UN without getting congressional approval.


No they weren't.
 
2013-01-03 05:22:38 PM  

Silly Jesus: The one by Lieberman. Points out that everyone on the ground was immediately saying that there were no protests whatsoever and Obama continued to blame a guy in California for days.


So youre saying the BBC staged all this?

Please proceed....
 
2013-01-03 05:22:42 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: sprawl15: olddinosaur: The facts are not in dispute:

The consulate was under seige for more than 8 hours, both Obama and Clinton were notified in 90 minutes + or - 15 minutes, and did nothing. Two Navy SEALS who were nearby were ordered to stand down, and both died when they disobeyed orders and defended the consulate anyway.

Also a true fact: both of these SEALS were the last living members of the team Obama claimed to have used to kill bin Laden, finishing the coverup he started by shooting down that helicopter.

I see where this is going. Hillary Clinton is Osama bin Laden.

[i147.photobucket.com image 461x346]


Nope. bin Laden was being boarded at the CIA 'facility' in Benghazi, and some of the Libyan rebels moved in to rescue him, mistakingly thinking that bin Laden was an enemy of the US. These rebels weren't affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, so it's possible that they weren't read in to the close bin Laden/Barack Hussein connections. The remaining SEALS, seeking vengeance for their lost comrades, rushed in to kill bin Laden, but the two forces meeting at the same time led to catastrophic consequences. The deaths of the two civilians were accidental, but that's what happens when you use Hellfire missiles in a crowded area.
 
2013-01-03 05:23:46 PM  

quickdraw: Silly Jesus: The one by Lieberman. Points out that everyone on the ground was immediately saying that there were no protests whatsoever and Obama continued to blame a guy in California for days.

So youre saying the BBC staged all this?

Please proceed....


From your link: "The protests followed an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi on Tuesday - in which the ambassador to Libya was killed in a fire"
 
2013-01-03 05:23:47 PM  

Silly Jesus: I do know, though, that if Dubya had similarly lied in the wake of a terror attack the lib reaction wouldn't be "meh."


That's undoubtedly true. I mean the Democrats impeached Bush for his lies tying 9/11 to Irq as a justification for invasion, right?
 
2013-01-03 05:23:52 PM  

ciberido: Carn: vudutek: gilgigamesh: whacknuttery

Thank you, my vocabulary has a new addition.

File it right next to wingbattery.

I now have you favorited as "made good point, whacknuttery and winbattery "


Works for me :D
 
2013-01-03 05:24:05 PM  

halfof33: as you know, I've been in LOTS of Benghazi threads. I get that lots of Administration Apologists don't care that they lied. I GET IT.


so have I.  so have a lot of us fark regulars.  And you know what?  I, at least, still can't figure out what's got you and your fellow GOP types so upset.  nor will you explain any of it.  the only thing that comes across clear is that you don't like Obama.  ok, we get that.  thanks for playing.
 
2013-01-03 05:24:32 PM  

VoodooTaco: Weaver95: Philip Francis Queeg: Silly Jesus: Somehow athletes get concussed and come back into the football game minutes later while Clinton can't seem to talk weeks later.

and of course professional athletes and 65 year old politicians react exactly the same way to physiocal injury.

yup.  exactly the same way.  totally.

I for one would like to see more 65 year old ladies in the NFL....


You want Brett Favre to unretire again?
 
2013-01-03 05:24:56 PM  

halfof33: theknuckler_33: Typical non-answer. Admit it, you are upset that the most recent information available wasn't made public. This constitutes a 'lie' to you and that is outrageous... despite the fact that the 'lie' didn't have any effect on anything whatsoever.

But hey, they LIED!!!!! It's as outrageous as when my daughter told me she didn't spill that milk.

as you know, I've been in LOTS of Benghazi threads. I get that lots of Administration Apologists don't care that they lied. I GET IT.

But your claim that the "most recent information wasn't made available" is false. They actually told a lie, and didn't stop until a week after being ridiculed by the President of Libya for telling it.


Oh right... the interview with the Libyan president where he contradicted himself about FBI coming in to investigate. Forgot about that. Libyan president quotes in media trumps US intelligence priorities... forgot!  Man, you love America! Hey, I get it. Obama bad. I GET IT.
 
2013-01-03 05:25:38 PM  

quickdraw: Silly Jesus: The one by Lieberman. Points out that everyone on the ground was immediately saying that there were no protests whatsoever and Obama continued to blame a guy in California for days.

So youre saying the BBC staged all this?

Please proceed....


I didn't catch the part where they showed Benghazi...

Please proceed...
 
2013-01-03 05:26:09 PM  

Silly Jesus: theknuckler_33: Silly Jesus: The report said that FROM THE BEGINNING they knew it was a terrorist attack. It says that thinking that it was about the video was at no time legitimate. The only thing that evolved was the lie.

Just curious, but how did these dastardly lies a) harm the US, b) benefit Obama or the administration, c) have any effect whatsoever on anything. I mean, I get that you are upset that Rice said 5 days later that "the best information we have at this time" while stating about half a dozen caveats was a bunch of information that was not accurate... I really do. Is that shocking though?  I mean, for goodness sakes... 5 days. It took a YEAR before they even set up a friggin' commission to investigate the original 9/11 attacks and you are losing your shiat over stuff said on a TV news show 5 days after the event happened. AND... the 'lies' benefitted noone. What in good God's name are you so farking upset about??!?!?

Lol

3/10


Getting a troll rating from a troll:   priceless.
 
2013-01-03 05:26:22 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Silly Jesus: I do know, though, that if Dubya had similarly lied in the wake of a terror attack the lib reaction wouldn't be "meh."

That's undoubtedly true. I mean the Democrats impeached Bush for his lies tying 9/11 to Irq as a justification for invasion, right?


What?
 
2013-01-03 05:26:59 PM  

theknuckler_33: Silly Jesus: theknuckler_33: Silly Jesus: The report said that FROM THE BEGINNING they knew it was a terrorist attack. It says that thinking that it was about the video was at no time legitimate. The only thing that evolved was the lie.

Just curious, but how did these dastardly lies a) harm the US, b) benefit Obama or the administration, c) have any effect whatsoever on anything. I mean, I get that you are upset that Rice said 5 days later that "the best information we have at this time" while stating about half a dozen caveats was a bunch of information that was not accurate... I really do. Is that shocking though?  I mean, for goodness sakes... 5 days. It took a YEAR before they even set up a friggin' commission to investigate the original 9/11 attacks and you are losing your shiat over stuff said on a TV news show 5 days after the event happened. AND... the 'lies' benefitted noone. What in good God's name are you so farking upset about??!?!?

Lol

3/10

Getting a troll rating from a troll:   priceless.


$7
 
2013-01-03 05:27:24 PM  

crawlspace: Meanwhile, if we replace Hillary Clinton in this situation with say, Condi Rice...


Condi is a traitor by denying Benghazigate You're a bit slow.
 
2013-01-03 05:27:53 PM  

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

March 15, 44 BC


Ides see what you did there.
 
2013-01-03 05:28:09 PM  

theknuckler_33: Oh right... the interview with the Libyan president where he contradicted himself about FBI coming in to investigate. Forgot about that. Libyan president quotes in media trumps US intelligence priorities... forgot! Man, you love America! Hey, I get it. Obama bad. I GET IT.


Lying about a non-existent protest outside the embassy that the Libyan President called "preposterous" is not an intelligence priority. I get your attempt to rationalize it after the fact, though.
 
2013-01-03 05:28:40 PM  

Silly Jesus: Philip Francis Queeg: Silly Jesus: I do know, though, that if Dubya had similarly lied in the wake of a terror attack the lib reaction wouldn't be "meh."

That's undoubtedly true. I mean the Democrats impeached Bush for his lies tying 9/11 to Irq as a justification for invasion, right?

What?


Bush did lie after a terror attack. What was the lib reaction?
 
2013-01-03 05:28:49 PM  

MyRandomName: Fluorescent Testicle: ThatBillmanGuy: Wait, its now a lie that the government spent a lot of time trying to blame this on a Muslim parody film? I'm sort of out of the loop on this, but I remember everyone talking about how that film was to blame.

The various protests really were triggered by the video; the terrorists just used the one in Benghazi as a cover.

No they didnt. Stop repeating debunked white house talking points. There was never a protest in benghazi.


imgs.xkcd.com

Where is this "talking point" "debunked"?
 
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 archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report