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 05:53:41 PM  

The Larch: crawlspace: 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.

You're imagining that a bad thing would happen if an imaginary thing happened, and you're blaming the libs because of the bad thing that you imagined?



No. Just posing a hypothetical scenario to make a point which you are too dull to grasp. But thanks for playing.
 
2013-01-03 05:54:20 PM  

The Why Not Guy: Silly Jesus: If Bush had said for two weeks that 9/11 was caused by the Teletubbies not a single lib would have cared.

Is that any dumber than "they hate us for our freedoms?"


Can't be any dumber than claiming that Iraq was involved.
 
2013-01-03 05:55:28 PM  

vudutek: gilgigamesh: whacknuttery

Thank you, my vocabulary has a new addition.


That article gave me several new additions.

From the comments: "Urinalism" = What FNC does that other news outlets call "Journalism"

"Testifying" = appearing on Sunday morning political talk shows

"Philippe" = a female name (who'd have thunk??)
 
2013-01-03 05:57:27 PM  

Flaming Yawn: vudutek: gilgigamesh: whacknuttery

Thank you, my vocabulary has a new addition.

That article gave me several new additions.

From the comments: "Urinalism" = What FNC does that other news outlets call "Journalism"

"Testifying" = appearing on Sunday morning political talk shows

"Philippe" = a female name (who'd have thunk??)


Technically it's not testifying unless it's a Fox News program.
 
2013-01-03 05:57:43 PM  

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


Since the 24 hour news cycle was invented.

FoxNews turning this into a vicious attack against a champion of freedom just trying to keep the public informed in 3... 2.... 1....
 
2013-01-03 05:57:45 PM  

crawlspace: The Larch: crawlspace: 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.

You're imagining that a bad thing would happen if an imaginary thing happened, and you're blaming the libs because of the bad thing that you imagined?

No. Just posing a hypothetical scenario to make a point which you are too dull to grasp. But thanks for playing.


I know. Remember the investigations Democrats screamed for during the 11 embassy attacks under Bush? Oh...
 
2013-01-03 05:58:30 PM  

MSFT: Can't be any dumber than claiming that Iraq was involved.


But the fact there is no proof that Iraq was involved in proof they were involved. And the fact that no weapons of mass destruction were found proves they had WMD's. Welcome to the world of FoxNews/NRA thinking.
 
2013-01-03 05:59:08 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.


I see halfof33 is dusting off the old alts just in case there's anybody left who hasn't played this game before.  Give it a rest, freak.  Do some home repair, take a walk, stick your pecker in something soft and warm and still living.
 
2013-01-03 05:59:32 PM  
I just have this weird feeling that the GOP is desperately trying to not fall apart.
 
2013-01-03 06:01:13 PM  
So when do we impeach Obama?

I for one am OUTRAGED that the CIA withheld some information which resulted in the Obama Administration releasing faulty information to the public.

I won't rest until he's impeached and Biden is President!
 
2013-01-03 06:01:51 PM  

Weaver95: I just have this weird feeling that the GOP is desperately trying to not fall apart.


Which apparently gives them this face:

www.rawstory.com

WAH-WAH
 
2013-01-03 06:01:54 PM  

according to TVEyes, Fox has mentioned "Benghazi" how many times this month? a) 400 b) 700 c) 1000 d) 1,200 [answer: d] #RWbubble

- Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) November 26, 2012
 
2013-01-03 06:02:56 PM  

Mrtraveler01: So when do we impeach Obama?

I for one am OUTRAGED that the CIA withheld some information which resulted in the Obama Administration releasing faulty information to the public.

I won't rest until he's impeached and Biden is President!


You'd think the CIA is  supposed to be secretive or something!
 
2013-01-03 06:04:16 PM  

thamike: Mrtraveler01: So when do we impeach Obama?

I for one am OUTRAGED that the CIA withheld some information which resulted in the Obama Administration releasing faulty information to the public.

I won't rest until he's impeached and Biden is President!

You'd think the CIA is  supposed to be secretive or something!


That's just proof of how involved Obama is in this lie.

If he managed to convince the CIA to lie to him so he can lie to the Press, who knows what else he's capable of!
 
2013-01-03 06:05:07 PM  

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


Very true. And as you continually prove, a person really doesn't have to have any measurable higher brain activity at all to, say, post on Fark.
 
2013-01-03 06:09:30 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?


Yeah, it was dead easy too. What with all the overwhelming evidence and such. Good times!
 
2013-01-03 06:10:21 PM  

GORDON: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.


hahaha I actually read that a couple of times as I thought it had been misspelled!
 
2013-01-03 06:10:58 PM  

Silly Jesus: calm like a bomb: Silly Jesus: Somehow athletes get concussed and come back into the football game minutes later while Clinton can't seem to talk weeks later.

The fact that the concussion came from passing out due to dehydration secondary to a really bad gastrointestinal virus certainly has no bearing on this at all.

You're right. Good point. When I have the shiats I am unable to speak for a week.


And when you speak, the shiat flows freely.
jewzi.com
 
2013-01-03 06:13:32 PM  

piglet: Silly Jesus: calm like a bomb: Silly Jesus: Somehow athletes get concussed and come back into the football game minutes later while Clinton can't seem to talk weeks later.

The fact that the concussion came from passing out due to dehydration secondary to a really bad gastrointestinal virus certainly has no bearing on this at all.

You're right. Good point. When I have the shiats I am unable to speak for a week.

And when you speak, the shiat flows freely.
[jewzi.com image 200x213]


I hate those f*cking toilet bears.
 
2013-01-03 06:13:39 PM  

MSFT: The Why Not Guy: Silly Jesus: If Bush had said for two weeks that 9/11 was caused by the Teletubbies not a single lib would have cared.

Is that any dumber than "they hate us for our freedoms?"

Can't be any dumber than claiming that Iraq was involved.


Proof that Benghazi was a coverup:

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-03 06:15:18 PM  

Fart_Machine: crawlspace: The Larch: crawlspace: 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.

You're imagining that a bad thing would happen if an imaginary thing happened, and you're blaming the libs because of the bad thing that you imagined?

No. Just posing a hypothetical scenario to make a point which you are too dull to grasp. But thanks for playing.

I know. Remember the investigations Democrats screamed for during the 11 embassy attacks under Bush? Oh...


Perhaps the Bush administration should have laughably asserted that the catalyst was a stupid youtube video.
 
2013-01-03 06:15:25 PM  

Evil High Priest: 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?

Yeah, it was dead easy too. What with all the overwhelming evidence and such. Good times!


Colin Powell as the key witness admitting it didn't hurt either.
 
2013-01-03 06:16:31 PM  
Oh look, halfof33 and the rest of his ilk come in and leave a steaming turd in the punchbowl, then argue they want to just 'present facts'.

Idiots like him are the reason that political discussion is so rancorous in the US today. Because anytime people want to seriously talk about the issues of the day like adults, they come strolling in and drop that massive deuce in the punchbowl, then act like they didn't do anything wrong and everyone else is in the wrong for pointing out their smelly shiat.

If you seriously want to 'discuss' this issue, then actually bring something other than ad hominem and BS. Otherwise, shut the fark up, since you bring nothing to the argument. Let the adults actually have a discussion. You don't want to actually know what happened with issues like Benghazi or Sandy or even the school shootings. You just want to come in and leave that turd, then act surprised when someone points it out.
 
2013-01-03 06:16:35 PM  
As noted, this is the same guy who told a Buzzfeed reporter "Have a good day. And by good day, I mean Fark Off." after telling him that a DoD study had proven beyond a doubt that the reporter was "an unmitigated asshole".

So ten points to him.
 
2013-01-03 06:17:08 PM  

lennavan: Evil High Priest: 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?

Yeah, it was dead easy too. What with all the overwhelming evidence and such. Good times!

Colin Powell as the key witness admitting it didn't hurt either.


Col. Lawrence Wilkerson has said some rather interesting things of the Powell testimony.
 
2013-01-03 06:18:35 PM  
You know, I watched Obama's press conference the other night and I expected him to take five seconds to wish the Secretary of State well while she was in the hospital, but no - that didn't happen. He hasn't so much as sent a tweet. Hasn't spoken about her since early December. Lots of tweets and shout-outs to Kerry, though.
 
2013-01-03 06:20:10 PM  

Weaver95: quickdraw: Weaver95: halfof33: 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.

dude - we can't even tell what it is you think was being lied about or covered up....nor will you explain your beliefs to any of us.

Its faith based political hackery. I dunno. I think the whole Benghazi narrative is a no go to anyone but the faithful and at this point the GOP is hemorrhaging the faithful as quickly as the Catholic church. Interesting isnt it how they both share the same ancient nemesis? Perhaps thats the historic narrative which fits here. The GOP reliving the doomed crusades of the Catholic church against Islam. Halliburton as the Knights Templar...

/brb must go write screenplay

I think you and theknuckler_33 are right - our GOP locals are just making shiat up and hoping something will stick to Obama.  nothing they're saying makes any sense, at least outside the GOP echo chamber.


I actually think they are hoping to get lucky and some random scandal will come from the Obama adminstration if they keep on pushing the non-scandal of Benghazzi. Kind of how years of Whitewater investigations led to Bill lying about a blow job many years later, which had nothing to do with Whitewater.
 
2013-01-03 06:20:21 PM  
"Silly Jesus: Somehow athletes get concussed and come back into the football game minutes later while Clinton can't seem to talk weeks later."

I know I'm late, but I'm gonna have to ask for a citation for this ridiculous claim. No legitimate sports league anywhere in the world is going to allow an athlete suspected of sustaining a concussion to return to the game.

/I miss the NHL
//Have had a concussion
///Don't care much for Hillary, but I doubt she's quaking (or faking) in her boots
 
2013-01-03 06:21:22 PM  

crawlspace: Perhaps the Bush administration should have laughably asserted that the catalyst was a stupid youtube video.


Just like Romney did when he, in his usual manner, bolted outside to grin like a crocodile about dead people while completely confusing Cairo for Benghazi while accusing Clinton of blaming a film for the attacks.

You do know that Romney was the first person to insinuate that the attacks were caused by a video that Clinton "apologized" about, right?  Twice.
 
2013-01-03 06:23:00 PM  

Melvin Lovecraft: "Silly Jesus: Somehow athletes get concussed and come back into the football game minutes later while Clinton can't seem to talk weeks later."

I know I'm late, but I'm gonna have to ask for a citation for this ridiculous claim. No legitimate sports league anywhere in the world is going to allow an athlete suspected of sustaining a concussion to return to the game.

/I miss the NHL
//Have had a concussion
///Don't care much for Hillary, but I doubt she's quaking (or faking) in her boots


Yeah you don't really see a lot of running while puking in the NFL.
 
2013-01-03 06:23:38 PM  

sprawl15: lennavan: Evil High Priest: 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?

Yeah, it was dead easy too. What with all the overwhelming evidence and such. Good times!

Colin Powell as the key witness admitting it didn't hurt either.

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson has said some rather interesting things of the Powell testimony.


For sure, the guy who wrote Powell's speech admitting it was all a hoax certainly helped the argument. But it's not like he wanted Bush impeached for it, right Evil High Priest?
 
2013-01-03 06:23:39 PM  
Fox News staff should no longer be referred to as 'reporter' 'anchor' 'commentator' or 'contributor'

From now on the term is 'scum'

So this should be corrected to: "State Department spokesperson calls out Fox News reporter SCUM for asking exactly why Hillary Clinton can't seem to testify about Bengazi. She even suggested the appropriate tag
 
2013-01-03 06:30:09 PM  

lennavan: But it's not like he wanted Bush impeached for it


Bush? Probably not. He seems to have believed that Cheney was much more the mind behind the operation, though, so that only goes so far...
DAVID BRANCACCIO: We've been talking grand policy. The then director of the CIA, George Tenent, Vice President Cheney's deputy Libby, told you that the intelligence that was the basis of going to war was rock solid. Given what you now know, how does that make you feel?

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: It makes me feel terrible. I've said in other places that it was-- constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. My participation in that presentation at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life.

I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council. How do you think that makes me feel? Thirty-one years in the United States Army and I more or less end my career with that kind of a blot on my record? That's not a very comforting thing.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: A hoax? That's quite a word.

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Well, let's face it, it was. It was not a hoax that the Secretary in any way was complicit in. In fact he did his best-- I watched him work. Two AM in the morning on the DCI and the Deputy DCI, John McLaughlin.

And to try and hone the presentation down to what was, in the DCI's own words, a slam dunk. Firm. Iron clad. We threw many things out. We threw the script that Scooter Libby had given the-- Secretary of State. Forty-eight page script on WMD. We threw that out the first day.

And we turned to the National Intelligence estimate as part of the recommendation of George Tenent and my agreement with. But even that turned out to be, in its substantive parts-- that is stockpiles of chemicals, biologicals and production capability that was hot and so forth, and an active nuclear program. The three most essential parts of that presentation turned out to be absolutely false.
Perhaps most damningly from the same interview:
LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Oh I think it's come to that. I think we've had some decisions at this administration that were more or less dictates. We've had a decision that the Constitution as read by Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo and a few other very selected administration lawyers doesn't pertain the way it has pertained for 200-plus years. A very ahistorical reading of the Constitution.

And these people marshal such stellar lights as-- Alexander Hamilton. They haven't even read Federalist Six. I'm sure they haven't. Where Alexander Hamilton lays down his markers about the dangers of a dictate-issuing chief executive. This is not the way America was intended to be run by its founders and it is not the interpretation of the Constitution that any of the founders as far as I read the Federalist Papers and other discussions about their views would have subscribed to. This is an interpretation of the constitution that is outlandish and as I said, clearly ahistorical.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: And if the system were shown to work that might be one thing. But-- in the case of recent US for--

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Dictatorships work on occasion. You're right. Dictatorships do work but I-- I'm like Ferdinand Eberstadt. I'd prefer to see the squabble of democracy to the efficiency of dictators.
(source)
 
2013-01-03 06:31:21 PM  

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. When did that change? What the hell was everyone talking about that film for, then? I'm not up on this Benghazi thing, so I'm seriously asking and not trying to troll, since bringing it up seems to provoke that kind of reaction.

/not my intent.


You remember correctly.  On Sept. 11, people around the world began demonstrating and even rioting due to the trailer (there is no actual film, just a long trailer).  Most notably in Egypt where the embassy staff put out a few tweets condemning the "film" .  This was (originally) the outrage and impeachable offense.

Rioting alos broke out in Libya, specifically in Benghazi.  At the time and in the fog, many people reasonably believed that they were rioting in Libya for the same reasons.  On 9/12 Obama mentioned nothing about the youtube clip, but intead said "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.".   In addition to make me some tea's timeline, this also was an impeachable offense because "acts of terror" is way different than "terrorist acts" for some reason.

Then on 9/16, Susan Rice (who was Ambassador to the UN, and therefore would have had zero knowledge or influence on the situation in Libya, and therefore could only repeat what point she had been told) said:
Well, Jake, first of all, it's important to know that there's an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.
But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous -- not a premeditated -- response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.

We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to -- or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in -- in the wake of the revolution in Libya are -- are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.
We'll wait to see exactly what the investigation finally confirms, but that's the best information we have at present.

Ultimately, it was proven that it was not the youtube clip, and that the Intelligence folks were already pretty sure of that, but in order to not burn assets on the ground, chose to prepare remarks that implied that it may be the video, while explicitly stating that it might not be the video.

Shortly thereafter, the Administration stopped mentioning the video, while John McCain, Lindsay Graham and wingnut bloggers screamed about it not being the video for the next 3.5 months.

meanwhile most of the rumors that were so scandalous weren't true.  Obama did send help, it just couldn't make it in time. Obama didn't watch them die while snorting coke off Bill Ayers buttocks.  There was such a big coverup that the Administration accepted an independent review that said that several senior staff members made mistakes in judgment that left the staff in Benghazi vulnerable.  A report that the state department accepted without issue.  4 people have been fired for it.

In the meantime "Scandal" has been defined down to mean "every bad decision ever".  "Coverup" has been defined down to mean "ever making a statement that may not be 100% correct, regardless of whether you are lying, protecting someone or repeating a statement you have no way of proving the veracity of" and "Slurper" has been defined by an idiot to mean "anyone who can;t sustain free-floating rage at this moving target".
 
2013-01-03 06:33:14 PM  
At the time, the entire Middle East was rioting over a Muslim parody film. The United States government was culpable in not realizing that in this particular instance the attack was not caused by a Muslim parody film and for not protecting this particular consulates from attack out of the dozens of other US consulates that were also being threatened. We all know that Obama owns a time machine which he used to post his birth announcements in the Honolulu papers. He should have used it to send a message back to the past so that the US European command could have sent out a strike force hours before the terrorists attacked to be on hand to prevent it. While we're on the subject, why didn't Obama have Navy SEALs waiting in Newtown to prevent that tragedy? With great power comes great responsibility.
 
2013-01-03 06:33:38 PM  

i_got_nuthin:
Actually, Libya is pretty big. 4th largest African nation, 17th largest in the world (by area).

/just sayin



IMHO: A population of ~6 million and a GDP 37 billion makes you pretty small.

/just sayin
 
2013-01-03 06:34:07 PM  

Melvin Lovecraft: "Silly Jesus: Somehow athletes get concussed and come back into the football game minutes later while Clinton can't seem to talk weeks later."

I know I'm late, but I'm gonna have to ask for a citation for this ridiculous claim. No legitimate sports league anywhere in the world is going to allow an athlete suspected of sustaining a concussion to return to the game.

/I miss the NHL
//Have had a concussion
///Don't care much for Hillary, but I doubt she's quaking (or faking) in her boots


Even if he were correct, if he doesn't understand the difference between "macho young athletes in peak physical condition under pressure to never admit weakness" and "65  year old", I doubt he can be helped.
 
2013-01-03 06:39:38 PM  

The Larch: crawlspace: 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.

You're imagining that a bad thing would happen if an imaginary thing happened, and you're blaming the libs because of the bad thing that you imagined?

You should get some professional help. Seriously.


It has little to do with imaginary situations and a lot to do with tu quoque.  "If it happened to you, you would be just as bad as us!"
 
2013-01-03 06:42:52 PM  
The talking heads guarding the inhabitants of Bullsh*t Mountain from rejoining the world of the sane just won't budge an inch will they? Fox News is a propaganda machine which dumbs down America by the day through disinformation and their slanted agendas. See their anchors spewing forth feces from their mouths in my visual homage to the network on my artist's blog at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-fox-news-scylla-guardia n-of-bullsht.html
 
2013-01-03 06:43:03 PM  
The administration's lies are of no importance. Move along.

That said, she has a farking blood clot in her brain. Some slack perhaps.
 
2013-01-03 06:43:18 PM  

thamike: crawlspace: Perhaps the Bush administration should have laughably asserted that the catalyst was a stupid youtube video.

Just like Romney did when he, in his usual manner, bolted outside to grin like a crocodile about dead people while completely confusing Cairo for Benghazi while accusing Clinton of blaming a film for the attacks.

You do know that Romney was the first person to insinuate that the attacks were caused by a video that Clinton "apologized" about, right?  Twice.


Romney? Who gives a fsck about Romney? You do know that blaming a lame youtube vid was the story Obama's State department ran with, right? It's telling to envision the ensuing shiatstorm that would have erupted if anyone other than a democrat tried this.
 
2013-01-03 06:44:27 PM  

sprawl15: lennavan: But it's not like he wanted Bush impeached for it

Bush? Probably not. He seems to have believed that Cheney was much more the mind behind the operation, though, so that only goes so far...


I was going with this quote:

The language in that article, the language in those two or three lines about impeachment is nice and precise - it's high crimes and misdemeanors. You compare Bill Clinton's peccadilloes for which he was impeached to George Bush's high crimes and misdemeanors or Dick Cheney's high crimes and misdemeanors, and I think they pale in significance."

He defines impeachment as high crimes and misdemeanors and then goes on to talk about Bush and Cheney's high crimes and misdemeanors.
 
2013-01-03 06:44:33 PM  
Boring nontroversy #673: But why did you call it a "terrorist act" rather than "terrorism"?!?!?!

/and why did we lose so miserably in November in a shiat economy against a controversial black guy with a Muslim-sounding name?
 
2013-01-03 06:47:57 PM  

david_gaithersburg: September
October
November
December

She has been unavailable for four months now, sounds like a fair question to put forward.


"I believe that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is suffering from a concussion. She has never shied away from a fight (assuming the testimony would even amount to that), she has never declined to testify before in her decades of public service ... and very significantly she has agreed to testify in January so they will hear from her. If the Republicans wanted to hear from her earlier, why didn't they just call her to testify earlier? and if she had said no, subpoena her? It is simple to do. The Republicans are in the Majority in the House of Representatives and had the power and could have summoned her / subpoenaed her to testify if they had wanted to. Frankly, I do want to hear what she says about Benghazi - she is important to hear from on this serious matter - but I want to hear from her when she is in good health. There are many, many unanswered and very serious questions in my mind, and as the Secretary of State, it is her job to answer them. I would have liked to have had her testify weeks ago and answered the questions - but now that she is sick - the right thing to do is to wait until she is better. I don't agree with being snarky about someone's health."

- Greta Van Susteren, Fox News.
 
2013-01-03 06:50:27 PM  

BSABSVR: 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. When did that change? What the hell was everyone talking about that film for, then? I'm not up on this Benghazi thing, so I'm seriously asking and not trying to troll, since bringing it up seems to provoke that kind of reaction.

/not my intent.

You remember correctly.  On Sept. 11, people around the world began demonstrating and even rioting due to the trailer (there is no actual film, just a long trailer).  Most notably in Egypt where the embassy staff put out a few tweets condemning the "film" .  This was (originally) the outrage and impeachable offense.

Rioting alos broke out in Libya, specifically in Benghazi.  At the time and in the fog, many people reasonably believed that they were rioting in Libya for the same reasons.  On 9/12 Obama mentioned nothing about the youtube clip, but intead said "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.".   In addition to make me some tea's timeline, this also was an impeachable offense because "acts of terror" is way different than "terrorist acts" for some reason.

Then on 9/16, Susan Rice (who was Ambassador to the UN, and therefore would have had zero knowledge or influence on the situation in Libya, and therefore could only repeat what point she had been told) said:
Well, Jake, first of all, it's important to know that there's an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.
But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous -- not a premeditated -- response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, t ...


THANK YOU.
 
2013-01-03 06:52:07 PM  

indylaw:
/and why did we lose so miserably in November in a shiat economy against a controversial black guy with a Muslim-sounding name?


derp.
 
2013-01-03 06:53:45 PM  

Fluorescent Testicle: Sidenote: Why are all the Politics tab threads being greened here instead?


Fox hate is always greened. This is fark.
 
2013-01-03 06:55:01 PM  
spiderpaz

garkola: For all the Democrats are like "hey, who cares", here's a tip: the Ambassador was killed in the attack, which doesn't happen often, and is a pretty big deal...except in the case of this poor schmuck, who got himself killed in an election year.

I understand no Ambassador actually died during the Bush years, but there were A LOT of these types of attacks where Americans died:
June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomat

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb. One killed and 13 wounded.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.

Oh yeah - and there was that whole WTC Bin Laden attack that Bush ignored warnings of. If you are not outraged by any of the above attacks and didn't voice it back then, we all can safely assume you are nothing but a shill carrying water for the right wing because ... you're pathetic I guess.


Get a clue and understand what the issues are. Embassies get attacked and people die all the time. Thats not the issue no matter how much you attempt to deflect it.

Issues

1. Stevens requested more security because of chatter and the 9/11 anniversary. State Dept denied request.
2. Once attack was on a request for aid went out, drones were in the area (remember the live feeds of the attacks to the WH) and strike fighters couple hours
away in Italy. Why no aid given, who gave order to not help?
3. Blaming a youtube video as a cause for the attack and calling it a spontaneous attack because of that video. While it takes time to determine causes and reasons for the attack, why didn't the WH and State dept say "We are investigating and will let you know" instead they lead with a story about a film. Who made that call since it was obviously a lie to deflect the blame from terrorist attack (and public asking "How stupid are you guys not to anticipate an attack on 9/11") to a spontaneous eruption due to an internet video (given most of those people don't have indoor plumbing and are dirt poor but they do have laptops and wifi to see the video)


Where's the crime and cover up as bacon guy asked. Well you don't need a crime to have a cover up - Just ask Bill Clinton and Scooter Libby who faced no criminal charges until they lied covering up embarrassing situations.

There may be no crime here and it is probably a lack of leadership on Clinton and Panetta's part. But the public and the families of the slain deserve answers as to why the reluctance to call it an act of terror, why help didn't come when the WH and State saw the attack on live feed, why was Steven's request for more security denied and why the rush to lie and call it a spontaneous attack as a result of an internet video. Criminal no, embarrassing yes but maybe some people need to have their decision making and leadership examined in the bright light the exposure of the issues bring.

The dead American Ambassador and 3 other dead Americans deserved better leadership, they didn't deserved to be killed when no help came, stripped naked and dragged through the streets and then have their bodies anally raped and desecrated even further.
 
2013-01-03 06:56:19 PM  

crawlspace: 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.


...because Hillary has been repeating administration lies that served as the excuse to invade Libya?
 
2013-01-03 06:58:13 PM  

Buffalo77: spiderpaz

garkola: For all the Democrats are like "hey, who cares", here's a tip: the Ambassador was killed in the attack, which doesn't happen often, and is a pretty big deal...except in the case of this poor schmuck, who got himself killed in an election year.

I understand no Ambassador actually died during the Bush years, but there were A LOT of these types of attacks where Americans died:
June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomat

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb. One killed and 13 wounded.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.

Oh yeah - and there was that whole WTC Bin Laden attack that Bush ignored warnings of. If you are not outraged by any of the above attacks and didn't voice it back then, we all can safely assume you are nothing but a shill carrying water for the right wing because ... you're pathetic I guess.

Get a clue and understand what the issues are. Embassies get attacked and people die all the time. Thats not the issue no matter how much you attempt to deflect it ...


Your phony concern is noted.
 
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