Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Washington Post)   Special Ops were told not to respond to Benghazi attacks. It might actually be a scandal now   ( washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Benghazi, U.S., Benghazi attacks, Jason Chaffetz, diplomats  
•       •       •

6509 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 May 2013 at 7:24 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



681 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-05-06 05:30:56 PM  
It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.
 
2013-05-06 05:45:43 PM  
At this point, it is the other way around. They do NOT work for us.
 
2013-05-06 05:46:29 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.


As we've been over, if they'd shown up as soon as they could have, they would have arrived just in time to be killed by mortar fire.

And then Republicans would be talking about how Obama didn't just sit and watch Americans die, he ORDERED them to die.
 
2013-05-06 05:47:28 PM  
 
2013-05-06 05:58:19 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.


So more youtube views equals more credibility?

Techno Viking is now the authority on everything.
 
2013-05-06 05:59:41 PM  
IMPEACH YOU COWARDS!
 
2013-05-06 05:59:51 PM  
Looks like we won't have to deal with another Clinton getting blowjobs during their presidency.
 
2013-05-06 06:02:47 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Looks like we won't have to deal with another Clinton getting blowjobs during their presidency.


I doubt it.  Weren't F14s told to stand down on 9-11?  Sure didn't stop Dubya from getting a second term and farking this country in the ass with Cheney's dick.
 
2013-05-06 06:03:03 PM  
4 Special Operators? They already killed two ex-SEALs. Did you want a higher body count?

Jesus. And the reason they couldn't get a team from Europe was time. It was over before they could even write the OPORD. They don't just throw people into the fire. They need at least SOME time to prep before they get dropped.

The whole timeline was laid out already. Jets and 4 Green Hats? Yes, what a horrific scandal. I'm now ashamed to be a Real American.
 
2013-05-06 06:03:03 PM  
When you go on witch hunts you leave not until you find your witch.

TBH, this really aint shiat. This is what is called "reaching".
 
2013-05-06 06:07:04 PM  
There's nothing new here - all this information was already released and, despite Republican attempts to turn in into a mountain, is actually a molehill.
 
2013-05-06 06:10:04 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?


Why does that make it a scandal? Why is the initial assumption that the attacks were caused by that video, which were the cause of other attacks around the ME, how is that a scandal?
 
2013-05-06 06:11:59 PM  
It might actually be a scandal now

No, no it won't. Sorry.
 
2013-05-06 06:13:16 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Weren't F14s told to stand down on 9-11?


IOKIYAR
 
2013-05-06 06:14:01 PM  
Let's say the GOP and their tinfoil brigade is correct: what was the motive again? Is it still that Obama is a muslim usurper?

What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?
 
2013-05-06 06:14:35 PM  
Can one of the "this is a SCANDAL!!!" folks tell me what they think would have been accomplished by this?  Do you armchair generals really think that the State Dept. dude's decision was countermanded by the military on a whim?  Or, just maybe, they looked at the situation and realized sending in four extra guys was pointless and would only lead to another "Blackhawk Down" scenario.
 
2013-05-06 06:15:14 PM  

I Said: Let's say the GOP and their tinfoil brigade is correct: what was the motive again? Is it still that Obama is a muslim usurper?

What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?


"Now watch this drive"
 
2013-05-06 06:20:31 PM  
bitlogic.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 06:20:35 PM  

timujin: Can one of the "this is a SCANDAL!!!" folks tell me what they think would have been accomplished by this?  Do you armchair generals really think that the State Dept. dude's decision was countermanded by the military on a whim?  Or, just maybe, they looked at the situation and realized sending in four extra guys was pointless and would only lead to another "Blackhawk Down" scenario.


I think this is the same as the birther crew, where every week there was some new evidence that Obama was born on Tatooine to jawas, and their little circle-jerk of sleuths would shout "AHA! Now we have the evidence that will lead to him being impeached and Sarah Palin being President and no black people in the whitehouse ever again ever", only to be crushed when they find that once again no one cares and everyone thinks they're insane.
 
2013-05-06 06:25:20 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: At this point, it is the other way around. They do NOT work for us.


jacquelicious.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 06:26:46 PM  

I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?


Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.
 
2013-05-06 06:27:16 PM  
Not sending troops into a confusing situation where they could have made things much worse by firing on civilians is a scandal?
Nope. Not a scandal.
 
2013-05-06 06:28:02 PM  

DamnYankees: I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.


Yes, because it takes brass balls to send other people out to die.
 
2013-05-06 06:29:04 PM  

DamnYankees: I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.


I'm sure Osama bin Laden will be happy to hear that
 
2013-05-06 06:30:32 PM  

DamnYankees: I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.


You're gonna get a lot of hits with that. Nice.
 
2013-05-06 06:41:42 PM  
Still not a scandal. If it were - they'd impeach.
 
2013-05-06 06:41:56 PM  

DamnYankees: I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.


Don't look out our window.  I think I saw a Predator Drone in your area.
 
2013-05-06 06:42:37 PM  

DamnYankees: I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.


*titter* hehehehheheheeee
 
2013-05-06 06:43:27 PM  
bitlogic.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 06:46:06 PM  

DamnYankees: I Said: What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

Democrats are cowards who are afraid to use military force.


Then why the right wing hissy fit for sending air support into Lybia or using drones in Pakistan and Yemen
 
2013-05-06 06:46:36 PM  
troycitydesign.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 06:47:30 PM  
"I can can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. And that's the same order I would give any time that I see Americans are in danger - whether they're civilian or military - because that's our number one priority." ~ Obama
 
2013-05-06 06:49:29 PM  

SkinnyHead: "I can can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. And that's the same order I would give any time that I see Americans are in danger - whether they're civilian or military - because that's our number one priority." ~ Obama


And at what hour, exactly, was he told?
 
2013-05-06 06:51:49 PM  
"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton
 
2013-05-06 06:53:24 PM  
Not this sh#t again.
 
2013-05-06 06:55:00 PM  

SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton


Your so cute!
 
2013-05-06 06:57:51 PM  
troycitydesign.comView Full Size
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-05-06 07:03:24 PM  

SkinnyHead: "I can can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. And that's the same order I would give any time that I see Americans are in danger - whether they're civilian or military - because that's our number one priority." ~ Obama


So strip the embassy of security to get revenge for an attack on a consulate?  I'll bet you guys would love it if both were overrun, right?
 
2013-05-06 07:03:49 PM  

NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.


... the attack lasted for hours.
 
2013-05-06 07:08:52 PM  
The derpers who are going to seize on this "interrogate the prisoner" to the original Red Dawn and are sure in their hearts that they'll be dispatching an M1A2 Main Battle Tank with Paw's over-under before repopulating Real America with the handicap lane checker what for down the Piggly Wiggly.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-05-06 07:09:16 PM  

impaler: The only scandal is how Republican scum are trying to make it a scandal.


Yes, but it might work.  There are plenty of BS artificial scandals that have.
 
2013-05-06 07:11:05 PM  

SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton


Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?
 
2013-05-06 07:12:42 PM  

Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.


Right, and people with active knowledge of how a Team deploys says they could not have been their in time. Don't you think the President asked SecDef that question FIRST? I do.

If there was an actionable plan it would have been carried out. It wasn't operationally realistic.

Especially this 4 guys thing. That's just f*cking retarded.
 
2013-05-06 07:12:58 PM  

vpb: There are plenty of BS artificial scandals that have.


ACORN!
 
2013-05-06 07:13:58 PM  

NewportBarGuy: their


MY KINGDOM FOR A GODDAMN EDIT BUTTON!"!NDSDFJNODFSDMLFD

There
 
2013-05-06 07:18:57 PM  

Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.


http://wonkette.com/514824/fox-news-expert-outlines-benghazi-rescue- pl an-that-would-have-worked-great-except-for-the-time-travel-part

The ambassador was killed 30 minutes after the President was briefed. How the hell is he supposed to prep a team and get them there and engaged in 30 minutes?
 
2013-05-06 07:19:57 PM  
NewportBarGuy:
The ambassador was killed 30 minutes after the President was briefed. How the hell is he supposed to prep a team and get them there and engaged in 30 minutes?

magic of course.
 
2013-05-06 07:20:55 PM  

Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.


Stuff in the military takes time, and people tend to want at least a platoon to deal with a company-sized assault. Finally, hours maybe so, but it still wasn't enough time to arm aircraft and get them there.
 
2013-05-06 07:22:20 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.

http://wonkette.com/514824/fox-news-expert-outlines-benghazi-rescue- pl an-that-would-have-worked-great-except-for-the-time-travel-part

The ambassador was killed 30 minutes after the President was briefed. How the hell is he supposed to prep a team and get them there and engaged in 30 minutes?


You had to ask?
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 07:24:18 PM  
And we STILL haven't invaded anyone? SCANDAL!

"I want seven hearings a week, times 40 weeks."

www1.pictures.zimbio.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 07:28:10 PM  
Defense Department officials have said they had no units that could have responded in time to counter the attack in Benghazi
 
2013-05-06 07:28:52 PM  
Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.
 
2013-05-06 07:29:38 PM  

Sir-Marx-A-Lot: Defense Department officials have said they had no units that could have responded in time to counter the attack in Benghazi


The Defense Department hates Foggy Bottom, duh. It's a conspiracy!
 
2013-05-06 07:30:34 PM  
It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.
 
2013-05-06 07:30:54 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.


I'm with you man! Those Bilderbergers really have us by the balls!
 
2013-05-06 07:34:30 PM  
You know how I know it's a scandal? All the left winger's voices going up four octaves and 100 dB shrieking that it isn't.
 
2013-05-06 07:36:04 PM  
KFTC.
 
2013-05-06 07:38:15 PM  

Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?


The GOP needs a scandal, so - it's a scandal.  it's just that simple.
 
2013-05-06 07:39:30 PM  
In unrelated news, Darryl "Jesus" looks pleased as he demonstrates the Blessing of the Dildos, using the two fixed dildos in the foreground. Note that press members brought their own from home to get theirs blessed, too.

www1.pictures.zimbio.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 07:40:14 PM  

cman: When you go on witch hunts you leave not until you find your witch.

TBH, this really aint shiat. This is what is called "reaching".


It is not reaching. Actual documents show reports of al queda links were scrubbed from reports clinton told congress there were no terrorist links until sept 23. She was on a memo for al queda links on sept 11. She lied. Why do liberals ignore this. The administration lied publicly, arrested tbe movie maker, for what? Election year politics.
 
2013-05-06 07:40:19 PM  

Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.


Not only that, but there were repeated smaller attacks on the building by known groups in the proceeding days, yet reports to DC about the growing threat and requests for further security were ignored and denied.
 
2013-05-06 07:41:08 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.


what does government people getting killed by foreigners have to do with government people oppressing the proletariat?
 
2013-05-06 07:41:22 PM  

jjorsett: You know how I know it's a scandal? All the left winger's voices going up four octaves and 100 dB shrieking that it isn't.


no, everyone NOT a glen beck follower is scratching their heads trying to figure out what the GOP is trying to do here.
 
2013-05-06 07:41:34 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.


Except when it's a Republican administration. Then they are just bending the rules to keep us safe, and no further.
 
2013-05-06 07:41:52 PM  
The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.
 
2013-05-06 07:42:29 PM  

randomjsa: Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.


How many Goddmaned times does everyone have to ask this, how was this a cover up?
 
2013-05-06 07:43:04 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.


kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.
 
2013-05-06 07:43:06 PM  
AdolfOliverPanties:  Weren't F14s told to stand down on 9-11?  Sure didn't stop Dubya from getting a second term and farking this country in the ass with Cheney's dick.

i.imgur.comView Full Size


Uh, no. Not that I've seen. If this is true, I would like to see a citation from a reputable source.
 
2013-05-06 07:43:11 PM  
If the right had pushed the sentiment that this was a massive failure on the administration versus a scandal they might have gotten something out of it other than looking like giant douchebags.

The fact that, over 6 months later, they are still trying to make it a scandal shows that they got absolutely nothin'. At this point a real scandal could be laid at their feet and they wouldn't even notice it due to their anti-Obama zealotry and laser focus on the embassy attack.

As somebody else pointed out way early in this thread, what's the endgame for this 'scandal' anyways? What possible motive could the State Dept., and Obama by extension, have to cover anything up about this attack, politically speaking? What a bunch of whacked out partisans.
 
2013-05-06 07:43:24 PM  

AdamK: feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.

what does government people getting killed by foreigners have to do with government people oppressing the proletariat?


Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.
 
2013-05-06 07:43:32 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton

Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?


Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.  Hillary suggested two alternatives: (1) a protest or (2) guys out for a walk at night who decided to kill Americans.  If that was the threat assessment, that might explain why the Obama administration gave the stand down order.  Maybe they did not feel that a military response was necessary because the whole thing could have just been some guys out for a walk.
 
2013-05-06 07:43:57 PM  

randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.


So you're satisfied, right? You'll shut up now, right? Romney's on his way to claim his throne, your republican paradise is imminent. I know that was the whole point of this. Thank Kolob we'll finally have a TRUTHTELLER watching over this great Christian nation, right?
 
2013-05-06 07:44:25 PM  

HeWhoHasNoName: Not only that, but there were repeated smaller attacks on the building by known groups in the proceeding days, yet reports to DC about the growing threat and requests for further security were ignored and denied.


Which, as already has been stated, was NOT brought to the decision makers. Hillary tried to fire those people responsible and ran into the federal unions (of which I'm a part). She could not fire them and wanted to, i feel her pain. I'd love to fire some incompetent people we have. It's a long process and defends the weak at the expense of the good workers. She asked the very same Republican Congressman and Senators "I've asked you for a way to fire these people for failing in their job." They had no response.

I watched the hearings and read the reports. Obviously, because you care so much, you haven't.
 
2013-05-06 07:44:31 PM  

Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.


Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.
 
2013-05-06 07:45:04 PM  

doyner: SkinnyHead: "I can can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. And that's the same order I would give any time that I see Americans are in danger - whether they're civilian or military - because that's our number one priority." ~ Obama

And at what hour, exactly, was he told?


He was told at 630pm on Sept 11th.  Then went to bed to make sure he'd be up in time for his two fundraisers the next day.  He spent more time preparing for fundraisers than finding out what was going on during a terrorist attack against one of his diplomats.
 
2013-05-06 07:45:44 PM  

SkinnyHead: Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.


Small arms and mortar fire, probably some RPGs. Next.
 
2013-05-06 07:46:53 PM  

MyRandomName: He spent more time preparing for fundraisers than finding out what was going on during a terrorist attack against one of his diplomats.


Wow. You're on the White House Staff? I'm impressed!
 
2013-05-06 07:47:14 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.


ew.  why would anyone want that?
 
2013-05-06 07:47:17 PM  
Why did the GOP demand the consulate be stripped of security?

Why did they deny funding for consulate security?
 
2013-05-06 07:47:21 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then.


No.  Sorry.  Still not a scandal.

Back to the drawing board.
 
2013-05-06 07:48:13 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.


==

Preview of Tomorrow: A response team was sent to Benghazi; according to the State Department's report, "the seven-person response team from Embassy Tripoli ... arrived at the Annex about 0500 local. Less than fifteen minutes later, the Annex came under mortar and RPG attack, with five mortar rounds impacting close together in under 90 seconds." Hicks doesn't say that the CIA issued stand down orders, let alone twice. He says that a jet was never scrambled to fly over the city (which we knew) and that a second team, one that arrived too late, should have gotten there faster.

How is this an impeachable offense? Seriously, lay it all out for me. I'm all about the government pulling lots of shiat its not supposed to...that's nothing new to anyone who's studied American history. But where is the actual scandal here in this case? Solyndra made more sense than this.
 
2013-05-06 07:50:22 PM  

MyRandomName: doyner: SkinnyHead: "I can can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. And that's the same order I would give any time that I see Americans are in danger - whether they're civilian or military - because that's our number one priority." ~ Obama

And at what hour, exactly, was he told?

He was told at 630pm on Sept 11th.  Then went to bed to make sure he'd be up in time for his two fundraisers the next day.  He spent more time preparing for fundraisers than finding out what was going on during a terrorist attack against one of his diplomats.


What, precisely should he have been doing? Flying to Benghazi himself? FFS, he has an entire State and Justice department for that. Jesus Christ, the President of the United States does not have to drop everything and put on a superhero uniform every time an American dies.
 
2013-05-06 07:50:42 PM  

Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.

ew.  why would anyone want that?


Apparently cheesey missed the bajillion times you've expressed your dislike of Hillary over the past decade.
 
2013-05-06 07:51:47 PM  

Somacandra: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.

==

Preview of Tomorrow: A response team was sent to Benghazi; according to the State Department's report, "the seven-person response team from Embassy Tripoli ... arrived at the Annex about 0500 local. Less than fifteen minutes later, the Annex came under mortar and RPG attack, with five mortar rounds impacting close together in under 90 seconds." Hicks doesn't say that the CIA issued stand down orders, let alone twice. He says that a jet was never scrambled to fly over the city (which we knew) and that a second team, one that arrived too late, should have gotten there faster.

How is this an impeachable offense? Seriously, lay it all out for me. I'm all about the government pulling lots of shiat its not supposed to...that's nothing new to anyone who's studied American history. But where is the actual scandal here in this case? Solyndra made more sense than this.


Ineptitude seems to be a common thread.  Let's go with that. More is coming.
 
2013-05-06 07:52:33 PM  

I Said: Let's say the GOP and their tinfoil brigade is correct: what was the motive again? Is it still that Obama is a muslim usurper?

What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?


As I said in one of the other dozen threads about this today:
Here's the bottom line of the whole Benghazi thang. What they want is for B. Hussein Obama to publicly state "this was the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history, and I am completely responsible for it. Not just 'responsible' in the sense that it happened during my administration, but personally responsible. I purposely planned for the attack to happen by allowing my Muslim Brothers easy access to the consulate. And I purposely prevented anyone from defending our brave citizens because I wanted al-Qaeda to kill Americans. Allhu akbar!"
 
2013-05-06 07:53:51 PM  

randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.


=

Actual Transcript of Rose Garden Remarks: "As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

What about this is a bald-faced lie? Point it out specifically and unambiguously.
 
2013-05-06 07:54:05 PM  

randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.


Citation needed. Again.

Which most liberals do.

C-  generic bullshiat generalization. You can do better young man.

They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi

Because Barack Hussein Obango personally cut the State Department security budget, and ordered the staff of the Benghazi Consulate to abandon their posts and sit in the yard and chant Kumbaya, with pork chops around their necks. C+ no originality

, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected.

Pulled out of ass, D-.

Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House. Republicans can demonstrate, somehow, that Obango is a threat to Our Way Of Life.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.

Democrats asked for Republicans to stop the constant "Let's vote to repeal ObamaCare" votes, so this is what they have shifted to. Today. I'm sure when this mud fails to stick after 6 months or so, they'll go back to voting ObamaCare out again.

\I'm sure you still have those lawyers from the Whitewater investigation on payroll somewhere
\\send 'em to Chicago, and let 'em fish for dirt for a few years like you did the last time a D was in office
\\\my cousin's husband was one of them, and made damn good money chasing shadows for the government
 
2013-05-06 07:54:42 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.

ew.  why would anyone want that?

Apparently cheesey missed the bajillion times you've expressed your dislike of Hillary over the past decade.


I don't swim in this this cesspool on a regular basis, so maybe you got me there.
 
2013-05-06 07:54:59 PM  

Somacandra: How is this an impeachable offense?


If a Republican commits an impeachable offense, they must insist the following Democrat is impeachable in order to dilute the value of the accusation.
 
2013-05-06 07:55:36 PM  
If Republicans had behaved responsibly over the past 5 years instead of trolling for outrage, they could have quietly and constructively used this episode to improve security, and then credibly campaigned in 2016 that they take security more seriously than Democrats.

But instead they're so bent on sabotaging Obama (and Hillary in 2016) that they've lost all credibility.
 
2013-05-06 07:55:40 PM  

CheapEngineer: Democrats asked for Republicans to stop the constant "Let's vote to repeal ObamaCare" votes, so this is what they have shifted to.


Fear not!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/03/house-obamacare-repeal_n_32 10 603.html
 
2013-05-06 07:55:57 PM  

Somacandra: randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

=

Actual Transcript of Rose Garden Remarks: "As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

What about this is a bald-faced lie? Point it out specifically and unambiguously.


One could argue that this has occurred, but I'm just splitting hairs.  Ho hum.
 
2013-05-06 07:56:10 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Ineptitude seems to be a common thread. Let's go with that. More is coming.


How is this "ineptitude" ? Lay it all out for me. Right here. That's an invitation.
 
2013-05-06 07:56:25 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Lionel Mandrake: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.

ew.  why would anyone want that?

Apparently cheesey missed the bajillion times you've expressed your dislike of Hillary over the past decade.

I don't swim in this this cesspool on a regular basis, so maybe you got me there.


So you commit ad hominems out of ignorance? Doesn't sound like you're doing your side any favors, son.
 
2013-05-06 07:56:28 PM  

NewportBarGuy: SkinnyHead: Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.

Small arms and mortar fire, probably some RPGs. Next.


Yes, but Hillary probably didn't anticipate that they would be so heavily armed.  Hillary believed that that attack was a spontaneous event, coming from either a protest group or guys out for a walk.  You don't expect guys going to a protest or out for a stroll to be carrying mortars and RPGs.
 
2013-05-06 07:57:14 PM  
It's kind of depressing that we elected such a Boy Scout like Obama that this is the most dirt they can pin to the guy. It's just so boring and lame. I want him doing lines of coke off Beyonce's ass in the Lincoln bedroom, or at the very least tweeting pictures of his balls on cherished American historical artifacts. That'd be a fun scandal, Obama tea bagging the Betsy Ross flag.
 
2013-05-06 07:58:33 PM  
Oh man, Obama's never going to get re-elected now.
 
2013-05-06 07:59:20 PM  
Oh, now I see. The GOP didn't get it's "October Surprise" for Obama 2012, but they might be able to drag down Hillary 2016.
 
2013-05-06 08:00:31 PM  

CheapEngineer: randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Citation needed. Again.


Or the fact that it doesn't make any sense.

"I was going to vote to re-elect Barack Obama if the attack in Libya was motivated by an anti-Islamic video, but since it was actually motivated by just good ol' fashioned anti-Americanism, I'm not."

Who the fark thinks like that?
 
2013-05-06 08:00:55 PM  
Why was overseas consulate security funding reduced!?

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

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

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


OK, and so it's also Fartbama has his own private army in Iraq, eh?
 
2013-05-06 08:01:06 PM  

deffuse: One could argue that this has occurred, but I'm just splitting hairs. Ho hum.


Pricipal . Caught sayof fighter jets that has stoped scrambling " See, told ya so" Is Benghazi scandal or not. Gregory Hicks Says yes. Washington Post Looking for stand down -OR- "hello, I am write single to testify and wait for chickensex again"
 
2013-05-06 08:01:22 PM  
the real scandal is that bush, cheney, and rumsfeld aren't on trial in the hague
 
2013-05-06 08:01:47 PM  
A lot of farkers have 8 months of egg on their face.  Its actually past the point of 'I told you so' and into just sad territory.  I just feel pitiful for you guys.  Under a delusion for 8 months.
 
2013-05-06 08:02:02 PM  

Sgt Otter: CheapEngineer: randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Citation needed. Again.

Or the fact that it doesn't make any sense.

"I was going to vote to re-elect Barack Obama if the attack in Libya was motivated by an anti-Islamic video, but since it was actually motivated by just good ol' fashioned anti-Americanism, I'm not."

Who the fark thinks like that?


troycitydesign.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:02:09 PM  
75,000% more people died on the real 9-11.
 
2013-05-06 08:02:57 PM  

vygramul: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Lionel Mandrake: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.

ew.  why would anyone want that?

Apparently cheesey missed the bajillion times you've expressed your dislike of Hillary over the past decade.

I don't swim in this this cesspool on a regular basis, so maybe you got me there.

So you commit ad hominems out of ignorance? Doesn't sound like you're doing your side any favors, son.


Yea well, it's not like Weaver didn't deserve it anyway.
 
2013-05-06 08:03:39 PM  
How do we know this is not a scandal? Because all the right wing roaches on this site are crawling out to insist it is.
 
2013-05-06 08:03:40 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.

http://wonkette.com/514824/fox-news-expert-outlines-benghazi-rescue- pl an-that-would-have-worked-great-except-for-the-time-travel-part

The ambassador was killed 30 minutes after the President was briefed. How the hell is he supposed to prep a team and get them there and engaged in 30 minutes?


This proves Obama is histories greatest monster. We all KNOW he has access to time travel technology. How else did he did he plant his birth announcement in that Hawaii newspaper.
 
2013-05-06 08:04:07 PM  

pacified: 75,000% more people died on the real 9-11.


Math has a well-known liberal bias, commie.
 
2013-05-06 08:04:28 PM  

Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.

ew.  why would anyone want that?


A little sweet talk and Bill can join in?
 
2013-05-06 08:04:29 PM  
The only way this could possibly be a scandal is if they can prove that Obama, personally, had troops stand down for the express purpose of getting these folks killed, or that he somehow thought that these people being killed would have some sort of political benefit.

In other words, there's no scandal.  Were mistakes made?  Hell, having diplomats in that shiathole country was their first one.  But the simple, sad fact of the matter was that we can't control everything and we can't win every single battle.

The only way Benghazi is a "scandal" is because people with Obama Derangement Syndrome desperately want this to be true.  Maybe then people will stop calling them racist teatards.
 
2013-05-06 08:04:39 PM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: I want him doing lines of coke off Beyonce's ass in the Lincoln bedroom, or at the very least tweeting pictures of his balls on cherished American historical artifacts.


Wait until he pardons Leonard Peltier on the way out the door. Holy shiat you'll see Fox crapping fire and saving matches.
 
2013-05-06 08:04:42 PM  
SCANDAL: they weren't deployed when the ambassador was already dead and it was hours past when it mattered. Maybe they could have saved two more American lives, maybe. Department of State gave the green light, but their own military commanders put the breaks on. The ARB (Accountability Review Board) was to find who in the state department was responsible... several people resigned, including the congressionally appointed guy who was in charge of security. Congress isn't looking for responsibility at this point, they're just trying to find some way to hang this farking albatross around Obama, but they still haven't got one.
 
2013-05-06 08:04:54 PM  
charlock.orgView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:06:25 PM  

MyRandomName: He was told at 630pm on Sept 11th. Then went to bed to make sure he'd be up in time for his two fundraisers the next day. He spent more time preparing for fundraisers than finding out what was going on during a terrorist attack against one of his diplomats.


He was told at around the time that the two fatalities at the consulate were killed?  And those 4 extra troops would have been able to arrive when?  The additional two fatalities occurred at 5:15am.  Could they have traveled 600 miles before that?

Please explain to me how this is a scandal.  The only thing that seems remotely scandalous is how the information was relayed to the public, and as it was an active investigation, that doesn't bother me.  I'm ok with the temporary withholding of information if there's a chance it could make it harder to find those accountable.  Point out where, exactly, your concern is.
 
2013-05-06 08:06:39 PM  

SkinnyHead: AdolfOliverPanties: SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton

Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?

Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.  Hillary suggested two alternatives: (1) a protest or (2) guys out for a walk at night who decided to kill Americans.  If that was the threat assessment, that might explain why the Obama administration gave the stand down order.  Maybe they did not feel that a military response was necessary because the whole thing could have just been some guys out for a walk.


How is it different? We could defend the compound, or defend the compound. You do know he gave the stand down order after it was quite obvious it was too late to send in someone who would make any sort of difference.
 
2013-05-06 08:07:28 PM  
Who cares? That was a long time ago.
 
2013-05-06 08:08:22 PM  

Somacandra: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Ineptitude seems to be a common thread. Let's go with that. More is coming.

How is this "ineptitude" ? Lay it all out for me. Right here. That's an invitation.


Be patient.
 
2013-05-06 08:09:10 PM  

NewportBarGuy: 4 Special Operators? They already killed two ex-SEALs. Did you want a higher body count?


Dropping a couple of special operations guys into the middle of a well-armed, angry mob.  Hmm, that sounds familiar.

badassoftheweek.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:09:24 PM  

Zeppelininthesky: How is it different? We could defend the compound, or defend the compound. You do know he gave the stand down order after it was quite obvious it was too late to send in someone who would make any sort of difference.



He saw a movie once. He's a military expert. You should defer to his judgement.
 
2013-05-06 08:11:07 PM  

Sir-Marx-A-Lot: Defense Department officials have said they had no units that could have responded in time to counter the attack in Benghazi


Well the new allegation is that they could have responded hours after the Ambassador and one other guy were killed, and maybe, just maybe, it would have magically been less of a scandal that way.
 
2013-05-06 08:11:25 PM  

firefly212: The ARB (Accountability Review Board) was to find who in the state department was responsible... several people resigned, including the congressionally appointed guy who was in charge of security. Congress isn't looking for responsibility at this point, they're just trying to find some way to hang this farking albatross around Obama, but they still haven't got one.


I think they're still pissed that Hillary biatchslapped them over a full day's testimony. Its really about Clinton, not Obama. Its another attempt to poison the well for the future.
 
2013-05-06 08:12:36 PM  

Sgt Otter: Dropping a couple of special operations guys into the middle of a well-armed, angry mob. Hmm, that sounds familiar.

www.badassoftheweek.com


Sigh...

The quote from that movie, though I hear it's unclear if Plato actually said it...

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." -Plato

These are the people whom forget history and want us to repeat it. The rest of us are sitting in the passenger seat screaming at them.

You don't just dump guys into a conflict without adequate preparation and sufficient support in place. That takes way longer than the window allowed here. I wish they would just shut the f*ck up already.

Especially Lindsey Graham. F*cking JAG thinks he's Rambo.
 
2013-05-06 08:13:14 PM  

feckingmorons: It was a scandal then.


No, it wasn't.

Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

No. Was that a requirement for not considering it a scandal?

/
thelastofthemillenniums.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:13:17 PM  
the deputy head of the embassy in Tripoli 600 miles away sought in vain to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets over Benghazi in a show of force that he said might have averted a second attack on a nearby CIA complex.

In other words, the first attack--the one that killed the Ambassador and three others--had already happened and they were dead. So the show of force would not have saved them and only "might" have averted a second attack; or it might have merely escalated the situation.

Hours later, according to excerpts of the account by the U.S. diplomat, Gregory Hicks, American officials in the Libyan capital sought permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops to Benghazi aboard a Libyan military aircraft early the next morning. The troops were told to stand down.

In other words, after the first attack was over--and the Ambassador and three others were dead--officials 600 miles away wanted to send four whole people to Benghazi the next day--not at the time, but even later than the request they were making. They wanted to send FOUR PEOPLE, IN A FEW MORE HOURS.

It's not a scandal, people. It's not even news.
 
2013-05-06 08:14:09 PM  

Zeppelininthesky: SkinnyHead: AdolfOliverPanties: SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton

Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?

Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.  Hillary suggested two alternatives: (1) a protest or (2) guys out for a walk at night who decided to kill Americans.  If that was the threat assessment, that might explain why the Obama administration gave the stand down order.  Maybe they did not feel that a military response was necessary because the whole thing could have just been some guys out for a walk.

How is it different? We could defend the compound, or defend the compound. You do know he gave the stand down order after it was quite obvious it was too late to send in someone who would make any sort of difference.


The Obama administration also gave the spin up order... that's the part that these knuckleheads don't want to acknowledge.... they gave the spin up order (State gave it from all indications), then DoD told them to stand down when it was obvious that even before departure, the four guys would not be able to save a guy who was already dead and a facility that was already lost hours before.
 
2013-05-06 08:14:33 PM  

SkinnyHead: AdolfOliverPanties: SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton

Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?

Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.  Hillary suggested two alternatives: (1) a protest or (2) guys out for a walk at night who decided to kill Americans.  If that was the threat assessment, that might explain why the Obama administration gave the stand down order.  Maybe they did not feel that a military response was necessary because the whole thing could have just been some guys out for a walk.


OK we got 12 to 20 atackers with small arms and motars and RPGs. Surrounding the compound and firing. OK let's deploy a seal team for standard counter manuevers.....Oh wait, you say the attackers are motivated by thier hatred of our freedoms.....Scrap that, let's parachute in Andy Dick, 2000 liters of hot sauce and a cactus.
 
2013-05-06 08:14:51 PM  
obummer COULD have called out the Iron Patriot but no. no, he did not. because this scandal is a false flag to distract from real scandals that we know nothing about yet. but we will. oh yes we will

i0.wp.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:15:12 PM  
Is that youtube guy still in jail? He sure is keeping a low profile.
 
2013-05-06 08:16:23 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Be patient.


i.imgur.comView Full Size


In other words, you've got nothing and you know it so you're just threadshiatting.
 
2013-05-06 08:17:40 PM  

NewportBarGuy: jjorsett: You know how I know it's a scandal? Because I devoured lead paint chips as a kid.

^This!


I loled.
 
2013-05-06 08:18:02 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Sgt Otter: Dropping a couple of special operations guys into the middle of a well-armed, angry mob. Hmm, that sounds familiar.

www.badassoftheweek.com

Sigh...

The quote from that movie, though I hear it's unclear if Plato actually said it...

"Only the dead have seen the end of war." -Plato

These are the people whom forget history and want us to repeat it. The rest of us are sitting in the passenger seat screaming at them.

You don't just dump guys into a conflict without adequate preparation and sufficient support in place. That takes way longer than the window allowed here. I wish they would just shut the f*ck up already.

Especially Lindsey Graham. F*cking JAG thinks he's Rambo.


4 dudes by themselves in a farking mob isn't a solution, it's a sequel to blackhawk down. Never put guys in without a plan to get them back out. Good on whatever c/o said fark no to sending four guys in to claim dead bodies and a destroyed office building, not worth four more dead servicemen.
 
2013-05-06 08:18:34 PM  

badhatharry: Who cares? That was a long time ago.


It is still not a scandal, despite your highest hopes. I know your butt hurts, but for the sake of the rest of the world, stop lying.
 
2013-05-06 08:18:41 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Weaver95: Lt. Cheese Weasel: The lights are on and the roaches are scattering.

kind of a harsh characterization of the GOP but...ok.  if that's how you wanna play it.

Hillary still is not going to sleep with you, no matter how much you try.


No, but I suspect Paul Ryan might sleep with you.

Not that there's anything wrong with that...
 
2013-05-06 08:18:46 PM  
For the last Goddamned time, how is this a scandal? Just tell us, even if it's a lame ass reason. Just something, please.
 
2013-05-06 08:19:08 PM  

Zeppelininthesky: SkinnyHead: AdolfOliverPanties: SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton

Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?

Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.  Hillary suggested two alternatives: (1) a protest or (2) guys out for a walk at night who decided to kill Americans.  If that was the threat assessment, that might explain why the Obama administration gave the stand down order.  Maybe they did not feel that a military response was necessary because the whole thing could have just been some guys out for a walk.

How is it different? We could defend the compound, or defend the compound. You do know he gave the stand down order after it was quite obvious it was too late to send in someone who would make any sort of difference.


Are you asking whether there is a difference between Hillary's protest theory and her guys-out-walking theory, or are you asking if there is a difference between those two theories and what really happened?
 
2013-05-06 08:20:29 PM  

Gyrfalcon: the deputy head of the embassy in Tripoli 600 miles away sought in vain to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets over Benghazi in a show of force that he said might have averted a second attack on a nearby CIA complex.

In other words, the first attack--the one that killed the Ambassador and three others--had already happened and they were dead. So the show of force would not have saved them and only "might" have averted a second attack; or it might have merely escalated the situation.

Hours later, according to excerpts of the account by the U.S. diplomat, Gregory Hicks, American officials in the Libyan capital sought permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops to Benghazi aboard a Libyan military aircraft early the next morning. The troops were told to stand down.

In other words, after the first attack was over--and the Ambassador and three others were dead--officials 600 miles away wanted to send four whole people to Benghazi the next day--not at the time, but even later than the request they were making. They wanted to send FOUR PEOPLE, IN A FEW MORE HOURS.

It's not a scandal, people. It's not even news.


Gyrfalcon: the deputy head of the embassy in Tripoli 600 miles away sought in vain to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets over Benghazi in a show of force that he said might have averted a second attack on a nearby CIA complex.

In other words, the first attack--the one that killed the Ambassador and three others--had already happened and they were dead. So the show of force would not have saved them and only "might" have averted a second attack; or it might have merely escalated the situation.

Hours later, according to excerpts of the account by the U.S. diplomat, Gregory Hicks, American officials in the Libyan capital sought permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops to Benghazi aboard a Libyan military aircraft early the next morning. The troops were told to stand down.

In other words, after the first attack was over--and the Ambassador and three others were dead--officials 600 miles away wanted to send four whole people to Benghazi the next day--not at the time, but even later than the request they were making. They wanted to send FOUR PEOPLE, IN A FEW MORE HOURS.

It's not a scandal, people. It's not even news.



Gyrfalcon: the deputy head of the embassy in Tripoli 600 miles away sought in vain to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets over Benghazi in a show of force that he said might have averted a second attack on a nearby CIA complex.

In other words, the first attack--the one that killed the Ambassador and three others--had already happened and they were dead. So the show of force would not have saved them and only "might" have averted a second attack; or it might have merely escalated the situation.

Hours later, according to excerpts of the account by the U.S. diplomat, Gregory Hicks, American officials in the Libyan capital sought permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops to Benghazi aboard a Libyan military aircraft early the next morning. The troops were told to stand down.

In other words, after the first attack was over--and the Ambassador and three others were dead--officials 600 miles away wanted to send four whole people to Benghazi the next day--not at the time, but even later than the request they were making. They wanted to send FOUR PEOPLE, IN A FEW MORE HOURS.

It's not a scandal, people. It's not even news.
 
2013-05-06 08:22:18 PM  
Honest Questions:

-Were we otherwise short of response forces? (aside from the original short-handedness)
-What support did we rally?
-What was the actual marginal utility of the "fresh reinforcements" in question?
-If there were many such embassy attacks (possibly 12) under Bush that got little if any attention, why should I view the Benghazi affair as anything but run-of-the-mill? Granted, the GOP would want to hype it before the election and the Dems would want to brush it away. If not for political gamesmanship, would we even be having this conversation?
 
2013-05-06 08:22:21 PM  

Gyrfalcon: In other words, the first attack--the one that killed the Ambassador and three others--had already happened and they were dead. So the show of force would not have saved them and only "might" have averted a second attack; or it might have merely escalated the situation...In other words, after the first attack was over--and the Ambassador and three others were dead--officials 600 miles away wanted to send four whole people to Benghazi the next day--not at the time, but even later than the request they were making. They wanted to send FOUR PEOPLE, IN A FEW MORE HOURS.


i.imgur.comView Full Size


Again, that's at least how I read TFA too. The only reason this is a "scandal" now unlike the Reagan Beirut Bombings and other attacks is because President Obama failed to use his most potent weapon in the arsenal.
 
2013-05-06 08:23:32 PM  

Mugato: For the last Goddamned time, how is this a scandal? Just tell us, even if it's a lame ass reason. Just something, please.


Apparently we're supposed to be patient and eventually something will eventually, maybe, possibly, come to light. It's real to them, damn it!
 
2013-05-06 08:24:01 PM  

firefly212: 4 dudes by themselves in a farking mob isn't a solution, it's a sequel to blackhawk down. Never put guys in without a plan to get them back out. Good on whatever c/o said fark no to sending four guys in to claim dead bodies and a destroyed office building, not worth four more dead servicemen.


There is something to be said for this.
 
2013-05-06 08:28:13 PM  

SkinnyHead: Zeppelininthesky: SkinnyHead: AdolfOliverPanties: SkinnyHead: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make!"  ~ Hillary Clinton

Please enlighten us the difference it makes.  If we knew the exact motivation for the attacks it would do what exactly?

Well, in deciding how to respond to an attack on the compound, you would think it important for the administration to know the nature of the attack.  Hillary suggested two alternatives: (1) a protest or (2) guys out for a walk at night who decided to kill Americans.  If that was the threat assessment, that might explain why the Obama administration gave the stand down order.  Maybe they did not feel that a military response was necessary because the whole thing could have just been some guys out for a walk.

How is it different? We could defend the compound, or defend the compound. You do know he gave the stand down order after it was quite obvious it was too late to send in someone who would make any sort of difference.

Are you asking whether there is a difference between Hillary's protest theory and her guys-out-walking theory, or are you asking if there is a difference between those two theories and what really happened?


We are talking about reality. We both know that it was not just someone walking around and just decided to attack. I know Hillary said it, but she was not saying that it was exactly what happened. To say otherwise, is just wrong.
 
2013-05-06 08:29:31 PM  
Gosh, you guys are really onto something now.  You've got Obama right where you want him.  Call your representatives today and demand that they bring articles of impeachment against Obama, right now.  Don't wait.  Hurry!

Good luck, Repubs, this will surely not blow up in your faces.
 
2013-05-06 08:31:45 PM  

RyogaM: Gosh, you guys are really onto something now.  You've got Obama right where you want him.  Call your representatives today and demand that they bring articles of impeachment against Obama, right now.  Don't wait.  Hurry!

Good luck, Repubs, this will surely not blow up in your faces.


Frankly, they should demand articles of impeachment, and if they don't get them, they should vote the bastards out.
 
2013-05-06 08:33:25 PM  

Sgt Otter: NewportBarGuy: 4 Special Operators? They already killed two ex-SEALs. Did you want a higher body count?

Dropping a couple of special operations guys into the middle of a well-armed, angry mob.  Hmm, that sounds familiar.

[www.badassoftheweek.com image 480x325]


bitlogic.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:33:46 PM  

Mugato: For the last Goddamned time, how is this a scandal? Just tell us, even if it's a lame ass reason. Just something, please.


Yes.  As a person who doesn't reflexively despise Obama and blame him for everything bad that happens, I too would like to know exactly what the "scandal" is.

If it's all about someone saying it happened because of a movie when they knew it wasn't, or because Hillary Clinton's name appears on a letterhead, then "conservatives" are even more retarded than I ever imagined.

Yet, those are the only two things people put forth as being a "scandal."
 
2013-05-06 08:33:49 PM  
Americans need a new holiday to bring them together. I propose we create something similar to Guy Fawkes day and have people celebrate by creating effigies of Darrell Issa and Lindsey Graham and repeatedly kick them in the shin.
 
2013-05-06 08:34:14 PM  
I smell chicken.  Oily, sweaty chicken.
 
2013-05-06 08:34:34 PM  
How else do you think the Syrian "rebels" got those chems? Smuggled out if Libya during the embassy attack.

Duh
 
2013-05-06 08:37:06 PM  

randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.


I just can't see how this position makes any sense at all. Benghazi was such a small casualty list compared to what the enemies of the US suffer every day, through direct military actions, sanctions, and good old economic competition. Benghazi should be taken as evidence that the USA is still secure, happy, and nearly impossible to hurt in any significant way, from the outside.
 
2013-05-06 08:38:03 PM  

Walter Paisley: Americans need a new holiday to bring them together. I propose we create something similar to Guy Fawkes day and have people celebrate by creating effigies of Darrell Issa and Lindsey Graham and repeatedly kick them in the shin.


I've got so many dibbs on Issa ever since he published (online) details about how intelligence is gathered at ports. Never before have I seen a guy who so sorely needed a swift kick in the nuts.
 
2013-05-06 08:38:33 PM  

Somacandra: firefly212: The ARB (Accountability Review Board) was to find who in the state department was responsible... several people resigned, including the congressionally appointed guy who was in charge of security. Congress isn't looking for responsibility at this point, they're just trying to find some way to hang this farking albatross around Obama, but they still haven't got one.

I think they're still pissed that Hillary biatchslapped them over a full day's testimony. Its really about Clinton, not Obama. Its another attempt to poison the well for the future.


Why are they so scared of a strong, Liberal woman?
 
2013-05-06 08:38:34 PM  

DarwiOdrade: There's nothing new here - all this information was already released and, despite Republican attempts to turn in into a mountain, is actually a molehill.


I thought all this sounded familiar.
 
2013-05-06 08:39:50 PM  
These teabaggers think it's funny to drop SpecForce assets into a situation well past the SF guys' ability to remedy.

These teabaggers think it's a great idea to lessen embassy and consulate security funding, and then shriek about the rights of a known parole abuser who got his witless ass slapped back in the pokey for deliberately busting the clear conditions of his parole.

These teabaggers think TYRANNY SATANIC POLICE STATE when new postal regs come up for mailing perfume to overseas adresses.
 
2013-05-06 08:39:54 PM  
They thought they could get Hillary to say something incriminating...I don't know why anyone thought that political opponents could make Hilary Clinton say anything she didn't want to say, but let's move past that...and she didn't.  Obama is pretty much bulletproof in the scandal department because he went into it knowing he'd have to be twice as clean to be seen as half as good.  Every little word, every line of syntax, every mark of punctuation and passing second must be reviewed, reconfigured, and rehashed from hundreds of documents for months to even begin to make this (an Obama failure in Benghazi) sound like something worth being concerned about.  Even then it just isn't quite good enough.

There is nothing here.  There never was anything here.  Doting on it for months will never, ever make anything horribly scandalous or incriminating appear.  Just stop it.  If you're going to try and play divisional politics, you have to admit when the other guy won this round, go home, regroup, and try and dig up a different scandal.  You're embarrassing yourselves.  You used to be better than this.

Though, to be honest, the Republicans have been off their game since a couple of nosy reporters got Nixon to resign about something relatively benign when no one had ever given a shiat about Kennedy who was a corrupt bastard.  Then Reagan forgot what he forgot and when he forgot it.  To make it worse, a decade later, the greater collective of American society was miming masturbatory motions at the Republicans while they flailed trying to make it important that the president was having an intimate affair that by some standards wasn't even really sex.
 
2013-05-06 08:41:04 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Especially Lindsey Graham. F*cking JAG thinks he's Rambo.


Maybe we should send him in next time.

/there will always be a next time
 
2013-05-06 08:41:45 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.

I just can't see how this position makes any sense at all. Benghazi was such a small casualty list compared to what the enemies of the US suffer every day, through direct military actions, sanctions, and good old economic competition. Benghazi should be taken as evidence that the USA is still secure, happy, and nearly impossible to hurt in any significant way, from the outside.


Yup, Obama lied... just like Hillary's "signature" is right on the cable... seriously though, the right is upset that the investigation wasn't complete 48 hours after the attack, that some key points got changed a few days later as intel developed, and that they can't, for the life of them, articulate what they would have done differently or better. Hamstringing them even more is the fact that they're the ones who overrode Hillary and cut the security consultant budget for the Department of State... though they're of the mindset that Hillary should have seen the attack coming, put all the security resources there instead of at the other hotspots around the region, and magically known instantly that though there were a dozen other protests based on the video, that this was the one that was going to be opportunistically used to attack a small installation.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-05-06 08:42:16 PM  

Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.


I don't think that the sort of people who think that this is a scandal are going to ask that, but I suppose the argument would be that Obama is a terrorist who want's to destroy 'murka and is in league with the terrorists or something like that.
 
2013-05-06 08:42:21 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Mugato: For the last Goddamned time, how is this a scandal? Just tell us, even if it's a lame ass reason. Just something, please.

Yes.  As a person who doesn't reflexively despise Obama and blame him for everything bad that happens, I too would like to know exactly what the "scandal" is.

If it's all about someone saying it happened because of a movie when they knew it wasn't, or because Hillary Clinton's name appears on a letterhead, then "conservatives" are even more retarded than I ever imagined.

Yet, those are the only two things people put forth as being a "scandal."


They want something to desperately stick to Obama they resorted to outright lying. I can't imagine how miserable Republicans must be to absolutely hate someone as much as they hate Obama.
 
2013-05-06 08:44:06 PM  
Congressional investigators released a partial transcript of Hicks's testimony Monday in advance of a hearing Wednesday at which he is scheduled to appear.

Well, let's see what he says on Wednesday.
 
2013-05-06 08:44:19 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: AdamK: feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.

what does government people getting killed by foreigners have to do with government people oppressing the proletariat?

Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.


Do it!
 
2013-05-06 08:44:24 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Tatsuma: NewportBarGuy: It was over before they could even write the OPORD.

... the attack lasted for hours.

Right, and people with active knowledge of how a Team deploys says they could not have been their in time. Don't you think the President asked SecDef that question FIRST? I do.


The agency that actually knows this type of shiat was not consulted.  So the people who ordered a stand-down didn't know.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57544026/sources-key-task-force- no t-convened-during-benghazi-consulate-attack/
 
2013-05-06 08:45:27 PM  

gadian: They thought they could get Hillary to say something incriminating...I don't know why anyone thought that political opponents could make Hilary Clinton say anything she didn't want to say, but let's move past that...and she didn't.  Obama is pretty much bulletproof in the scandal department because he went into it knowing he'd have to be twice as clean to be seen as half as good.  Every little word, every line of syntax, every mark of punctuation and passing second must be reviewed, reconfigured, and rehashed from hundreds of documents for months to even begin to make this (an Obama failure in Benghazi) sound like something worth being concerned about.  Even then it just isn't quite good enough.

There is nothing here.  There never was anything here.  Doting on it for months will never, ever make anything horribly scandalous or incriminating appear.  Just stop it.  If you're going to try and play divisional politics, you have to admit when the other guy won this round, go home, regroup, and try and dig up a different scandal.  You're embarrassing yourselves.  You used to be better than this.

Though, to be honest, the Republicans have been off their game since a couple of nosy reporters got Nixon to resign about something relatively benign when no one had ever given a shiat about Kennedy who was a corrupt bastard.  Then Reagan forgot what he forgot and when he forgot it.  To make it worse, a decade later, the greater collective of American society was miming masturbatory motions at the Republicans while they flailed trying to make it important that the president was having an intimate affair that by some standards wasn't even really sex.

2.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size

The straight powder, no water.  You gotta admire that.
 
2013-05-06 08:49:08 PM  

randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.


Care to quote his bold faced lies?
 
2013-05-06 08:50:26 PM  

dr_blasto: NewportBarGuy: Especially Lindsey Graham. F*cking JAG thinks he's Rambo.

Maybe we should send him in next time.

/there will always be a next time


I'm sure the enemy would cower in fear at the thought of an effeminate southern fancy lad coming their way...
charlock.orgView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 08:52:45 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: feckingmorons: It was a scandal then. Did you actually believe it was because of some youtube video with less than 50K views?

Really?

Your government lies to you constantly. Expect it, don't be surprised by it. They think they know better, they don't realize they work for us, the think it is the other way 'round.

So more youtube views equals more credibility?

Techno Viking is now the authority on everything.


This is an idea I am 100% for. Techno Viking for everything.
 
2013-05-06 08:53:22 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: The straight powder, no water.  You gotta admire that.


Not really. We don't admire you mainlining the GOP hater-ade, after all.
 
2013-05-06 08:53:31 PM  
Sending in special forces into a situation that just happened isn't going to happen. Special forces don't get sent into anything without copious intel and planning, that's the whole thing to special forces really. They go in where other forces can't, for any of a number of reasons, when you have a clear objective and can develop a clear plan. A special forces unit can spend months preparing for a mission that between insertion and removal lasts an hour. Also even if you want to ignore all that, it's not likely there was a special forces unit, SEALs, Rangers etc anywhere near to the situation. Plus on top of that, there's the issue of having PJ's ready to go. They aren't so big on the planning thing, but they do need to be ready and near by in case someone ends up needing rescuing.
 
2013-05-06 08:53:49 PM  

NewportBarGuy: 4 Special Operators? They already killed two ex-SEALs. Did you want a higher body count?

Jesus. And the reason they couldn't get a team from Europe was time. It was over before they could even write the OPORD. They don't just throw people into the fire. They need at least SOME time to prep before they get dropped.

The whole timeline was laid out already. Jets and 4 Green Hats? Yes, what a horrific scandal. I'm now ashamed to be a Real American.


That is what I was thinking.  If those four troops were deployed then we would've just had four more bodies added to the body count.  Reality isn't like the Rambo movies where one guy can take out an entire opposing army.
 
2013-05-06 08:54:01 PM  
Ever since Obama won reelection, I've assumed he'll be impeached (and, like Clinton, not removed from office), because the system is so polarized, Republicans have nothing else to do.  Impeachment is going to become routine for second-term presidents, like a third campaign.
 
2013-05-06 08:55:14 PM  
Meet the new Truthers just like the old Truthers.
 
2013-05-06 08:55:43 PM  

Nem Wan: Ever since Obama won reelection, I've assumed he'll be impeached (and, like Clinton, not removed from office), because the system is so polarized, Republicans have nothing else to do.  Impeachment is going to become routine for second-term presidents, like a third campaign.


Not really. They just hate Obama, and want him gone. It is just sad.
 
2013-05-06 08:56:16 PM  

Ed Grubermann: What's the scandal?


The President is a Democrat.
 
2013-05-06 08:56:33 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.


You know what? They should go with that. They should try to impeach obama. I'm sure that will be recieved well.
 
2013-05-06 08:56:47 PM  

liam76: randomjsa: It was a scandal before unless you think it's a-ok for Obama to tell bald faced lies in order to cover his rear before the election.

Which most liberals do. They would rather have Obama, whose incompetence led to Benghazi, and who tried to cover it up and lie about it than face the possibility of him not getting reelected. Everything is justified so long as liberals keep the White House.

This from the people who constantly prattle on about how Republicans put 'party before country'. As always you will know liberals by what they accuse others of.

Care to quote his bold faced lies?


I have the audio.

/Oh, you mean backing it up
 
2013-05-06 08:59:47 PM  

Felgraf: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.

You know what? They should go with that. They should try to impeach obama. I'm sure that will be recieved well.


They'll try to do it, if they take the Senate in 2014.
 
2013-05-06 09:00:04 PM  

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Ed Grubermann: What's the scandal?

The President is a Democrat.


Holy shiat! At least he's not a ni-*BONG*!
 
2013-05-06 09:01:53 PM  
There are a number of things we don't know about the Consulate. We do know that there was a ███ base, less than a mile away. The function at the Consulate was ████████ and ███████.
If the State Department initially fed us a line of ambiguity, it was due to ███████  ███████.

/███████
 
2013-05-06 09:02:52 PM  
So the official seems to be talking more about things that could have been done to prevent or deter the consulate attacks. To me, it seems more like opining than whistleblowing. The most scandalous thing mentioned is tje special ops not being deployed, but there may have been a reason for that call. You can argue over whether or not it was the right call, but this doesn't strike me as impeachable crap. I think the GOP is aware of this, given how the Rep. Quoted in the article seems to focus more on hammerin the President's response rather than accusing him of a coverup.
 
2013-05-06 09:03:00 PM  
To anyone who keeps saying that it wouldn't have mattered if they sent in some troops.

Unless Obama actually does have a magical time machine there was no way for anyone to know at the time if it would've helped or not. The reports from the scene at the time asked for help and none was sent, or apparently even kicked into gear so that they could be that much more prepared when they finally were given the orders to go in. I'll say that again. If you get a call for assistance because you are under fire you should get it no questions asked, you can ask questions later on. If it turns out that the assistance is no longer required then you can always turn them around and send them back home.

It's one thing to say that "We need time to prepare but we are working on it as we speak and we will get there as soon as we can." as opposed to saying "No, we won't send anyone to help.". That's where the "Scandal" is. At the very least whoever it was in the chain of command that decided to not get the ball rolling should be put up on the chopping block.
 
2013-05-06 09:03:20 PM  

ourbigdumbmouth: How else do you think the Syrian "rebels" got those chems? Smuggled out if Libya during the embassy attack.

Duh


Right. Because the only thing stopping them was the US embassy (it wasn't the embassy, btw).

/know you're probably being sarcastic, but just in case
 
2013-05-06 09:04:05 PM  
So... The Republicans who failed to find Bin Laden for eight years would have somehow done a better job in Benghazi?

Or maybe Romney, who ran a campaign so clueless that he had no idea he was going to get his ass handed to him, would have somehow magically anticipated the attacks and prevented them?

The real scandal here is how the Republicans are trying to make hay out of the deaths of four americans. I will personally never remember Benghazi without thinking of that shiat eating grin on Romney's face when he held his press conference. That was the face of the Republican response the day of the attacks. A big ol happy smile.
 
2013-05-06 09:05:00 PM  

firefly212: Walter Paisley: Americans need a new holiday to bring them together. I propose we create something similar to Guy Fawkes day and have people celebrate by creating effigies of Darrell Issa and Lindsey Graham and repeatedly kick them in the shin.

I've got so many dibbs on Issa ever since he published (online) details about how intelligence is gathered at ports. Never before have I seen a guy who so sorely needed a swift kick in the nuts.


That's whats so disgusting about these individuals. They aren't doing this on any sort of principle, they're just exploiting something for political points. I should add that this new holiday should have a name along the lines of "Stop Exploiting Murders for Political Points, You Assholes! Day."
 
2013-05-06 09:06:24 PM  

leviosaurus: So... The Republicans who failed to find Bin Laden for eight years would have somehow done a better job in Benghazi?

Or maybe Romney, who ran a campaign so clueless that he had no idea he was going to get his ass handed to him, would have somehow magically anticipated the attacks and prevented them?

The real scandal here is how the Republicans are trying to make hay out of the deaths of four americans. I will personally never remember Benghazi without thinking of that shiat eating grin on Romney's face when he held his press conference. That was the face of the Republican response the day of the attacks. A big ol happy smile.


I think the Republicans are happy the attack happened. They need something to attack Obama with, and this is the best that they have.
 
2013-05-06 09:07:51 PM  
Looks like Obama's not going to win a reelection after this scandal.
 
2013-05-06 09:08:36 PM  

firefly212: Yup, Obama lied... just like Hillary's "signature" is right on the cable... seriously though, the right is upset that the investigation wasn't complete 48 hours after the attack, that some key points got changed a few days later as intel developed, and that they can't, for the life of them, articulate what they would have done differently or better. Hamstringing them even more is the fact that they're the ones who overrode Hillary and cut the security consultant budget for the Department of State... though they're of the mindset that Hillary should have seen the attack coming, put all the security resources there instead of at the other hotspots around the region, and magically known instantly that though there were a dozen other protests based on the video, that this was the one that was going to be opportunistically used to attack a small installation.


Ugh that seems so useless. I wish the left wing was as loud and relentless about the budget cuts. Not that I think the US State Department needs a bigger budget, but it would make people think more practically about the problems that the US's partisan gridlock has created.
 
2013-05-06 09:11:01 PM  
Countdown to congress getting GitMo'd begins now.
 
2013-05-06 09:11:50 PM  

doyner: I Said: Let's say the GOP and their tinfoil brigade is correct: what was the motive again? Is it still that Obama is a muslim usurper?

What motive would the president have to, seemingly according to the right, withhold protection and drag their feet and laugh maniacally while the embassy was attacked?

"Now watch this drive"


t3.gstatic.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 09:16:30 PM  

Kittypie070: Why did the GOP demand the consulate be stripped of security?

Why did they deny funding for consulate security?


Why isn't this a scandal yet?
 
2013-05-06 09:17:09 PM  
I see the usual gang of idiots is here in full force, trying to make a something out of a nothing. Why don't you morons go back to accusing Fartbongo of being a Kenyan sleeper agent? At least that was somewhat amusing and didn't involve waving dead people around like farking flags.
 
2013-05-06 09:17:44 PM  

zenobia: Kittypie070: Why did the GOP demand the consulate be stripped of security?

Why did they deny funding for consulate security?

Why isn't this a scandal yet?


IOKIYAR
 
2013-05-06 09:18:27 PM  

Waldo Pepper: leviosaurus: So... The Republicans who failed to find Bin Laden for eight years would have somehow done a better job in Benghazi?

Well to be fair, it isn't like Obama had to start the search for Bin laden from square one. If he had it is quite possible that he wouldn't have found bin laden either in 8 year


They did start from square one. The case was COLD, they had absolutely no idea where Bin Laden was, and even worse, Bush didn't even care, so there was little resource in finding him. It was Obama that got the ball rolling.
 
2013-05-06 09:18:49 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: firefly212: Yup, Obama lied... just like Hillary's "signature" is right on the cable... seriously though, the right is upset that the investigation wasn't complete 48 hours after the attack, that some key points got changed a few days later as intel developed, and that they can't, for the life of them, articulate what they would have done differently or better. Hamstringing them even more is the fact that they're the ones who overrode Hillary and cut the security consultant budget for the Department of State... though they're of the mindset that Hillary should have seen the attack coming, put all the security resources there instead of at the other hotspots around the region, and magically known instantly that though there were a dozen other protests based on the video, that this was the one that was going to be opportunistically used to attack a small installation.

Ugh that seems so useless. I wish the left wing was as loud and relentless about the budget cuts. Not that I think the US State Department needs a bigger budget, but it would make people think more practically about the problems that the US's partisan gridlock has created.


Sadly, the center and left do not have a massive corporate media infrastructure dedicated to barking talking points at above-ground nuclear test levels at the entire country 24/7.
 
2013-05-06 09:18:53 PM  

Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.


People died, Obama lied.
 
2013-05-06 09:19:41 PM  

Waldo Pepper: leviosaurus: So... The Republicans who failed to find Bin Laden for eight years would have somehow done a better job in Benghazi?

Well to be fair, it isn't like Obama had to start the search for Bin laden from square one. If he had it is quite possible that he wouldn't have found bin laden either in 8 year


You may want to read up on the state of the investigation when the situation was handed to Obama before you get too attached to that theory. It wasn't square one, but it was damn near.
 
2013-05-06 09:20:40 PM  

Nem Wan: Ever since Obama won reelection, I've assumed he'll be impeached (and, like Clinton, not removed from office), because the system is so polarized, Republicans have nothing else to do.  Impeachment is going to become routine for Democratic second-term presidents, like a third campaign.


Remember, Republicans can do no wrong, and when they do do wrong we should work with them and not against them because they are a valuable part of the political conversation and totally not a bloody shiatstain on America's underwear.
 
2013-05-06 09:20:48 PM  

Waldo Pepper: Well to be fair, it isn't like Obama had to start the search for Bin laden from square one. If he had it is quite possible that he wouldn't have found bin laden either in 8 year


Actually, it is.  Bush dismantled the Bin Laden task force and didn't consider him a priority.  They weren't even sure if he was alive.
 
2013-05-06 09:20:55 PM  

Somacandra: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.

==

Preview of Tomorrow: A response team was sent to Benghazi; according to the State Department's report, "the seven-person response team from Embassy Tripoli ... arrived at the Annex about 0500 local. Less than fifteen minutes later, the Annex came under mortar and RPG attack, with five mortar rounds impacting close together in under 90 seconds." Hicks doesn't say that the CIA issued stand down orders, let alone twice. He says that a jet was never scrambled to fly over the city (which we knew) and that a second team, one that arrived too late, should have gotten there faster.

How is this an impeachable offense? Seriously, lay it all out for me. I'm all about the government pulling lots of shiat its not supposed to...that's nothing new to anyone who's studied American history. But where is the actual scandal here in this case? Solyndra made more sense than this.


4.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size

"It was due to a YouTube video"
 
2013-05-06 09:21:57 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Uh, an impeachable government due to it's deceit, lies and ineptitude? Just a guess.


You should stop guessing at things.
 
2013-05-06 09:22:11 PM  

feckingmorons: People died, Obama lied.


... he chants at the screen for two minutes as the party leaders nod approvingly.
 
2013-05-06 09:22:25 PM  

feckingmorons: Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.

People died, Obama lied.


It rhymes and fits on a bumper sticker, so you know it's legit.
 
2013-05-06 09:22:50 PM  

feckingmorons: Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.

People died, Obama lied.


A stupid bumper sticker is not an explanation.  HTH FOAD.
 
2013-05-06 09:23:35 PM  

feckingmorons: Obama lied.


When, where and about what? We're all well aware that Benghazi was an attack on a U.S consulate outpost. What no one has actually done is explain how this is a "scandal" unlike attacks every day in Afghanistan, Iraq, and throughout the last several decades of attacks on consulates and embassies, or how the President "lied" about it.
 
2013-05-06 09:23:42 PM  

ferretman: "It was due to a YouTube video"


That's not an answer.
 
2013-05-06 09:24:08 PM  

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: feckingmorons: People died, Obama lied.

... he chants at the screen for two minutes as the party leaders nod approvingly.


dookdookdook: feckingmorons: Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.

People died, Obama lied.

It rhymes and fits on a bumper sticker, so you know it's legit.


The funny thing is that they actually think that's just as bad as, "Bush lied, people died." For some reason, causality is irrelevant to Republicans.
 
2013-05-06 09:25:33 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Waldo Pepper: Well to be fair, it isn't like Obama had to start the search for Bin laden from square one. If he had it is quite possible that he wouldn't have found bin laden either in 8 year

Actually, it is.  Bush dismantled the Bin Laden task force and didn't consider him a priority.  They weren't even sure if he was alive.


There were still a lot of people in the military and intelligence communities who were looking hard. They needed the support of someone like Obama to succeed. Once they got that support, pow. They deserve a lot of credit for staying the course while the Republicans dismantled their efforts.
 
2013-05-06 09:26:20 PM  

feckingmorons: Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.

People died, Obama lied.


Exactly what was Obama's lie?

Were the dead people due to Obama lies?

Where were you when GW Bush lied to get thousands killed in needless war? Where do you get the moral standing to accuse the current administration of a scandal?

What, actually, is the scandal?
 
2013-05-06 09:27:27 PM  
feckingmorons:

People died, Obama lied.

huh.  the GOP version of the 'Two minutes hate'.  I still think Orwell's version was better.
 
2013-05-06 09:27:31 PM  

dr_blasto: feckingmorons: Mugato: Would someone please for the love of Christ tell me how this is a scandal?

I'm not averse to accepting that Obama is capable of being a duplicitous prick but at least explain it to me.

People died, Obama lied.

Exactly what was Obama's lie?

Were the dead people due to Obama lies?

Where were you when GW Bush lied to get thousands killed in needless war? Where do you get the moral standing to accuse the current administration of a scandal?

What, actually, is the scandal?


The president is a Democrat.
 
2013-05-06 09:28:24 PM  
This story, again. How exciting.
 
2013-05-06 09:28:40 PM  

BSABSVR: ferretman: "It was due to a YouTube video"

That's not an answer.


That's not an actual quote either.
 
2013-05-06 09:30:41 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Somacandra: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Ineptitude seems to be a common thread. Let's go with that. More is coming.

How is this "ineptitude" ? Lay it all out for me. Right here. That's an invitation.

Be patient.


"I'm not smart enough to really understand, so once I'm out of talking points, I'll just get mysterious.  Youtube. Act of terror.  Susan Rice. It's not the crime it's the cover-up".

After seeing some of you winners in this thread i was surprised that this wasn't main paged.
 
2013-05-06 09:31:33 PM  
Every time I hear the word Benghazi I keep thinking of Mitt Romneys malicious smirk after he walked away from the podium 8 months ago.

And here we are, with Republicans still trying to make political hay from the deaths of four Americans.

USA USA USA!
 
2013-05-06 09:31:47 PM  

ferretman: [Photo of Dr. Rice]
"It was due to a YouTube video"


How is that a scandal? There were other protests/attacks at the same time elsewhere that were. If the protest over the movie served as cover for a preplanned attack on 9/11, that doesn't mean the movie "had nothing to do with the American deaths" (unless it just means that the movie isn't to blame for the deaths, in which case I agree). Any idiot can see it was preplanned, as I said at the time. That's why the President called it an "act of terror" at his first news conference. That doesn't exclude the video for inciting protests at the same time. Again, how is this a scandal?
 
2013-05-06 09:33:42 PM  
What I've heard is that this whole attack was a couple hours long. Correct me if i'm wrong.

these special forces were to be deployed the next day.

what were they going to do?
 
2013-05-06 09:34:40 PM  

Heraclitus: Every time I hear the word Benghazi I keep thinking of Mitt Romneys malicious smirk after he walked away from the podium 8 months ago.


i.imgur.comView Full Size


Perhaps Governor Romney should testify tomorrow? He certainly claimed to be the expert.
 
2013-05-06 09:34:49 PM  

firefly212: the right is upset that the investigation wasn't complete 48 hours after the attack


Hannity on his radio show this afternoon apparently had on someone who claimed to be the drone operator from the night of the consulate attacks giving his side of the story.  I thought it was a parody bit when I turned it on, seriously.  The guy was parroting every right-wing talking point, even going to the point of saying "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!" when asked if he thought it was a cover-up.  The guy talked about breaking a NDA and getting in trouble by talking on air.  I seriously thought I'd hear "BABABOOEY!" any minute.. but sadly, didn't.
 
2013-05-06 09:35:01 PM  

dr_blasto: BSABSVR: ferretman: "It was due to a YouTube video"

That's not an answer.

That's not an actual quote either.


Yes, but it's memetic on the right now.  Along with the "fact" that Obama was watching in real time.
 
2013-05-06 09:35:52 PM  
Benghazi on the other hand had a CIA center that wasn't to be revealed. But it was revealed by some traitorous Senators(R) and some traitorous Congressmen(R) who were never arrested by the FBI/CIA to be tried for treason of revealed classified information.

Time to get the fark out of the mess that the U.S. has made to the Middle East with all its placed puppet Dictatorships.

This wasn't a scandal either. [sarcasm!!!] It was covered up as the powers that be decided to let the attack continue to avoid a military conflict with Israel.

The USS Liberty attack/murders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats, on 8 June 1967, during the Six-Day War.[3] The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 171 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[4] At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][5]

Israel apologized for the attack, saying that the USS Liberty had been attacked in error after being mistaken for an Egyptian ship. Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity,[2] though others, including survivors of the attack, have rejected these conclusions and maintain that the attack was deliberate.[6]

In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$21.9 million in 2013) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty itself plus 13 years' interest.[7]
 
2013-05-06 09:36:17 PM  
Heraclitus:
And here we are, with Republicans still trying to make political hay from the deaths of four Americans.

the weird part is how the GOP types expect us to forget everything they've done over the past couple of years.  its like they cannot understand the internet DOES NOT FORGET!  not ever.  each and every gaffe, mistake and oddball statement the Republicans have made is archived, sorted and stored for easy retrieval.  so when the GOP stands up and says the same tired old lies again and pretends that this time its something new....they forget that the rest of us are doing a quick google search for what actually happened and looking over the historical files from the past couple months.
 
2013-05-06 09:36:27 PM  

Frozboz: "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!"


False Flag?
 
2013-05-06 09:36:56 PM  

Asa Phelps: What I've heard is that this whole attack was a couple hours long. Correct me if i'm wrong.

these special forces were to be deployed the next day.

what were they going to do?


Just imagine the wharrgarbl had the Tripoli consulate been attacked the next day, and Obama had moved those guys to Benghazi. Can you imagine?
 
2013-05-06 09:37:47 PM  
I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.
 
2013-05-06 09:38:07 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 09:38:17 PM  

sheep snorter: Benghazi on the other hand had a CIA center that wasn't to be revealed. But it was revealed by some traitorous Senators(R) and some traitorous Congressmen(R) who were never arrested by the FBI/CIA to be tried for treason of revealed classified information.

Time to get the fark out of the mess that the U.S. has made to the Middle East with all its placed puppet Dictatorships.

This wasn't a scandal either. [sarcasm!!!] It was covered up as the powers that be decided to let the attack continue to avoid a military conflict with Israel.

The USS Liberty attack/murders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats, on 8 June 1967, during the Six-Day War.[3] The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 171 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[4] At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][5]

Israel apologized for the attack, saying that the USS Liberty had been attacked in error after being mistaken for an Egyptian ship. Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity,[2] though others, including survivors of the attack, have rejected these conclusions and maintain that the attack was deliberate.[6]

In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$21.9 million in 2013) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liber ...


bitlogic.comView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 09:38:29 PM  

BSABSVR: dr_blasto: BSABSVR: ferretman: "It was due to a YouTube video"

That's not an answer.

That's not an actual quote either.

Yes, but it's memetic on the right now.  Along with the "fact" that Obama was watching in real time.


Well, even Obama needs something to fap to like the rest of us. Or something. These people are sad sacks, if they weren't so annoying I'd feel bad for them.
 
2013-05-06 09:38:50 PM  
As far as I can tell, the people claiming this to be a "scandal" (or otherwise purporting to be scandalized) are doing so on the basis of one or more of the following:

- Misunderstanding the source of these orders
- Misunderstanding the reasoning behind the orders
- Misunderstanding the likely (or hell, even the best-case) scenario had some different instructions been given
 
2013-05-06 09:39:42 PM  

BSABSVR: dr_blasto: BSABSVR: ferretman: "It was due to a YouTube video"

That's not an answer.

That's not an actual quote either.

Yes, but it's memetic on the right now.  Along with the "fact" that Obama was watching in real time.


On his personal drone that is also a magic time machine.
 
2013-05-06 09:41:19 PM  

Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.


Point to actual obfuscation and the actual cover up.
 
2013-05-06 09:42:08 PM  

Frozboz: firefly212: the right is upset that the investigation wasn't complete 48 hours after the attack

Hannity on his radio show this afternoon apparently had on someone who claimed to be the drone operator from the night of the consulate attacks giving his side of the story.  I thought it was a parody bit when I turned it on, seriously.  The guy was parroting every right-wing talking point, even going to the point of saying "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!" when asked if he thought it was a cover-up.  The guy talked about breaking a NDA and getting in trouble by talking on air.  I seriously thought I'd hear "BABABOOEY!" any minute.. but sadly, didn't.


you mean the drone that arrived near the end of the attack on the consulate?
 
2013-05-06 09:43:08 PM  

Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.


Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake
 
2013-05-06 09:43:18 PM  

Whodat: The administration has...done nothing but fuel the flames.


What flames? What fuel?
 
2013-05-06 09:43:29 PM  
Remember kids...

President is a democrat - can't possibly be responsible for everything

President is republican - he's commander in chief, everything is his fault
 
2013-05-06 09:43:35 PM  
Pure poly ticks. Sad for our country. Sad for the people who died.
 
2013-05-06 09:44:02 PM  

dr_blasto: Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.

Point to actual obfuscation and the actual cover up.


More importantly, point to the motive. Nixon's campaign staff committed a crime, and Nixon covered it up. Obama's, I mean, someone committed a crime, and, well, Obama, er, well, you see... IT'S A SCANDAL, DAMMIT! WHY WON'T YOU PEOPLE LISTEN TO ME!?! CAN'T YOU SEE HOW BLACK HE IS!?!
 
2013-05-06 09:44:28 PM  

Frozboz: Hannity on his radio show this afternoon apparently had on someone who claimed to be the drone operator from the night of the consulate attacks giving his side of the story. I thought it was a parody bit when I turned it on, seriously. The guy was parroting every right-wing talking point, even going to the point of saying "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!" when asked if he thought it was a cover-up. The guy talked about breaking a NDA and getting in trouble by talking on air. I seriously thought I'd hear "BABABOOEY!" any minute.. but sadly, didn't.


Apparently Fox has some alleged anonymous insider whistleblower source who's just been recycling previously-known-and-debunked bullshiat from months ago as if it's bombshell breaking news.  Dunno if it's the same guy, but probably the same propaganda technique.

mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/02/foreign-policy-magazine-casts-more-d o ubt-on-fox/193876

(cut & paste b/c fark hates mediamatters links)
 
2013-05-06 09:44:48 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Remember kids...

President is a democrat - can't possibly be responsible for everything

President is republican - he's commander in chief, everything is his fault


When it's really the opposite?
 
2013-05-06 09:44:51 PM  

Asa Phelps: What I've heard is that this whole attack was a couple hours long. Correct me if i'm wrong.

these special forces were to be deployed the next day.

what were they going to do?


Link to analysis and a timeline:

Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith were killed early.  The other two were killed several hours later.

Short answer: If Michael Bay movies were real life, Obama could have saved everyone.  But he chose not to activate Optimus Prime so as to advance sharia.
 
2013-05-06 09:44:58 PM  

Somacandra: Whodat: The administration has...done nothing but fuel the flames.

What flames? What fuel?


Obama has been black when talking about this.  Can you believe that?
 
2013-05-06 09:45:27 PM  

Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate.


How the shiat does this compare with a President ordering a burglary?
 
2013-05-06 09:46:20 PM  

dookdookdook: Frozboz: Hannity on his radio show this afternoon apparently had on someone who claimed to be the drone operator from the night of the consulate attacks giving his side of the story. I thought it was a parody bit when I turned it on, seriously. The guy was parroting every right-wing talking point, even going to the point of saying "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!" when asked if he thought it was a cover-up. The guy talked about breaking a NDA and getting in trouble by talking on air. I seriously thought I'd hear "BABABOOEY!" any minute.. but sadly, didn't.

Apparently Fox has some alleged anonymous insider whistleblower source who's just been recycling previously-known-and-debunked bullshiat from months ago as if it's bombshell breaking news.  Dunno if it's the same guy, but probably the same propaganda technique.

mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/02/foreign-policy-magazine-casts-more-d o ubt-on-fox/193876

(cut & paste b/c fark hates mediamatters links)


he's probably a self-hating male prostitute who runs his own news website that nobody has ever heard of.
 
2013-05-06 09:47:15 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Remember kids...

President is a democrat - can't possibly be responsible for everything

President is republican - he's commander in chief, everything is his fault


Did you actually write that with a straight face after 8 years of W as president.  Projection at it's finest.
 
2013-05-06 09:48:12 PM  

Zeppelininthesky: On his personal drone that is also a magic time machine.


Congratulations on your re-election Mr. Obama.  A reminder, sir, that we expect our leaders to obey the laws of the land INCLUDING the laws of physics.
 
2013-05-06 09:49:17 PM  

vygramul: dr_blasto: Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.

Point to actual obfuscation and the actual cover up.

More importantly, point to the motive. Nixon's campaign staff committed a crime, and Nixon covered it up. Obama's, I mean, someone committed a crime, and, well, Obama, er, well, you see... IT'S A SCANDAL, DAMMIT! WHY WON'T YOU PEOPLE LISTEN TO ME!?! CAN'T YOU SEE HOW BLACK HE IS!?!


Exactly. What was covered up? How do you have a cover up if there's nothing to cover?

Was there initial confusion? Sure.
Did Rice speak with bad information? Yep.
Did Obama say anything untrue? Nope.
With 20/20 hindsight, could this have been prevented? Definitely.

WTF is the cover up? Are the Republicans covering up for their refusal to fund security for the State Dept?
 
2013-05-06 09:49:24 PM  

Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.


So, you think that this is somehow worse than Watergate, and will result in Obama being impeached and resigning from office?

I just want to get a sense of the full extent of the crazy before deciding how hard to laugh.
 
2013-05-06 09:50:04 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Remember kids...

President is a democrat - can't possibly be responsible for everything

President is republican - he's commander in chief, everything is his fault


"Ultimately as Commander-in-Chief I am responsible and I don't shy away from that responsibility," -President Obama 28OCT12

-Michael Scott 28OCT12

Sounds like he took responsibility fairly quickly. Your trollz is teh lulz.

Source:

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/264 46 9-obama-says-he-is-ultimately-responsible-for-benghazi-security
 
2013-05-06 09:51:54 PM  

Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.


The only ones obfuscating the truth are the GOP.
 
2013-05-06 09:51:59 PM  

Biological Ali: Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.

So, you think that this is somehow worse than Watergate, and will result in Obama being impeached and resigning from office?

I just want to get a sense of the full extent of the crazy before deciding how hard to laugh.


Well, it has certainly damaged any chance of me voting for him for President in the future.
 
2013-05-06 09:52:05 PM  

Asa Phelps: dookdookdook: Frozboz: Hannity on his radio show this afternoon apparently had on someone who claimed to be the drone operator from the night of the consulate attacks giving his side of the story. I thought it was a parody bit when I turned it on, seriously. The guy was parroting every right-wing talking point, even going to the point of saying "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!" when asked if he thought it was a cover-up. The guy talked about breaking a NDA and getting in trouble by talking on air. I seriously thought I'd hear "BABABOOEY!" any minute.. but sadly, didn't.

Apparently Fox has some alleged anonymous insider whistleblower source who's just been recycling previously-known-and-debunked bullshiat from months ago as if it's bombshell breaking news.  Dunno if it's the same guy, but probably the same propaganda technique.

mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/02/foreign-policy-magazine-casts-more-d o ubt-on-fox/193876

(cut & paste b/c fark hates mediamatters links)

he's probably a self-hating male prostitute who runs his own news website that nobody has ever heard of.


Wonder if Fox is just making it up and they know they're just a propaganda mill or someone is farking with them and Fox just doesn't care enough to verify the person's credentials.
 
2013-05-06 09:52:51 PM  

Whodat: The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.


This is exactly what you guys said about Obama's birth certificate.
 
2013-05-06 09:53:01 PM  
The GOP had fallen so far. This BS "scandal" didn't keep Obama from being reelected, but they think it'll stop Hillary in '16? How low on ideas are these morons?
 
2013-05-06 09:53:06 PM  

Biological Ali: So, you think that this is somehow worse than Watergate, and will result in Obama being impeached and resigning from office?


The argument is that nobody died during Watergate, and therefore I'm going to make a delicious apple pie with these oranges.
 
2013-05-06 09:53:10 PM  

dr_blasto: Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.

Point to actual obfuscation and the actual cover up.


Every press event where this was brought up to Jay Carney is a start. Susan Rice's appearances, Hillary Clinton's "testimony" etc. If you think there have been real answers on this issue, you have not been paying attention or you are a willing dupe.
 
2013-05-06 09:53:36 PM  

Waldo Pepper: I find it funny that people on here are saying "well this side did this before or that side did something like it before" as this making doing the same thing okay.

Whether this is a scandal or not has nothing to do with anything either the right or left has gotten away with in the past.

I have no clue if or if not anything could have been done before, during or after the attack, What I do know is I watched Obama lay all the blame on some video and I would bet my paycheck that he knew the video had nothing to do with it.  

This was a bald face lie and being right before the election, this is an issue.


Find a quote that supports this.
 
2013-05-06 09:53:49 PM  

Waldo Pepper: What I do know is I watched Obama lay all the blame on some video and I would bet my paycheck that he knew the video had nothing to do with it.


And what difference does it make, ffs?
 
2013-05-06 09:54:09 PM  

Waldo Pepper: I have no clue if or if not anything could have been done before, during or after the attack, What I do know is I watched Obama lay all the blame on some video and I would bet my paycheck that he knew the video had nothing to do with it.


Don't you ever feel bad about lying/trolling on the internet?  I mean really, is that all you have going in your life?
 
2013-05-06 09:55:09 PM  

NewportBarGuy: 4 Special Operators? They already killed two ex-SEALs. Did you want a higher body count?

Jesus. And the reason they couldn't get a team from Europe was time. It was over before they could even write the OPORD. They don't just throw people into the fire. They need at least SOME time to prep before they get dropped.


Wrong.
Don't you think they are trained to go into situations without a lot of notice?
You watch too many movies.
 
2013-05-06 09:55:22 PM  

Whodat: dr_blasto: Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.

Point to actual obfuscation and the actual cover up.

Every press event where this was brought up to Jay Carney is a start. Susan Rice's appearances, Hillary Clinton's "testimony" etc. If you think there have been real answers on this issue, you have not been paying attention or you are a willing dupe.


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/09/12/us/politics/libya-stat em ents.html?_r=0
 
2013-05-06 09:55:25 PM  

Frozboz: firefly212: the right is upset that the investigation wasn't complete 48 hours after the attack

Hannity on his radio show this afternoon apparently had on someone who claimed to be the drone operator from the night of the consulate attacks giving his side of the story.  I thought it was a parody bit when I turned it on, seriously.  The guy was parroting every right-wing talking point, even going to the point of saying "we knew RIGHT THEN it wasn't a normal demonstration!" when asked if he thought it was a cover-up.  The guy talked about breaking a NDA and getting in trouble by talking on air.  I seriously thought I'd hear "BABABOOEY!" any minute.. but sadly, didn't.


lol, the worst part is that there are people who believe that moron...here's a hint... the NDA covers not telling people you were the frakkin drone operator on duty and over any given situation

The people who buy into this are just too farking stupid for me to wrap around, they have this tenuous grasp on logic that leads them to simply accept whatever fits their preconception, no matter how illogical it is.
 
2013-05-06 09:57:13 PM  

Waldo Pepper: What I do know is I watched Obama lay all the blame on some video


When?  Where? When he called it an "Act of Terror" ? And what paycheck? And why is the President obliged to tell you a goddamn thing about ongoing operations at all, ever? I wouldn't have expected Bush to brief us on Fallujah while it was unfolding, nor should he have.
 
2013-05-06 09:59:23 PM  

Waldo Pepper: I find it funny that people on here are saying "well this side did this before or that side did something like it before" as this making doing the same thing okay.

Whether this is a scandal or not has nothing to do with anything either the right or left has gotten away with in the past.

I have no clue if or if not anything could have been done before, during or after the attack, What I do know is I watched Obama lay all the blame on some video and I would bet my paycheck that he knew the video had nothing to do with it.
This was a bald face lie and being right before the election, this is an issue.


What was his motivation for blaming it on a video? Why would that in any way mitigate any of the facts on the ground? All the video does is shift the blame from Muslims being angry at the US BEFORE he was president to being pissed off at the US for something that happened WHILE he was president. Changing the motives of the attackers is irrelevant to the handling of the incident itself.

Motive, means, and opportunity are critical when reconstructing the crime scene. Motive is required to determine Mens Rea. No motive, and you're stuck in front of a jury with a dick in your hand - and not necessarily your own. So until someone comes up with a plausible, SPECIFIC way in which the lie helps him, it's just a bunch of hogwash.
 
2013-05-06 10:00:57 PM  
 
2013-05-06 10:00:59 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: NewportBarGuy: 4 Special Operators? They already killed two ex-SEALs. Did you want a higher body count?

Jesus. And the reason they couldn't get a team from Europe was time. It was over before they could even write the OPORD. They don't just throw people into the fire. They need at least SOME time to prep before they get dropped.

Wrong.
Don't you think they are trained to go into situations without a lot of notice?
You watch too many movies.


Except, by the time they could of actually gotten them on the ground, it was too late to do anything. Yes, they do need time to prepare for the mission. Do you think they can just drop in without knowing anything?
 
2013-05-06 10:01:30 PM  

BSABSVR: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Somacandra: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Ineptitude seems to be a common thread. Let's go with that. More is coming.

How is this "ineptitude" ? Lay it all out for me. Right here. That's an invitation.

Be patient.

"I'm not smart enough to really understand, so once I'm out of talking points, I'll just get mysterious.  Youtube. Act of terror.  Susan Rice. It's not the crime it's the cover-up".

After seeing some of you winners in this thread i was surprised that this wasn't main paged.


fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.netView Full Size
 
2013-05-06 10:01:45 PM  

vygramul: dr_blasto: Whodat: I think that this will pan out like Watergate. It wasn't the actual event that was the problem but rather the obfuscation and cover up that will be the real issue. Obvious difference being that nobody died in Watergate.

The administration has had a long time to get out in front of this issue and they have done nothing but fuel the flames.

Point to actual obfuscation and the actual cover up.

More importantly, point to the motive. Nixon's campaign staff committed a crime, and Nixon covered it up. Obama's, I mean, someone committed a crime, and, well, Obama, er, well, you see... IT'S A SCANDAL, DAMMIT! WHY WON'T YOU PEOPLE LISTEN TO ME!?! CAN'T YOU SEE HOW BLACK HE IS!?!


The motive is the cover up or dismissal of a failure to protect the embassy. I don't think that anyone other than some nutters are attempting to say that they allowed the embassy to be overrun for a nefarious intent.
Also, do you know why Nixon's staff were bugging the Dem's office? Hint: It wasn't to get campaign strategy.
BTW Weak-assed attempt to play the race card. I guess when all you have is a hammer (or in this case the tattered remains of the race card) everything looks like a nail.
 
2013-05-06 10:02:33 PM  

vpb: impaler: The only scandal is how Republican scum are trying to make it a scandal.

Yes, but it might work.  There are plenty of BS artificial scandals that have.


It won't work because everyone has moved on except the conspiracy theory nuts.  At this point it's beating a dead horse over and over and over and over...