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.

(Talking Points Memo)   WaPo fact checker gives three "Pinocchios" to the doctored Benghazi emails claim. Proving once and for all that we cannot trust a single soul within a 50 mile radius of D.C   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, District of Columbia, Benghazi, fact checking, Capitol Hill Republicans, Benghazi emails, emails, Washington Post, ABC White House  
•       •       •

10929 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 May 2013 at 10:22 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-05-22 10:54:22 AM  

Phinn: skozlaw: He was jerking off in the Lincoln bedroom.

LasersHurt: Why does this matter to you?

Three Crooked Squirrels:  I'm going to guess the answer is "He was doing something appropriate to the situation." because if he wasn't, the GOP would already be all over it.

Three more don't-knows.


What type of toilet paper does Obama keep in the Oval Office restroom? 2 ply? 3 ply? Quilted? The Constitution?

WHAT IS OBAMA HIDING?!?!?!?!?!?!
 
2013-05-22 10:54:49 AM  

Phinn: Muta: Does the text of the e-mails the Whitehouse release match the text the Republicans released?

Why didn't the "fact-checker answer that question?

The text does not match exactly because at the original White House briefing, the White House refused to allow any of the reporters to have copies of the emails.  Reporters were allowed to read them and take notes.  The report was based on the notes of Jon Karl, which were not 100% accurate.

The White House's decision to withhold the actual emails, but allow only a viewing of them, is implied but not explicitly stated in the TPM article.


You didn't even read this short article. No WONDER you missed where Obama was and what he was doing.
 
2013-05-22 10:54:56 AM  

FlashHarry: factoryconnection: Will we be seeing conservatives defending.... nay, hailing the efforts of the liberal, in-the-tank, lamestream MSM media like the WaPo and broadcast news outlets?  Someone check the weather report for Hell!

point of fact: the WaPo is a rightwing paper.


HAhahaha!!! No.

You're confusing the nominally rightwing Washington Times with the paper the GOP unaffectionately dubs the Com(munist)Post. Of course there are some deluded souls who believe anything the the right of Bernie Sanders is right-wing.

Codenamechaz: So if I'm reading this right, they're saying the white house is lying because there's no way republicans would do something like make up a statement to make someone else look bad?


Nope, they say the people claiming the emails were doctored are lying as you can't "doctor" a paraphrased recollection. The defenders are saying that The GOP edited emails based on irrelevant differences in the reported content and the actual content.
 
2013-05-22 10:54:57 AM  

vygramul: skozlaw: vygramul: And that's why the Post endorsed Obama.

Although increasingly rare in America, it's still possible to be right-leaning and intelligent.

You had to be either pretty damn stupid or obscenely rich to endorse anyone but Obama in the last election.

The Post hadn't ever endorsed a presidential candidate before. They could have followed tradition.

They also consistently overwhelmingly endorse democrats for local office.

They are liberal. Not even close.


Recommending that you don't vote for Mitt Romney doesn't make you a liberal. It makes you someone who loves America.
 
2013-05-22 10:56:00 AM  

Phinn: The text does not match exactly because at the original White House briefing, the White House refused to allow any of the reporters to have copies of the emails. Reporters were allowed to read them and take notes. The report was based on the notes of Jon Karl, which were not 100% accurate.


Not 100% accurate? They were changed to fit the GOP talking points and not based on Jon Karl's notes.
 
2013-05-22 10:56:18 AM  

Phinn: skozlaw: He was jerking off in the Lincoln bedroom.

LasersHurt: Why does this matter to you?

Three Crooked Squirrels:  I'm going to guess the answer is "He was doing something appropriate to the situation." because if he wasn't, the GOP would already be all over it.

Three more don't-knows.


I don't know either.  I'm guessing he was arming himself, and gassing up Air Force 1, getting ready for the big Mission Accomplished once he went all human drone strike on the evil mooselims.  Just like Mittens would have done.
 
2013-05-22 10:57:03 AM  

Phinn: The report was based on the notes of Jon Karl, which were not 100% accurate. revealed as lies and fantasy.

 
2013-05-22 10:57:56 AM  

skozlaw: vygramul: They are liberal

Yea, yea. Anything that isn't completely unapologetic republican propaganda is liberal. Same as yesterday, same as tomorrow.


How do you distinguish between that and what you are doing? The Post consistently takes liberal positions, yet a few moderate mistakes on their part and you declare them right-leaning.
 
2013-05-22 10:58:16 AM  

Billy Bathsalt: I don't know either. I'm guessing he was arming himself, and gassing up Air Force 1, getting ready for the big Mission Accomplished once he went all human drone strike on the evil mooselims. Just like Mittens would have done.


i93.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-22 10:58:43 AM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: vygramul: They also consistently overwhelmingly endorse democrats for local office.

They are liberal. Not even close.

Some of us are if the belief that today's Democratic Party is far from liberal, and is actually a little center-right, which would fit the original statement that the Post is somewhat right leaning and the other papers in that town extend to the right of the Post.


How do you explain the Post ALWAYS having supported the Democratic Party?
 
2013-05-22 10:59:03 AM  

Cletus C.: He does, in some depth. Actual farking articlel


Well how-dee...
In particular, Karl quotes Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes as writing late on the evening of Sept. 14:"We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don't want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting."On May 13, CNN obtained the actual e-mail written by Rhodes, which said:"We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation....We can take this up tomorrow morning at deputies."

That is a pretty significant edit.
 
2013-05-22 10:59:30 AM  

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: vygramul: skozlaw: vygramul: And that's why the Post endorsed Obama.

Although increasingly rare in America, it's still possible to be right-leaning and intelligent.

You had to be either pretty damn stupid or obscenely rich to endorse anyone but Obama in the last election.

The Post hadn't ever endorsed a presidential candidate before. They could have followed tradition.

They also consistently overwhelmingly endorse democrats for local office.

They are liberal. Not even close.

Recommending that you don't vote for Mitt Romney doesn't make you a liberal. It makes you someone who loves America.


Mitt Romney doesn't run for the vast majority of local offices.
 
2013-05-22 10:59:41 AM  

vygramul: Phinn: The White House's decision to withhold the actual emails, but allow only a viewing of them, is implied but not explicitly stated in the TPM article.

You didn't even read this short article. No WONDER you missed where Obama was and what he was doing.


Yes, I did.  The last sentence of the TPM article confirms that the reporters were allowed to view the emails and take notes, but it does not expressly state that the reporters were prohibited by the White House from receiving actual copies to take with them.

That's why I said this fact was "implied but not explicitly stated in the TPM article."
 
2013-05-22 11:00:27 AM  
Ah, another "fact-check" from Glenn Kessler, eh?

vygramul: And why the Fark do we link to articles about articles? Why not to the goddamn fact check itself?


If I were to have submitted this, I'd want to make sure that that hack doesn't see a dime from his "work."
 
2013-05-22 11:00:39 AM  

ikanreed: 3 "Pinocchios" for the burden of proof being placed on the wrong person?  You're the damned fact checker, when you assume that title, the burden of proof is always on you.


You mean like Mitt Romney paying taxes? I mean, someone accused him of it. Nevernind they had no proof. It was his responsibility to prove otherwise.
 
2013-05-22 11:00:51 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Didn't Karl claim he got that information from the emails, then had to relent and say that some guy told him?


Yep; which lead to a short period of people CONVINCED Obama didn't release all the e-mails since they didn't release the ones that said what the ABC report claimed.

Again, I actually do give quite the benefit of the doubt that since the e-mails weren't released to House Republicans only shown to them there may have been some confusion between what some aide transcribed and what he noted. That said, saying claims that Republicans altered the e-mails to try to make them more damaging is a 3 out of a possible 4 on the scale of how much of a lie it is is ridiculous, especially since the media has continued to report that the e-mails that Stephen Hayes published months ago without scandal are now scandalous after the incorrect summaries were made into breaking news is ridiculous.
 
2013-05-22 11:01:03 AM  

vygramul: skozlaw: vygramul: They are liberal

Yea, yea. Anything that isn't completely unapologetic republican propaganda is liberal. Same as yesterday, same as tomorrow.

How do you distinguish between that and what you are doing? The Post consistently takes liberal positions, yet a few moderate mistakes on their part and you declare them right-leaning.


The editorial page featuring Jennifer Rubin and Charles Krauthammer doesn't scream "consistently liberal positions" to me.
 
2013-05-22 11:01:26 AM  

vygramul: skozlaw: vygramul: And that's why the Post endorsed Obama.

Although increasingly rare in America, it's still possible to be right-leaning and intelligent.

You had to be either pretty damn stupid or obscenely rich to endorse anyone but Obama in the last election.

The Post hadn't ever endorsed a presidential candidate before. They could have followed tradition.

They also consistently overwhelmingly endorse democrats for local office.

They are liberal. Not even close.


Welcome to your lesson in the No True Liberal fallacy. You'll get tons of examples of it in reply. You can cite their position on a million issues that put them on the left-wing side of politics but they'll always be right-wing because they made one statement "not of The Body".
 
2013-05-22 11:01:35 AM  
Fark:

Everything Obama does, everything his administration does, is awesome, or Bush did it.

About sums it up.
 
2013-05-22 11:01:42 AM  

Phinn: vygramul: Phinn: The White House's decision to withhold the actual emails, but allow only a viewing of them, is implied but not explicitly stated in the TPM article.

You didn't even read this short article. No WONDER you missed where Obama was and what he was doing.

Yes, I did.  The last sentence of the TPM article confirms that the reporters were allowed to view the emails and take notes, but it does not expressly state that the reporters were prohibited by the White House from receiving actual copies to take with them.

That's why I said this fact was "implied but not explicitly stated in the TPM article."


Reporters? You sure about that?
 
2013-05-22 11:02:12 AM  

Phinn: vygramul: Phinn: cameroncrazy1984: Look, we're not going to do all of your research for you. If, 8 months after it happened, you don't know the timeline of the attack even in general terms, why are you even commenting on it?

I didn't ask about the timeline of the attack.  I asked where Obama was, and what he was doing, during the time that his subordinates needed to inform him of the latest events and receive his orders.

You don't know either?

Sooo.... Guilty until proven innocent? How American of you.

Another one who doesn't know the answer.

Has Obama's whereabouts and activities, at the time his subordinates were needing to inform him and receive orders to respond to the attack, been determined?

Snark and neeners aren't answering the question.


I'm having a hard time understanding what the point you are trying to make is.  Is it that 0Bummer knew when and why the attacks where taking place, at the exact time they were taking place, and ignored it?

What the fark are you on about, man?
 
2013-05-22 11:03:42 AM  

vygramul: How do you explain the Post ALWAYS having supported the Democratic Party?


Do serious GOP candidates even bother running for District offices?  Like, here in SC, we have "Democrats" that run against the GOP, but most of them are just nutcases with the occasional Blue-dog that still loses after being thrashed all over as a "commie pinko liberal scumbag Pelosi lapdog," like EC Busch was against Mark Sanford recently.
 
2013-05-22 11:03:51 AM  

DirkValentine: I'm having a hard time understanding what the point you are trying to make is. Is it that 0Bummer knew when and why the attacks where taking place, at the exact time they were taking place, and ignored it?

What the fark are you on about, man?


I like to get the facts before I start making points.
 
2013-05-22 11:04:05 AM  

Mrbogey: Nope, they say the people claiming the emails were doctored are lying as you can't "doctor" a paraphrased recollection.


So you can just paraphrase things completely wrong. But that's not doctoring.

Mrbogey: The defenders are saying that The GOP edited emails based on irrelevant differences in the reported content and the actual content.


Weird that most people seem to think those edits are rather signifigant. But probably not to a diehard GOP apologist.
 
2013-05-22 11:04:08 AM  

vygramul: Three Crooked Squirrels: vygramul:

How do you explain the Post ALWAYS having supported the Democratic Party?


I don't pretend to know the entire endorsement history of the Washington Post.  I only offer that the modern Democratic Party, in my opinion, is not liberal.
 
2013-05-22 11:05:08 AM  

Thunderpipes: Fark:

Everything Obama does, everything his administration does, is awesome, or Bush did it.

About sums it up.


Nope there are real scandals but the right wing wont touch them. I wonder why.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-05-22 11:05:29 AM  

Phinn: Has anyone determined where Obama was and what he was doing between the time he was told the embassy was under attack and the time the ambassador was murdered?

I heard the question asked, but I don't remember getting an answer.

I ask because we were treated to those photos of Obama in the Situation Room being very presidential-looking when bin Ladin was being killed.  Are there any photos of him dealing with the embassy murders in a similar manner?


You mean the Bin laden killing that was planed in advance?
 
2013-05-22 11:05:32 AM  
A reminder to all the farkers out there:

fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net
 
2013-05-22 11:06:30 AM  
Whatdifferencedoesitmake.jpg
 
2013-05-22 11:06:38 AM  

vygramul: How do you distinguish between that and what you are doing?


I'm not the one who held up an exceptional example and then argued that it wasn't exceptional circumstances that led to it.

Your ridiculous commentary has all the hallmarks of the typically shallow and meaningless conservative "thought" processes. You want to hold up an exception as evidence of your perfectly mundane claim of political bis. It never occurs to you that if you're going to hold up an exception that maybe there is an exceptional reason it occured. Like maybe one candidate was so exceptionally bad that they took the exceptional step of breaking long-standing tradition of not endorsing a candidate to endorse his opponent.

But, no. That can't be it. It's just not plausible that a conservative candidate could be completely and utterly terrible for president, right? The one who lost by a substantial margin despite absolutely staggering amounts of spending on him. It's not that he was an atrocious candidate, no, it's because of "liberals".

It's just like the fact-checkers during the cycle. It's not that Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan lied, oh, god no, that can't be. It must be because of liberals! He didn't lie, the liberal fact-checkers just have a different opinion! It's not that they didn't have any actual plans to show anybody, it's that any outlet that reported that fact or ran an editorial criticizing their lack of concrete plans is liberal!

Liberals! Liberals! The problem is always Emmanuel Goldstein!
 
2013-05-22 11:07:15 AM  
Yea, this is the same guy who said Mitt Romney didn't run the company he was legally running and getting paid to run.

But then the guy rates "lies" with the number of Pinocchios and not the length of his nose, so, it's not like his brain functions like normal people anyway.
 
2013-05-22 11:08:16 AM  

James!: factoryconnection: Will we be seeing conservatives defending.... nay, hailing the efforts of the liberal, in-the-tank, lamestream MSM media like the WaPo and broadcast news outlets?  Someone check the weather report for Hell!

Also, Obama Administration, I am dissapoint.

That article doesn't say what you think it says.  He gave the Pinocchios to the White house.


What's the Whitehouse supposed to do with three wooden marionettes with no strings?
 
2013-05-22 11:08:50 AM  

skilbride: A reminder to all the farkers out there:

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 636x488]


It's possible they're both aliens too, but I still prefer to stick to likely realities: Obama is average and W. Bush (and especially his advisers) was terrible.
 
2013-05-22 11:08:53 AM  

factoryconnection: Will we be seeing conservatives defending.... nay, hailing the efforts of the liberal, in-the-tank, lamestream MSM media like the WaPo and broadcast news outlets?  Someone check the weather report for Hell!

Also, Obama Administration, I am dissapoint.


Even though the IRS came out and said "We did something wrong, sorry bout that," some peeps still defend it.  This is a great litmus test to see who is liberal, and who is leftist.  A liberal has a certain view about how to interpret the Constitution, but does not necessarily think the government is infallible... a Leftist is pushing the agenda of the left, no matter what.

Amaze and label your friends.
 
2013-05-22 11:09:44 AM  

I_C_Weener: What's the Whitehouse supposed to do with three wooden marionettes with no strings?


Well, the last administration had one big one there for eight years...

/ wait, you said no strings
 
2013-05-22 11:09:58 AM  

I_C_Weener: James!: factoryconnection: Will we be seeing conservatives defending.... nay, hailing the efforts of the liberal, in-the-tank, lamestream MSM media like the WaPo and broadcast news outlets?  Someone check the weather report for Hell!

Also, Obama Administration, I am dissapoint.

That article doesn't say what you think it says.  He gave the Pinocchios to the White house.

What's the Whitehouse supposed to do with three wooden marionettes with no strings?


Cheap labor?
 
2013-05-22 11:10:12 AM  

hawcian: spentshells: This is actually why Ron Paul should have been elected. Americans would not have even been in that country.

Too bad you all did not think this through. It is unfortunate Dr. Paul will be too old to run for office next time around. I told all my friends in the USA to write him in.

I know Ron Paul is famously against military adventurism, but I wasn't aware he doesn't even want embassies/consulates in other countries.


Then you need to read up more because that is exactly what he states constantly. Close army bases and embassies because it is a waste of money. Billions spent in relations with countries that don't like them or want them there.

I'm surprised you don't know that. Dr. Paul is an unsung American hero.
 
2013-05-22 11:10:52 AM  

skozlaw: I_C_Weener: What's the Whitehouse supposed to do with three wooden marionettes with no strings?

Well, the last administration had one big one there for eight years...

/ wait, you said no strings


And I was going to go with an "They already have Biden" joke.  B-b-b-Bush is so much edgier.  :)
 
2013-05-22 11:11:01 AM  

Phinn: DirkValentine: I'm having a hard time understanding what the point you are trying to make is. Is it that 0Bummer knew when and why the attacks where taking place, at the exact time they were taking place, and ignored it?

What the fark are you on about, man?

I like to get the facts before I start making points.


Then I'm surprised you aren't already familiar with the timeline, which clearly states that the president was told about the situation roughly an hour after the attack started. Why repeatedly ask for information that is widely available? Why imply that there is a scandal involving the president's whereabouts when you can easily determine for yourself that there is not?
 
2013-05-22 11:11:49 AM  

GORDON: some peeps still defend it


What if I'm indifferent toward it because I haven't been paying attention because I've just been assuming it's a "scandal" in the same way every other "scandal" the conservatives have been screeching about for fives years has been?

/ I'll give a shiat about them being hard on the poor, downtrodden teabaggers when Karl Rove is no longer running the biggest tax-free political machine in American history
 
2013-05-22 11:12:25 AM  

skozlaw: Phinn: Has Obama's whereabouts and activities, at the time his subordinates were needing to inform him and receive orders to respond to the attack, been determined?

He was jerking off in the Lincoln bedroom.

Any more stupid questions that mean nothing or are you done here?


I believe he's looking for the answer to why there is a four hour ago between when first calls for help went out, and when the ambassador was killed, when we had assets in the region to extract them, and what the presidents orders where during that timeframe. This is a legitimate question, far more than this email variance BS. Because, and no I don't have a source, if memory serves me correct, Obama went to bed.
 
2013-05-22 11:13:09 AM  

I_C_Weener: And I was going to go with an "They already have Biden" joke. B-b-b-Bush is so much edgier. :)


Biden is about the farthest thing from a puppet as you can get. That's his liability.

Either that or his puppeteer is terrible.
 
2013-05-22 11:13:55 AM  

James!: I_C_Weener: James!: factoryconnection: Will we be seeing conservatives defending.... nay, hailing the efforts of the liberal, in-the-tank, lamestream MSM media like the WaPo and broadcast news outlets?  Someone check the weather report for Hell!

Also, Obama Administration, I am dissapoint.

That article doesn't say what you think it says.  He gave the Pinocchios to the White house.

What's the Whitehouse supposed to do with three wooden marionettes with no strings?

Cheap labor?


Firewood?  Do they have real fire places in there anymore or is it natural gas?
 
2013-05-22 11:14:34 AM  

jayphat: This is a legitimate question


Then he should ask that question, not engage in his retarded fishing expedition so he can later pick a fight with people who respond over narrow technicalities.
 
2013-05-22 11:14:56 AM  

I_C_Weener: James!: I_C_Weener: James!: factoryconnection: Will we be seeing conservatives defending.... nay, hailing the efforts of the liberal, in-the-tank, lamestream MSM media like the WaPo and broadcast news outlets?  Someone check the weather report for Hell!

Also, Obama Administration, I am dissapoint.

That article doesn't say what you think it says.  He gave the Pinocchios to the White house.

What's the Whitehouse supposed to do with three wooden marionettes with no strings?

Cheap labor?

Firewood?  Do they have real fire places in there anymore or is it natural gas?


It's all that fireplace TV station.
 
2013-05-22 11:15:25 AM  

skilbride: A reminder to all the farkers out there:

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 636x488]


For Obama to be a terrible President, you would have to concede every President ranked below Obama to be a terrible President.  That's a long list.
 
2013-05-22 11:15:48 AM  
FACT CHECK:  Some claim that Anthony Weiner posted a photo of his junk on Twitter.  However, as that would be an extremely foolish thing for him to do it obviously did not occur.
-FOUR PINOCCHIOS ON FIRE
 
2013-05-22 11:18:06 AM  

skozlaw: I_C_Weener: And I was going to go with an "They already have Biden" joke. B-b-b-Bush is so much edgier. :)

Biden is about the farthest thing from a puppet as you can get. That's his liability.

Either that or his puppeteer is terrible.


Holder?  Who would be an Obama puppet?  Carney.   Definitely Carney.
 
2013-05-22 11:18:33 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: vygramul: skozlaw: vygramul: They are liberal

Yea, yea. Anything that isn't completely unapologetic republican propaganda is liberal. Same as yesterday, same as tomorrow.

How do you distinguish between that and what you are doing? The Post consistently takes liberal positions, yet a few moderate mistakes on their part and you declare them right-leaning.

The editorial page featuring Jennifer Rubin and Charles Krauthammer doesn't scream "consistently liberal positions" to me.


Wouldn't you expect a liberal paper to do the intellectually honest thing and present opposing viewpoints? Or do you expect that of conservative papers?
 
2013-05-22 11:18:50 AM  
3 pinochios sounds like it should be a lie.  What i read in the article sounds like both sides were just spinning.  Spinning is not lying.  At least not in Washington.
 
Displayed 50 of 423 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report