• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Republicans, please explain the Behghazi outrage to me

Page 22 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
First said:
Poor Fern, post-wingnut conversation he's really gone downhill. Can't even admit now easily confirmable bullshit statements he made about the admin lying.
Click to expand...
A New York Post story on Benghazi and what the brain damaged Hillary will get questioned on about it.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinio..._questions_for_clinton_iPokjZYDz6wpgH8rPpVzKL

..........................
Last week, however, Sen. Bob Corker asserted that no new secretary of state be confirmed until Clinton testifies. Corker, ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee starting in January, was joined by Sen. Lindsey Graham. Their idea provides a strong incentive to committee Chairman John Kerry, now tapped as Clinton’s successor, to schedule her testimony.
Click to expand...
 
monovillage said:
A New York Post story on Benghazi and what the brain damaged Hillary will get questioned on about it.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinio..._questions_for_clinton_iPokjZYDz6wpgH8rPpVzKL
Click to expand...
An op-ed ... by John Bolton, no less? Lulz! Good to see how you keep your outrage stoked. Just keep your head firmly lodged in the nutter bubble and guzzle the propaganda. It really works on hate-filled hacks on the right-wing fringe. Very kind of Spidey to make room for you.

On the bright side, I did enjoy the Jennifer Aniston link right below Bolton's swill. She's still amazingly hot for a 40 year old. It's probably the best thing you've (almost) posted in the last year.
 
Last edited:
ivwshane said:
So where is the cover up? Please tell us what nefarious reasons Obama would make such a statement.
Please tell us what this admin did that was an impeachable offense.
Click to expand...

He can't provide answers to you man, genetic born trolls stay losers for life. He'll wimp out ad nauseam. See Fern et al wingnuts, can't man up with evidence of any lies. Benghazi report put this to rest and so will Clinton's testimony. But these dolts will still loser it up. Fun to watch from my end, though.
 
ivwshane said:
So where is the cover up? Please tell us what nefarious reasons Obama would make such a statement.
Please tell us what this admin did that was an impeachable offense.
Click to expand...

It's very obvious to everyone, even the partisan Obama suckers that have been posting in this thread that Obama and his administration have been lying about what happened in Benghazi. It will only be impeachable if his administration and Obama himself lies under oath. Lying to the American people is so common by this administration it isn't even cause for a post. Let those subpoenas roll baby!
 
monovillage said:
It's very obvious to everyone, even the partisan Obama suckers that have been posting in this thread that Obama and his administration have been lying about what happened in Benghazi. It will only be impeachable if his administration and Obama himself lies under oath. Lying to the American people is so common by this administration it isn't even cause for a post. Let those subpoenas roll baby!
Click to expand...

What were the lies?
 
ivwshane said:
I have read it and all I see is the same pieces of shits making baseless claims.

As expected, you've got nothing.
Click to expand...

Isn't it amazing that you and the other Obama dick suckers have been saying the same thing for over 3 months and the stories keep rolling in? I wonder what the next excuse old Hillary will find to escape testifying under oath about Benghazi?
 
monovillage said:
Isn't it amazing that you and the other Obama dick suckers have been saying the same thing for over 3 months and the stories keep rolling in? I wonder what the next excuse old Hillary will find to escape testifying under oath about Benghazi?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm sure you're about to report the next "story" on Hillary that just broke moments ago....

\are your privates sweating... I'm sure they are...
\\I'm going to set my watch until the next report... in five, four, three, two, one....
 
Last edited:
ivwshane said:
What were the lies?
Click to expand...
I have assumed that the Obama administration was lying about parts of the Benghazi situation since Representative Chaffetz of the Issa Committee exposed the existence of the CIA annex in Benghazi.

What I don't understand is how the Republicans (and their supporters in this thread) think it serves the nation to pursue these lies.

Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we kept our mission open in Benghazi after the other western powers abandoned that city because we needed it there solely as cover for the CIA facility?
Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we did not upgrade security at a sham mission because there wasn't supposed to be anything there important enough to warrant the upgrades?
Do we really need the administration to admit to the world that the State Department functions more as an adjunct of the CIA than as a diplomatic service in some regions?
 
UberNeuman said:
Good advice. Much like Fox News and rightwing media putting REALITY on ignore....

\you enjoy how much they mislead you?
Click to expand...

I actually laugh quite a bit each time Jhhnn, First, and you attempt to mislead me. It is enjoyable to see you all try so hard and yet fail so miserably. Keep it up. 🙂
 
CallMeJoe said:
I have assumed that the Obama administration was lying about parts of the Benghazi situation since Representative Chaffetz of the Issa Committee exposed the existence of the CIA annex in Benghazi.

What I don't understand is how the Republicans (and their supporters in this thread) think it serves the nation to pursue these lies.

Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we kept our mission open in Benghazi after the other western powers abandoned that city because we needed it there solely as cover for the CIA facility?
Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we did not upgrade security at a sham mission because there wasn't supposed to be anything there important enough to warrant the upgrades?
Do we really need the administration to admit to the world that the State Department functions more as an adjunct of the CIA than as a diplomatic service in some regions?
Click to expand...

A most worthy post, one in which is based in reality rather than pure political posturing and gamesmanship the righties are employing full press in this instance. :thumbsup:
 
The outrage is mostly based on the cover up of the lies - which failed. We now know the government knew what was going on and instead lied about it repeatedly.

Obviously there are too many Obamites here to understand such a simple concept.
 
cybrsage said:
I actually laugh quite a bit each time Jhhnn, First, and you attempt to mislead me. It is enjoyable to see you all try so hard and yet fail so miserably. Keep it up. 🙂
Click to expand...

Romney won the election.... enjoy the deception and what your media feeds you...
 
CallMeJoe said:
I have assumed that the Obama administration was lying about parts of the Benghazi situation since Representative Chaffetz of the Issa Committee exposed the existence of the CIA annex in Benghazi.

What I don't understand is how the Republicans (and their supporters in this thread) think it serves the nation to pursue these lies.

Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we kept our mission open in Benghazi after the other western powers abandoned that city because we needed it there solely as cover for the CIA facility?
Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we did not upgrade security at a sham mission because there wasn't supposed to be anything there important enough to warrant the upgrades?
Do we really need the administration to admit to the world that the State Department functions more as an adjunct of the CIA than as a diplomatic service in some regions?
Click to expand...
😀 Yeah, the Obama administration didn't fuck up, it was the evil CIA. The Messiah was pure and clean and saving the world, only he has to work through impure vessels. Probably even some closet Republicans among them.

Please stop spinning just long enough for us to strap some magnets to your ass so that we can use you for a clean source of power.
 
werepossum said:
😀 Yeah, the Obama administration didn't fuck up, it was the evil CIA. The Messiah was pure and clean and saving the world, only he has to work through impure vessels. Probably even some closet Republicans among them.

Please stop spinning just long enough for us to strap some magnets to your ass so that we can use you for a clean source of power.
Click to expand...

With a lack of gravity there's no need to spin...

\Behghazi a scandal yet?
 
Last edited:
werepossum said:
😀 Yeah, the Obama administration didn't fuck up, it was the evil CIA. The Messiah was pure and clean and saving the world, only he has to work through impure vessels. Probably even some closet Republicans among them.

Please stop spinning just long enough for us to strap some magnets to your ass so that we can use you for a clean source of power.
Click to expand...
Where did I blame the CIA for anything? They definitely had (and continue to have) a legitimate and valuable mission in Benghazi.


edit: the State Department also plays a valuable role in support of the CIA. I don't think it necessarily benefits national security to have too thorough a public exploration of their relationship.
 
Last edited:
UberNeuman said:
With a lack of gravity there's no need to spin...

\Behghazi a scandal yet?
Click to expand...
I agree there's no need to spin. But some people seemingly cannot stomach the thought that even someone under Obama - a mere mortal touched with only a tiny bit of Grace borrowed from the Messiah - could screw up and thus, it becomes part of a grand plan, part of a higher good.

CallMeJoe said:
Where did I blame the CIA for anything? They definitely had (and continue to have) a legitimate mission in Benghazi.


edit: the State Department also plays a valuable role in support of the CIA. I don't think it necessarily benefits national security to have too thorough a public exploration of their relationship.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Let's look:
Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we kept our mission open in Benghazi after the other western powers abandoned that city because we needed it there solely as cover for the CIA facility?
Click to expand...
Obama didn't move our consul because of the CIA; their need kept diplomats in danger.

Do we really need the administration publicly to admit that we did not upgrade security at a sham mission because there wasn't supposed to be anything there important enough to warrant the upgrades?
Click to expand...
Obama didn't provide the consul with the requested security because of the CIA's needs. Why, it wasn't even a real consul, merely a sham mission to provide a thin CIA cover.

Do we really need the administration to admit to the world that the State Department functions more as an adjunct of the CIA than as a diplomatic service in some regions?
Click to expand...
Four Americans died directly because of CIA operations, two of them engaged in nothing more substantial than providing the merest shred of a veil of legitimacy to cover for the CIA.

Dude, you did everything but show up with a pitchfork and torch shrieking "Kill the spooks!"
 
werepossum said:
Seriously? Let's look:
Obama didn't move our consul because of the CIA; their need kept diplomats in danger.
Obama didn't provide the consul with the requested security because of the CIA's needs. Why, it wasn't even a real consul, merely a sham mission to provide a thin CIA cover.
Four Americans died directly because of CIA operations, two of them engaged in nothing more substantial than providing the merest shred of a veil of legitimacy to cover for the CIA.
Dude, you did everything but show up with a pitchfork and torch shrieking "Kill the spooks!"
Click to expand...
I suppose you could conceivably misinterpret my posts that way. It takes quite a stretch, though not beyond what we see you routinely essay on this forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top