Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is miniscule with all that is happening in the world.
Why would Obama even dignify its existence?
Wow! Really?! Our embassy is attacked, our ambassador murdered, along with a lot of brave embassy personell, and it should just be dismissed?! No, I don't think so. Highly placed people, all the way up to Obama, should fry for this.
Haha, the Republicans are finally realizing they have nothing. All the Benghazi chatter is starting to get awfully quiet. Obama wins, once again.
What world are you in? The problem is scandals are starting to pile up one right after another. Using the IRS as a club to knock off your enemies? Breaking into a news organization's communications? Hey, way to win friends and influence people.
Face people, this Benghazi Hunt don't Witch.. time to move along now.. Hey start making up things on the IRS or AP "scandals".
The typical liberal wish and hope-
"Let's just ignore it and hope it goes away".
Liberals have truely arrived at fascism when they no longer support the rule of law, but instead, support a leader who they feel is exempt from the law. Gee, Bob............. if Obama did nothing wrong in Benghazi, the IRS attacks on conservatives, and spying on the AP, you have nothing to worry about!
If, on the other hand, Obama did commit crimes, then YOU have something to worry about. The nation, who, for the most part, still feels as though the rule of law supercedes the absolute power of the president, will celebrate.
Why do you support ONE MAN over the RULE OF LAW? Was Nixon above the law? Was Agnew above the law?
What world are you in? The problem is scandals are starting to pile up one right after another. Using the IRS as a club to knock off your enemies? Breaking into a news organization's communications? Hey, way to win friends and influence people.
Guess what? It's really not that big of a deal and will quickly blow over. There's no evidence Obama or anyone in his administration directed the IRS to investigate Tea Party groups specifically. Despite all the histrionics on Faux News, this "scandal" means nothing.
Guess what? It's really not that big of a deal and will quickly blow over. There's no evidence Obama or anyone in his administration directed the IRS to investigate Tea Party groups specifically. Despite all the histrionics on Faux News, this "scandal" means nothing.
It didn't bother you at all when his highness said "if" it was done? If???? Uh, hello they've already admitted it.
There's also no evidence the administration DIDN'T have anything to do with it (yet) still a bit early on for judgement on who did what.
If we had a real leader that leader would've asked for resignations instead of trying to tell people "I heard about it Friday from the news just like you did". C'mon, really?
This applies to any person in office not just Obama.
As for the AP thing, show you had a warrant to get the phone records from a judge and it's done. If not fire Holder immediately.
It is pathetic to listen to President Obama defense of his lack of actions.He claimed yesterday that he called it a terrorist attack the next day. So He claims the next day it was terrorist attack yet sends out his UN ambassador to say it was a movie. So either Obama is a complete in component or a fool. Either one is exposing the culture of corruption involved with democrats
All the Benghazi chatter is starting to get awfully quiet. Obama wins, once again.
Have you not heard of the calm before the storm? Supenas will begin flying in all directions soon. Obama is done as a significant influence on the hill. He foolishly wasted his little remaining political capital on gun control and now there's nothing left to deal with these crises.
The Washington Post just gave Obama's claim that he called Benghazi an "act of terrorism" four Pinocchios.
Quote:
But the president’s claim that he said “act of terrorism” is taking revisionist history too far, given that he repeatedly refused to commit to that phrase when asked directly by reporters in the weeks after the attack. He appears to have gone out of his way to avoid saying it was a terrorist attack, so he has little standing to make that claim now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Was Nixon above the law? Was Agnew above the law?
