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.
Who? The Republicans? I don't support them at all.
What do you neo-cons think is going to be gained by this witch hunt at this point? If you seriously think this is going to lead to Obama resigning or being impeached, you are a complete and total fool that has been brainwashed by the Republican media echo-chamber.
I sincerely pray that people with your mindset are marginalized in the next election before any more serious harm is done to our nation and society. This administration is criminal and dangerous with no regard for truth, the rule of law or the Constitution. The battle lines are being drawn.
If incapable of being honest, at lease be informed???
I am, sadly it seems you're not.
Read on and you will be.
Armitage was giving me high-level insider gossip, unusual in a first meeting. About halfway through our session, I brought up Bush’s sixteen words.... I then asked Armitage a question that had been puzzling me but, for the sake of my future peace of mind, would better have been left unasked. Why would the CIA send Joseph Wilson, not an expert in nuclear proliferation and with no intelligence experience, on the mission to Niger? “Well,” Armitage replied, “you know his wife works at the CIA, and she suggested that he be sent to Niger.” “His wife works at the CIA?” I asked. “Yeah, in counterproliferation.”
He mentioned her first name, Valerie.... The exchange about Wilson’s wife lasted no more than sixty seconds. Armitage offered no interpretation of Wilson’s conduct and said nothing negative about him or his wife. I am sure it was not a planned leak but came out as an offhand observation.... Shortly thereafter, he secretly revealed his role to federal authorities investigating the leak of Mrs. Wilson’s name but did not inform White House officials, apparently including the President.
Novak got Valerie’s last name from Wilson’s bio in Who’s Who. But after he used it in his column, the name Valerie Plame became big news in the media and caused quite a storm. On October 1, 2003, after reading a second column by Novak on the case, Armitage, alarmed by the clamor in the press for the name of the leaker who had outed a covert CIA agent, revealed his role to his boss Secretary of State Colin Powell. They took up the matter with State Department lawyer William H. Taft IV, who then spoke with White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, who allegedly told Taft that he did not want to know. But why didn't Taft or Powell go directly to the President with this important information?
In January 2004, the Justice Department chose prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald to investigate the leak of Valerie Plame's identity. From the outset, he was made fully aware that the leaker was Armitage, who resigned from the State Department in November 2004 but remained a subject of the inquiry until February 2006 when Fitzgerald told him in a letter that he would not be charged. The New York Times reported on Sept. 2, 2006 The Truth About the Valerie Plame Case Finally Emerges (Scooter Libby Innocent)
What basis do you have for saying he was a disgruntled employee ?
The fact that he said it was an attack from the get go and didn't go along with the movie protest theme ?
"Death is part of life," said Democrat Elijah Cummings, ranking Democrat.
None of the Democrats at the hearings will admit to the plain truth that everyone has know since early on in the investigation into the terrorist attack on our Embassy in Benghazi, that there was a "stand down" order given by the administration, that help was refused, and Americans allowed to die. Help was available, and ready to respond. They were ordered not to go in.
Further, there has been an intentional cover-up of the truth, with the White House treating it as a non-event, something that happened "a long time ago."
Yet the testimony reveals the truth.
Democrats are uninterested, which seems strange since, where other investigations initiated by Democrats have been concerned, they have always insisted, "It's the seriousness of the charge."
Apparently that only applies if it is a Republican under investigation.
The only real non-event in this whole thing seems to be "it's the video".
Very few, if any, liberals really want to know the truth behind Benghazi, as they fear the damage it may cause members of their party.
It is disgusting, yet predictable, that liberals have no interest in the rule of law. Benghazi shows that liberals feel as though members of their party are above the law and that an investigation of a crime is "silly". I guarantee you there would be a different response if Obama and Hillary were republicans.
Watch the testimony on C-SPAN. The democratic congressmen were acting as Obama's defense council and were interested only in discrediting the witnesses or suggesting that the whole issue was caused by lack of funding (due to those naughty republicans) and thus, everything was perfectly fine!
In Watergate, we had members of BOTH PARTIES trying to arrive at the truth. In Benghazi, we have EVERY DEMOCRAT trying to cover tracks for Obama and Hillary.
I sincerely pray that people with your mindset are marginalized in the next election before any more serious harm is done to our nation and society. This administration is criminal and dangerous with no regard for truth, the rule of law or the Constitution. The battle lines are being drawn.
This is all vague coded talk. Are you advocating violence against "liberals?" That's what it sounds like you mean.
Once again, the MSM proves professional enough to tell the difference between news and partisan political puffery. The primary reason conservatives hate the MSM is because the MSM is competent.
Its so funny how every response by the left is about conservatives undermining the liberals or right vs left. Never has anyone one of you sat down, actually thought about the incident and had a passionate discussion about the concerns for what is being nationally covered.
Its so easy to be so dismissive. For once, answer the question without bringing in Bush or how there is a which hunt. Discuss how a high ranking official who testified under oath stated that he was denied the ability to speak with investigating officials after the incident. I don’t believe fox spoon-fed that info into his mouth.
No, don't do it. I know you want to but don't do it. Don't mention left/right or Bush. I know you want to.
Yeah... Mr. Hicks appears to be pretty upset over being considered less than a stellar employee. A reasonable person would take that into account when considering his motives for testifying. He would certainly not the first person who wanted to get back at the boss.
However, if your intention is to deliver bombshells, you actually need to have bombshells. Yesterday, we didn't even get firecrackers.
In your opinion. What gets me is the "we have to listen to the Generals, they know what they're doing". Well, maybe and maybe not but what needs to be pointed out is at that level Generals are as much a political animal as anyone else in the administration otherwise they don't keep their jobs long. Remeber the saying "I serve at the pleasure of the President"?
Say or do something that displeases the President? POOF you're now a retired General slinking off to write your memoirs so what do you THINK a General will say? The administration was wrong? Yeah, ok.
You probably should know that better than most on here.
There are many reasons that responses become "typical." One of them is that the truth is generally pretty predictable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
Very few, if any, liberals really want to know the truth behind Benghazi, as they fear the damage it may cause members of their party.
Not even close. Very few, if any, liberals are of the opinion that we don't already know the truth behind Benghazi. Based on yesterday's hearings... where exactly nothing new was revealed even after weeks of posturing, predicting, pontificating and prevaricating by conservatives... we are right.
The rest of your whining post would be simply pathetic were it not also sadly amusing. The truth frustrates you at every turn. What is real does not conform to what you wish was real.
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.
