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.
He was there, in the country. He was well aware of what was going on. He was in contact with Ambasssador Stevens. And when he heard the story presented by the current administration about the events he "was stunned", according to his testimony.
Nixon resigned after a term and part of another....I double this president will. Nixon lied and obstructed justice. Coming off of eight miserable years of Bush...Obama should be awarded a medal.
What in hell has Nixon to do with my question? The question is, Why did this administration continue to try to convince us that one thing had happened in Benghazi when it was clear that what had really happened was something totally different?
Only the US intelligence was so woefully uninformed because the rest of the world had concluded by that Friday before it was a planned terrorist attack.
And then Rice went on CBS telling the President of Libya he was wrong and that it was the movie outrage and not an attack.
Turns out the President of Libya and the rest of the world were right and the US and their great intelligence network was dead wrong.
And you call 2 security agents "substantial security" ? Stevens had 3 more but only 2 were stationed at Benghazi.
9/18/2012: Ambassador Susan Rice: Libya Attack Not Premeditated - ABC News
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last week was not premeditated, directly contradicting top Libyan officials who say the attack was planned in advance.
..
Rice’s account directly contradicts that of Libyan President Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf, who said this weekend that he had “no doubt” the attack was pre-planned by individuals from outside Libya.
“It was planned, definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their arrival,” Magariaf told CBS News.
..
But Rice said there was a “substantial security presence” at the consulate in Benghazi, noting that two of the four Americans killed there were providing security.
Then the best course of action would be to attempt to understand why the CIA was so uninformed when it was a CIA facility that was attacked.
Apparently you are a West Point grad and should be intelligent enough to know that differential application of the rule of law erodes adherence to those laws and leads us down a path of anarchy. That is why the POTUS must abide by the same laws that we, as "ordinary citizens", are expected to obey. This is why Watergate was important and why Benghazi is important.
This case is about obstruction of justice and the hope that citizens can rely upon the rule of law to maintain proper and ethical behavior in our nation.
What do you not understand about that?
There is zero evidence that Obama has broken any laws.
1. Why the available military assets were told to "stand down" during the attack?
No available military assets were told to "stand down" during the attack. In fact, assets had been mobilized to respond on three continents. They were told to stand down only when the attacks were over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
2. Who ordered these forces to "stand down"?
During the attacks, no such order was given.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
3. Why was the commander of Africom fired after this?
He was not fired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
4. Why did Hillary tell Hicks she agreed the consulate should be evacuated, then denied the evacution?
She never denied an evacuation. It was fully evacuated in roughly 12 hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
5. Who over-ruled Hillary?
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
6. Why did the White House ignore the warnings of the Libyan government?
To the extend that they were involved in the State Department decision (unlikely), it would have been a judgement call.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
7. Why, despite the requests of Hicks, was the FBI investigation of the site delayed 18 days?
Considering that Hicks has never been in the FBI's chain of command, there is no evidence of any delay other than the red tape always necessary for the FBI to operate overseas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
8. What communication did the State Department have with Obama?
These details have already been shared with Congress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
9. Why did Rice perpetuate the "video" lie, even when it was clear this was incorrect?
Once it became clear that it was incorrect, she stopped.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
10. Who told Rice to make the talk show rounds espousing the video lie?
Ignoring that it was never a "lie," these details have been shared with Congress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
11. Did Obama have any direct communication with Africom?
The President has direct contact with all his top level military commanders. He does not, however, make a habit of inserting himself into ongoing operations. Panetta has testified that the answer to this question is, "No."
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
12. Did Panetta have any direct communication with Africom?
Of course he did. He has fully testified in front of Congress on that subject.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
13. Why have those who wrote the 'official" White House version of Benghazi refused to testify?
To this point, no one has been identified, called to testify, and then refused to testify.
What in hell has Nixon to do with my question? The question is, Why did this administration continue to try to convince us that one thing had happened in Benghazi when it was clear that what had really happened was something totally different?
Even though the State Dept had intel reports of a terrorist act, they said the CIA said it was a spontaneous protest gone bad. The State Dept didn't acknowledge that until the night before the Oct hearings when the emails would be made public.
Now, seeing that Benghazi was a CIA base to begin with, they of all people would have known if there was a protest there or not.
I don't know about the spooks Happy. Having worked with both them and the DIA a couple of times they wouldn't tell ordinary folks anything. Nothing. Zip. Nada.
No available military assets were told to "stand down" during the attack. In fact, assets had been mobilized to respond on three continents. They were told to stand down only when the attacks were over.
During the attacks, no such order was given.
He was not fired.
She never denied an evacuation. It was fully evacuated in roughly 12 hours.
See above.
To the extend that they were involved in the State Department decision (unlikely), it would have been a judgement call.
Considering that Hicks has never been in the FBI's chain of command, there is no evidence of any delay other than the red tape always necessary for the FBI to operate overseas.
These details have already been shared with Congress.
Once it became clear that it was incorrect, she stopped.
Ignoring that it was never a "lie," these details have been shared with Congress.
The President has direct contact with all his top level military commanders. He does not, however, make a habit of inserting himself into ongoing operations. Panetta has testified that the answer to this question is, "No."
Of course he did. He has fully testified in front of Congress on that subject.
To this point, no one has been identified, called to testify, and then refused to testify.
Two have..Nuland and Rhodes. But Nuland's email says "her superiors" were unhappy with the talking points not her.
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.
