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.
Republicans on the committee, which includes Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), want to know if politics were driving the decisions rather than security.
Congressman Chaffetz appeared on CNN this morning with Soledad O’Brien where she asked the Congressman about his vote in the U.S. House of Representatives when he voted against more security.
Republicans on the committee, which includes Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), want to know if politics were driving the decisions rather than security.
Congressman Chaffetz appeared on CNN this morning with Soledad O’Brien where she asked the Congressman about his vote in the U.S. House of Representatives when he voted against more security.
The budget is and they received $4.3 million higher than last year. He didn't have a vote in what the money was spent on, that is the State Dept. He had a vote to or not to, raise that amount, to more than the annual yearly budget increase.
Yes, the Congress did not fund the State Department's request for additional monies. But the RWNJs don't want to acknowledge/hear that. Nor do they want to acknowledge that Benghazi was a CIA station/base and not a diplomatic mission such as an Embassy or Consulate is considered. Even if State had received additional funds, I doubt it would have spent the money on Benghazi. And if the CIA had spent the money and fortified the building(s) that would have drawn unwanted attention. Foreign service officers understand they are taking risks when they're assigned to conflict zones. Nobody wants to die, but they understand there are serious risks. All of this flap over Benghazi is disengenuous because it's about trying to sully Hillary Clinton as she prepares to run for President. Little sorrow is being displayed for the lives lost.
Yes, the Congress did not fund the State Department's request for additional monies. But the RWNJs don't want to acknowledge/hear that. Nor do they want to acknowledge that Benghazi was a CIA station/base and not a diplomatic mission such as an Embassy or Consulate is considered. Even if State had received additional funds, I doubt it would have spent the money on Benghazi. And if the CIA had spent the money and fortified the building(s) that would have drawn unwanted attention. Foreign service officers understand they are taking risks when they're assigned to conflict zones. Nobody wants to die, but they understand there are serious risks. All of this flap over Benghazi is disengenuous because it's about trying to sully Hillary Clinton as she prepares to run for President. Little sorrow is being displayed for the lives lost.
Well said. Very little sorrow about the lives lost except insofar as they are useful as a political bludgeon to use against the administration. And absolutely no concern or calls to find the terrorists who are actually responsible for the deaths. But that's understandable--there is nothing to be gained politically by focusing attention there, so who cares? Better that we hold another six hearings about which alphabet agency changed the talking points. That's vastly more important.
Republicans on the committee, which includes Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), want to know if politics were driving the decisions rather than security.
Congressman Chaffetz appeared on CNN this morning with Soledad O’Brien where she asked the Congressman about his vote in the U.S. House of Representatives when he voted against more security.
As has been pointed out a whole lot of times, you need to catch up, the State Dept. said funding WAS NOT AN ISSUE.
As has been pointed out a whole lot of times, you need to catch up, the State Dept. said funding WAS NOT AN ISSUE.
So, what is your point?
Since when does the State Dept provide security for CIA bases ?
Isn't the point of the CIA to be spies ? Aren't they supposed to blend in and be able to spy ?
No one wants to hear this kinda truth. They want sinister truth. They want that Obama "left" Abm. Stevens behind...not that funding was not there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gomexico
Yes, the Congress did not fund the State Department's request for additional monies. But the RWNJs don't want to acknowledge/hear that. Nor do they want to acknowledge that Benghazi was a CIA station/base and not a diplomatic mission such as an Embassy or Consulate is considered. Even if State had received additional funds, I doubt it would have spent the money on Benghazi. And if the CIA had spent the money and fortified the building(s) that would have drawn unwanted attention. Foreign service officers understand they are taking risks when they're assigned to conflict zones. Nobody wants to die, but they understand there are serious risks. All of this flap over Benghazi is disengenuous because it's about trying to sully Hillary Clinton as she prepares to run for President. Little sorrow is being displayed for the lives lost.
They did get a 4.3 million increase in funding from the previous year.
Since when does the State Dept provide security for CIA bases ?
Isn't the point of the CIA to be spies ? Aren't they supposed to blend in and be able to spy ?
This place is being exposed as a CIA jail.
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.
