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.
Eric Holder has reused to answer the simplest question and there is firm proof that the Administration and DOJ mad one many political decisions.
There was officers who testified to this fact.
Obama Administration still lied and people died. The sorry thing about this the lies keep on getting bigger.
Now they are telling lies, to hide the lies.
As seen before, Obama cannot keep up with the many lies he tells and then slips spilling the beans on just how deep the corruption goes.
Within hours, State and CIA officials at the Embassy in Tripoli, Libya's president and video footage made that clear. Yet the Administration settled on deceptive spin and stuck to it for over a week.
This is important. No one in the administration ever thought it was a video. They have been attempting to feed the gullible this story ever since it happened. It is very clear, no one in the administration ever thought it was about the video. Every fabrication since the attack has been to cover up that lie.
another:
Quote:
The White House also found a scapegoat in the intelligence community, blaming the CIA for drawing up the faulty "talking points" used by Administration officials. Last May it released drafts of emails from the CIA, with input from State and the White House, that spontaneous protests had "evolved into a direct assault." Yet those talking points never mentioned a video, and earlier this month former acting CIA Director Mike Morell said he didn't understand why Ms. Rice had mentioned it.
Mr. Rhodes's email provides the answer. The message directive came directly from the White House and was followed to the word. Mr. Rhodes alluded to the video in five spots in his email. On Wednesday, Mr. Carney still insisted Ms. Rice had "relied on points about the Benghazi attack that were produced by the CIA." He must think the press corps is stupid.
The Rhodes email shows a White House political operative trying to protect his boss two months before Election Day. Mr. Obama's campaign said al Qaeda was on the run and it was time for "nation-building at home." The terror attack on Americans in Benghazi didn't fit this story.
From this link,is an excerpt of the Rhodes email that the administration refused to turn over after several requests. The democrats are complaining that there have been several investigations, well, why hasn't the administration turned over what they have been asked to. It took a court order to finally get it released. And, from what I understand, it isn't the last of it. Smoking gun: Shock #Benghazi email reveals that Obama White House agreed with CIA talking points.
The second point is key here, Ms Rice is to underscore the point that this was about a video. Even though the administration knows it isn't. Remember they NEVER thought it was about the video. They want her to lie to the public, yes that is you.
Of course, the press is willing to help distract you by giving more coverage to bridgegate. Democrats in congress are more than willing to downplay this by suggesting there are more important things to worry about. Here is one, Waxman (CA-D) wants a hearing on the football team named the Redskins. Henry Waxman wants hearing on Redskins - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com
It is a common strategy of this administration. Delay, obfuscate, distract as long as you can and then when the facts finally come out, try to trivialize it because it happened so long ago. I hope they don't get away with it this time. This is so blatant it is insulting to us
He said "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." And that was the only sentence with the word terror in it. This whole thing about him calling it a terrorist attack the morning after is nothing but disingenuous misrepresentation. After all, he referred to the video in the same speech but oddly enough none of you liberals seem eager to point that out now that the video story has been thoroughly debunked. An "act of terror" and a "terrorist attack" are two different things. The Sandy Hook shooting was an act of terror. It wasn't a terrorist attack. Additionally, he told the families of the victims that he would get the maker of the video for the attack and otherwise blamed the video for long after that speech. Obama has one mention of the word "terror" against week after week of blaming the video. And you all simply want to ignore the mountain of times he blamed the video after knowing it was false and point to instance of the word "terror" where he didn't even call it an actual terrorist attack nor make any mention of terrorists.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 05-11-2014 at 06:49 PM..
Reason: deleted quoted post
And yet it took a FOIA request by Judicial Watch to discover the Ben Rhoades e-mail that proves the WH changed the talking points.
Remember when Jay Carney told us that the CIA changed the talking points. That is now a proven lie.
There are many other proven lies, but you're not really interested in the truth or the facts. You are an Obamalemming who is interested in defending your side at all costs. Like I said, truly sad.
There was nothing in the emails obtained by Judicial Watch that proved the White House Changed the talking points. Besides the initial version of the CIA talking points shared with the White House already said the attack was spontaneous, evolved into an attack and was connected to events in Cairo. The White House did not add any of those characterizations.
Yep, the lie was blaming the attack on the video. You don't have to care one way or another. Enough people believe he deliberately misled [lied] about the cause for the investigation to keep the public interested.
I see you are at the point Obama wants you to be. He has delayed this long enough it seems so trivial now, doesn't it? We should all just dismiss it and move on, right?
Well, let me ask you this, if it is so trivial, why doesn't he just fess up? Carney is still saying it is the best information they had at the time even though there is proof it is not. The administration really thinks we are idiots
That was the lie. It was NEVER about the video and the administration knew it. It just was their best talking point, and a lousy one at that, to try and explain their failure to contain al-Qaeda. At that time, Obama was doing all this chest beating on how he had them on the run and this little "incident" put a little smear on that boast.
The press cheerfully went along. And so, apparently, did half of Americans. Now the proof is coming out that the Obama administration never thought it was about the video, it was indeed a failure of his policy. He is STILL sticking to his lie. And so are you!
Since we have all the answers, please tell me who gave the order to stand down that night. After all, we've had all these investigations, surely you can tell me. Thanks in advance.
V. There was no “stand down” order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who
sought to join the fight in Benghazi. However, because official reviews after the attack
were not sufficiently comprehensive, there was confusion about the roles and
responsibilities of these individuals.
After the Benghazi attack began, six U.S. security personnel left the embassy in Tripoli
on a chartered Libyan aircraft to lend assistance.94 Two of these individuals were U.S. soldiers
on a specialized assignment who took orders in such circumstances from authorities outside of
AFRICOM and Special Operations Command-Africa (SOCAFRICA).95 These were the only
U.S. military personnel who got to Benghazi before survivors arrived in Tripoli on a chartered
plane, and they performed heroically.
Four other military personnel remained behind in Tripoli. They comprised the reduced
and revamped Security Support Team and were assigned to AFRICOM.96 Army Lieutenant
Colonel S.E. Gibson, who led the reconfigured SST, told the committee that when he learned of
the attack in Benghazi “[t]here were concerns this might be part of a larger coordinated attack . .
. with the U.S. Embassy [in] Tripoli being targeted.”97 Indeed, Colonel George Bristol of the
Joint Special Operations Task Force – Trans Sahara briefed the committee that he told
Lieutenant Colonel Gibson in a quick telephone call from another country in Africa “that the
U.S. embassy in Tripoli was his priority” and he must “ensure that it was protected.”98
Therefore, because of concern about the possibility of a follow-on attack in Tripoli, the four SST
soldiers, including a medic, joined “less than a handful” of State Department security personnel
in helping to safeguard embassy staff and facilities.99
However, after the diplomatic staff had been moved to what Lieutenant Colonel Gibson
considered a “secure” location in Tripoli, he informed AFRICOM that he was about to take his
three special operators to Benghazi on a Libyan transport plane. At that time, Rear Admiral
Brian L. Losey, SOCAFRICA’s commander, conveyed an order to Lieutenant Colonel Gibson to
remain in Tripoli to defend Americans there.100 Rear Admiral Losey said he was concerned
about the possibility of follow-on attacks in Tripoli or a potential for attempts at hostage
taking.101 Preferring to move, however, Lieutenant Colonel Gibson told the committee he was
“visibly upset” at the time.102 But, Rear Admiral Losey explained to the committee that it was
rooted in his belief that Lieutenant Colonel Gibson’s team was “the only military element . . . in
Tripoli that had any security experience whatsoever” and “it seemed prudent” to divide the few
military personnel in Libya between Tripoli and Benghazi rather than concentrate them in one
location.103 He said his decision was based on consultation with two other officers and the three
had “about 90 years of collective Special Operations experience” between them.104
M
Like I said. That's your problem. It was a never a lie.
It was the best intelligence at the time. It was wrong. But it was never a lie.
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.
