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.
New CNN Poll
Do you think the House Select Committee on Benghazi is mostly conducting an objective
investigation of what happened in the Benghazi attack, or is it mostly using the investigation to gain
political advantage? (ASKED OF HALF SAMPLE. RESULTS BASED ON 523 INTERVIEWS IN
VERSION B -- SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 4.5 PERCENTAGE POINTS.)
Oct. 14-17 2015 Mostly conducting an objective investigation 23%
Mostly using the investigation to gain political advantage 72%
No opinion 5%
This is why Gowdy is flailing around so desperately. He knows the gig is up. The American people gave him plenty of time to prove otherwise, but today's hearing just solidifies what many suspected all along.
Why she refused Ambassador Stevens' repeated request for more security assets? She can't shift the blame to Diplomatic Service or Bureaucratic infighting. The requests came directly to her.
Now which of the two GOP accusations is true, that Stevens didn't have a way to directly contact Clinton or that Clinton personally turned down direct requests from Stevens?
Of course we then have to ask ourselves what freaking expertise did Clinton have regarding security? None so it is patently ridiculous that if such a request came to her directly (which there is no evidence that it did) that she wouldn't have a matter of course sent the request to the department that specializes in such matters?
I've never, ever had a job in a organization that was even a 10th of the size of the State Department where top management didn't defer to the department heads when a request was made that concerned their department. Yet you really want to argue that Hillary Clinton personally made a decision about staffing the security detail in Benghazi?
Benghazi was a CIA/Pentagon arms depot.
The operation did not even fall under the purview of the Secretary of State.
Clinton made it perfectly clear that the CIA annex was involved in the capture of advanced weaponry that was floating around the country. And while it was a CIA operation, it is no secret that both the Agency and the State Dept work hand and glove.
Clinton made it perfectly clear that the CIA annex was involved in the capture of advanced weaponry that was floating around the country. And while it was a CIA operation, it is no secret that both the Agency and the State Dept work hand and glove.
She didn't have to make anything clear, this has been common knowledge to anyone who
reads true non-American sources of news since it happened.
The CIA and Pentagon do NOT work "hand-in-hand" with the State Department.
They COMMAND the State Department to do whatever the hell they want it to do.
Now which of the two GOP accusations is true, that Stevens didn't have a way to directly contact Clinton or that Clinton personally turned down direct requests from Stevens?
Of course we then have to ask ourselves what freaking expertise did Clinton have regarding security? None so it is patently ridiculous that if such a request came to her directly (which there is no evidence that it did) that she wouldn't have a matter of course sent the request to the department that specializes in such matters?
I've never, ever had a job in a organization that was even a 10th of the size of the State Department where top management didn't defer to the department heads when a request was made that concerned their department. Yet you really want to argue that Hillary Clinton personally made a decision about staffing the security detail in Benghazi?
What kind of feckless fools do you take us for?
It appears these questions and smearing what she did ( or didn't do) and why the State Department functions the way it does/did leads me to believe these highly paid panelists asking questions have absolutely no idea of how it works???? ( And these guys make decisions on how much to fund that Department???? Do they actually expect her to have micromanaged given the totality of her job description???
Gowdy's whole tone has indeed demonstrated HIS focus..and the whistleblower is validated ...Witch Hunt in a "Nut Shell"...
I've missed a lot of this today. Can anyone tell me what the BREAKING NEWS is? What is the new information that is going to send Hillary to prison?
We're into the 7th hour and nothing yet. Maybe they're saving it for the grand finale. Uh, huh...
More likely, there is no breaking news. In fact, there has been nothing new in all 7 hours of testimony so far.
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.
...Witch Hunt in a "Nut Shell"...
