• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Benghazi Report- a clusterfuck

Go said:
Its shame that the Admin screwed up then decided to play politics but its business as usual in DC.

Republicans should be focused on economic issues that will win in November, which will lead to majorities that will steer the country in the correct direction to get the economy really roaring.

People sadly don't give a damn about a dead Ambassador, they're more excited about the new Jay-Z/Beyonce tour.
Click to expand...

The two main reasons there's a dead ambassador are that the Republicans dramatically cut the budget for embassy security and that Stevens didn't listen to the security teams about going to Benghazi.

The Administration had nothing to do with the screw ups that led to his death and the deaths of the others. There is no rational reason to blame the administration or Clinton for those deaths or what Susan rice said.

As to the economy, it would be much stronger if the Republicans didn't hate Obama more than they loved America. The perfect example is the roads bill that passed with 78 votes in the Senate. It would have helped our infrastructure and put over a million people. The cowardly Speaker and the haters kept our from progressing.

Go, there is no way around these facts.
 
Go said:
Its shame that the Admin screwed up then decided to play politics but its business as usual in DC.

Republicans should be focused on economic issues that will win in November, which will lead to majorities that will steer the country in the correct direction to get the economy really roaring.

People sadly don't give a damn about a dead Ambassador, they're more excited about the new Jay-Z/Beyonce tour.
Click to expand...

If this is a subtle jab at POTUS (who left DC the day after the attack to go to a fundraiser with Sasha Fierce herself in Las Vegas) very, very well done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ONW
RJKarl said:
The two main reasons there's a dead ambassador are that the Republicans dramatically cut the budget for embassy security and that Stevens didn't listen to the security teams about going to Benghazi.

The Administration had nothing to do with the screw ups that led to his death and the deaths of the others. There is no rational reason to blame the administration or Clinton for those deaths or what Susan rice said.

As to the economy, it would be much stronger if the Republicans didn't hate Obama more than they loved America. The perfect example is the roads bill that passed with 78 votes in the Senate. It would have helped our infrastructure and put over a million people. The cowardly Speaker and the haters kept our from progressing.

Go, there is no way around these facts.
Click to expand...

It is written. Obama comes out unscathed again in RJ's mind. The man is simply amazing. It's the equivalent of Oprah constantly making the cover of OPRAH magazine.

RJ is to accuracy what Susan Boyle is to agility.
 
This "Republicans killed him through non-funding" argument is just as obtuse as the "Obama lied about the video" argument. I wish literally everyone would just STFU about the whole thing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/barbara-boxers-claim-that-gop-budgets-hampered-benghazi-security/2013/05/15/d1e295cc-bdb0-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html

The Congressional Research Service has documented that Congress, whether led by Democrats and Republicans, year after year did not fully fund the various pots of money for embassy security. (See page 25.) The State Department, for instance, was shortchanged by $142 million in fiscal year 2010, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.
Click to expand...

...

Meanwhile, while the Accountability Review Board investigation into the attack lamented the failure of Congress to provide necessary resources — and called for “a more serious and sustained commitment from Congress to support State Department needs” — it fixed the blame for the lack of security squarely on State Department officials.
One huge problem was that the facility was deemed temporary — as we have noted, most of the officials there were working for the CIA, not State — and thus it could not be funded with standard overseas building funds. (Despite persistent news media reports, this was not a “consulate”—far from it.) After the fact, the ARB report recommended allowing for greater flexibility in use of such funds and requiring minimum security standards for such temporary facilities.
Click to expand...

...

During hearings into the attack last fall and this month, State Department officials were specifically asked if a lack of financial resources played a role in the attack. The answer was no.

Oct. 10, 2012 hearing:
QUESTION: It has been suggested that budget cuts were responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi. And I'd like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE CHARLENE LAMB: No, sir.
***
QUESTION: So there's not a budget problem. It's not you all don't have the money to do this?
LAMB: Sir, it's a volatile situation. We will move assets to cover that.
May 8, 2013 hearing:
QUESTION: Mr. Nordstrom, you were on that panel. Do you remember what she [Lamb] said?
REGIONAL SECURITY OFFICER ERIC NORDSTROM: Yes, she said that resources was not an issue. And I think I would also point to the ARB report, if I'm not mistaken, that they talked to our chief financial officer with D.S. [Diplomatic Security], who also said that resources were not an issue.
Click to expand...
 
WakeandBake said:
party pooper
Click to expand...

Some people like you post like a dickhead in response to people being dickheads. I get that.

But then you get RJ who posts this shit because he thinks politics is a team sport where we will add up the points at the end of the year to see who won.
 
This sounds like the MSNBC report of what went down. Could someone please post the Fox account, which would read the complete opposite of what RJK posts here.

RJKarl said:
The two main reasons there's a dead ambassador are that the Republicans dramatically cut the budget for embassy security and that Stevens didn't listen to the security teams about going to Benghazi.

The Administration had nothing to do with the screw ups that led to his death and the deaths of the others. There is no rational reason to blame the administration or Clinton for those deaths or what Susan rice said.

As to the economy, it would be much stronger if the Republicans didn't hate Obama more than they loved America. The perfect example is the roads bill that passed with 78 votes in the Senate. It would have helped our infrastructure and put over a million people. The cowardly Speaker and the haters kept our from progressing.

Go, there is no way around these facts.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, watch the video posted above.
 
So Lewinsky just happened to release a book about her affair....
 
I'm not going to read this thread, but I still don't understand why the right is so angry about this. An intelligence failure left four people dead and then there was an attempt to score political points off of it. We went into a war that killed thousands of American troops based on multiple intelligence failures and nobody on the right really cared then.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
It's not a cover-up in the criminal sense. It's incompetence, and then an attempt to spin that incompetence because it happened right during the middle of an election year and potentially harmed Hillary's future. It's so fucking obvious, has been from the outset, and yet here you dufuses still spin this as a RW conspiracy theory. And now what do we know? That they did indeed try to spin this and that they continue to do so, as evidenced by pointing to a negligible difference in security funding requests between the GOP and the WH. No, it has nothing to do with funding. It quite simply has to do with an ambo being where he shouldn't have been and the State Dept. not having the foresight that they should have had for an event like this on the anniversary of 9/11.
Click to expand...

Lol. God. Okay. He was told not to go there and chose to go anyways. This is the definition of a conspiracy theory. Fox News has had hosts blaming Obama for the attack and then alleging he tried to cover his role up. This is the right wing conspiracy theory, you're just being selective in your recitation of the facts.
 
ONW said:
I'm just going to play this video in response to anyone who brings up Benghazi.
Click to expand...

The ironic part of that video is that Stewart is expressing the equal and opposite hypocritical stance that this board is expressing. Outrage over bush lying. Meh over Obama lying. There are people who were and are appalled by both. I proved it with my voting record both times. Lying to the American public should not be tolerated or glosses over. Stewart (who I normally love) is no better than Fox News on this one (well maybe a little better). If he were he would take a little harder stance on the campaign lies.
 
When Bush lied and had his minions lie, over 180,000 people died and hundreds of thousands more were injured because of it.

If you think Obama lied, who was hurt by it? First of all there is no proof that he personally lied or directed anyone to lie. In fact the opposite has been testified to under oath by many people.
 
The two liars arent mutually exclusive. Bush sucked. Bush lied. THat has really nothing to do with Obamas decisions.

It is not acceptable to respond to all of Obama's faults with: "but Bush was worse so it doesn't matter!"
 
Last edited:
Wrangor said:
The ironic part of that video is that Stewart is expressing the equal and opposite hypocritical stance that this board is expressing. Outrage over bush lying. Meh over Obama lying. There are people who were and are appalled by both. I proved it with my voting record both times. Lying to the American public should not be tolerated or glosses over. Stewart (who I normally love) is no better than Fox News on this one (well maybe a little better). If he were he would take a little harder stance on the campaign lies.
Click to expand...

I thought it came off more as a criticism of both parties behavior and hypocrisy.
 
What did Obama lie about re:Benghazi? Millions have been spent investigating Benghazi. Dozens of people have testified under oath. Everyone from Petreaus to multiple generals and State Department lifers stated that they made the decisions on what was said.

Lying to tell your girlfriend or wife that she looks good in those jeans is not the same as lying about having a three way with her two sisters every week for ten years.

Comparing the two is partisanship on steroids. Plus you didn't complain about any of the lies Bush told.

there's a huge difference between the two. W and his direct appointees personal directed the lies. We know this. There is massive evidence of it. There are thousands of pages of testimony and documents re: Benghazi and there is no evidence that Obama had anything to do with the talking points. We know who directed that.

Of course facts and testimony have no place with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top