Benghazi Plot Thickens

Benghazi Plot Thickens (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Level -> Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 4:13:46 PM)
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/05/05/benghazi-plot-thickens/ If this turns out to have been a cover up, how serious is it? The same level as Iran-Contra?

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 4:21:42 PM)
That would depend...If you are an R this is on the level of Watergate. If you are a D, this no worse than a Lewinski in the oval office. I find it unlikely you will get insightful and honest opinion.

TheHeretic -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:02:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level If this turns out to have been a cover up, how serious is it? The same level as Iran-Contra? That will depend on how the various media outlets choose to cover it. Considering that the bearer of the official lie was dispatched to 5 Sunday morning news shows to spread it, that answer might not be the one the administration is going to like.

Level -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:11:31 PM)
Thank you both. This just has me scratching my head; if they tried to cover this up, why?? No real benefit vs tremendous potential damage.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:20:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level Thank you both. This just has me scratching my head; if they tried to cover this up, why?? No real benefit vs tremendous potential damage. I don't know if this would have hurt Obama's re-election or not. That's a big reason I could see being behind a cover up (if there is one). Obama may have wanted to save face, too. He's been all about the improvements in the government and how everything was hunky dory. If this was al Qaeda, that would mean that al Qaeda wasn't really as defunct as the administration would want use to believe.

switchdavid69 -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:21:50 PM)
Hillary Clinton, " What difference does it matter "..

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:23:25 PM)
It is all or nothing politics. Both parties refuse to admit wrong doing on anything.... However, for the administration, this event was at a critical time in the election. They had an entire election to gain if they buried it. Not that Mitt was great by any stretch of the imagination, but the Pres watching Americans die whilst doing nothing??? That can turn the tide quickly even for second rate turd like Mitt..........

Level -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:31:41 PM)
DS and FC: if that was their thinking, and I were in Obama's ear, I'd say "no way; WE'RE the guys that got bin Laden, we're going to tell the voters that they want us on the job handling it, if it's al queda". Too much Cover Your Ass in DC.

FatDomDaddy -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:40:55 PM)
It really doesn't matter. I am sure its all Bush's fault. Or maybe Reagan's

switchdavid69 -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 6:50:53 PM)
People died, Obama lied.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 7:04:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level DS and FC: if that was their thinking, and I were in Obama's ear, I'd say "no way; WE'RE the guys that got bin Laden, we're going to tell the voters that they want us on the job handling it, if it's al queda". Too much Cover Your Ass in DC. Exactly. They ran so much "we got bin Laden" back slapping and made claims that al Qaeda was running and hiding. No way they were going to let it out that al Qaeda operatives were behind the Benghazi debacle. I still don't think it would have had enough of an impact that Obama wouldn't have won.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 7:09:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level DS and FC: if that was their thinking, and I were in Obama's ear, I'd say "no way; WE'RE the guys that got bin Laden, we're going to tell the voters that they want us on the job handling it, if it's al queda". Too much Cover Your Ass in DC. Yeah but the retort would be, why didn't you call in the Spec ops from Italy to whoop some ass, why let it play out then react months or years later?... If this is true, I think Obama was being to risk averse, some state people got killed, and he didn't want to look bad during the election. That could have burnt through the OBL capital real fast, and validated the R fear mongering that he is weak. By all accounts many of the polls were tight, and that would have gotten the protest bible thumpers out of their seat to vote Romney. Obama has surrounded himself with some pretty cut-throat advisors, they could have been telling him sweep it away and soon enough everyone will forget

TheHeretic -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 8:02:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level This just has me scratching my head; if they tried to cover this up, why?? No real benefit vs tremendous potential damage. It was the election, Level. To the administration, no possible outcome that might come later was worse than having a successful al Qaeda attack on our ambassador tip the balance in that. So they told a stupid lie, and smeared anyone who questioned it, and now, they may reap the consequences.

subrob1967 -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 8:38:15 PM)
FR Nothing's gonna happen, Holder and the BATF got away with much worse, and Issa folded like a cheap tray table.

erieangel -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/6/2013 10:13:28 PM)
Nothings gonna happen. Just like nothing during the whole Cocaine-Contra affair under Reagan.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/7/2013 12:48:38 AM)
I never watch TV news. I get my news from newspapers or interwebs sites. Tonight, I was up late and there was literally *nothing* on my 900+ channel DirecTV that I wanted to watch (I *hate* Pennsyltucky, already!). I was scrolling through the endless channels and came upon Van Susterin. I clicked on and it was a repeat of an earlier broadcast. She was talking about those three abducted girls, rescued in Ohio, alive (thank God). I stayed with her show, the whole way through. After her show there was a ([n] encore?) showing of something called "The Five". The first thing they did was the Benghazi story. There's a guy on the show (I looked on their website and couldn't find information about any of the people) who I really liked. He's a heavy-set guy. Awwww! Screw it! He's fat, like me. He's, obviously, a democrat supporter. Of that there's no doubt but, after hashing the story out for about ten minutes, he came to the same conclusion that I was trying to verbalize. Forget that the administration tried to tell us it was about a video on Youtube. Forget that for days ... possibly weeks, they tried to convince us that it couldn't be a terrorist attack. One of the whistle-blowers (who became the defacto embassador, once that poor embassador was brutalized and murdered) is prepared to testify, under oath, that there were troops who could have come to their aid and the administration told them to stand down. That, for me, is the issue. That there was a rush to hide their huge fuck-up is no surprise to me but, I believe that much like Nixon might have survived the Watergate mess had he not covered it up, I think this is going to become *very* serious. I wish FNC had the entire segment posted (they don't, as yet) but the heavy fellow started off, unable to believe any of the accusations. When presented with facts, he finally said (something very much like): "If there were troops that could have gone to these peoples' rescue and they were prevented from doing so, someone should go to jail". That about sums up my feelings, as well. Peace and comfort, Michael

DesideriScuri -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/7/2013 6:15:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr ... One of the whistle-blowers (who became the defacto embassador, once that poor embassador was brutalized and murdered) is prepared to testify, under oath, that there were troops who could have come to their aid and the administration told them to stand down. That, for me, is the issue. That there was a rush to hide their huge fuck-up is no surprise to me but, I believe that much like Nixon might have survived the Watergate mess had he not covered it up, I think this is going to become *very* serious. I wish FNC had the entire segment posted (they don't, as yet) but the heavy fellow started off, unable to believe any of the accusations. When presented with facts, he finally said (something very much like): "If there were troops that could have gone to these peoples' rescue and they were prevented from doing so, someone should go to jail". ... Michael Do you think this is an impeachable offense, like Watergate? If you do, how far down do you think it reaches? Will it include Joe Biden? Do you think Boehner, Leahy, or Kerry had any part in it? Could you even imagine if Obama and the 4 others I mentioned all were shitcanned over this? We'd have Jacob "Jack" Lew (Secretary of the Treasury) as the new President. Man, that would be a complete mess.

mnottertail -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/7/2013 7:20:55 AM)
Lotta ifs in that article, and not much else. Too early to take a wait and see attitude here, it is just trying to nail jelly to the tree, so far.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/7/2013 7:39:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Lotta ifs in that article, and not much else. Too early to take a wait and see attitude here, it is just trying to nail jelly to the tree, so far. <Takes out calendar> Completely agree, Ron. I'm not even sure if it's an impeachable offense, to begin with.

tweakabelle -> RE: Benghazi Plot Thickens (5/7/2013 8:07:59 AM)
That was my impression too. The article had all the hallmarks of a fishing expedition whose members are unsure if there are any fish there to catch. Is this Obama-era version of Whitewater ?

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875