WHAT NOW? - Are you saying that you want Obama treated differently than Reagan?
That is a problematl134 - When the Obama administration tells
people a riot is about a video long after they know it is not - it is both wrong
and a lie - not a mistakeErnest T. Bass - Ah yes the faux news quip
- a tired joke and sure sign of vapidity; but surprizingly you have a point.
The internet has allowed the public to get around the gatekeepers and witness
just how biased the mainstream media is - mostly by their selectivity. We now see that NBC routinely edits stories to change their meaning.
CBS News President, David Rhodes, brother of Obama's deputy
national security, Ben Rhodes, who was instrumental in changing the Benghazi
talking points - is trying to dump Sheryl Attkisson, the only CBS investigative
reporter reporting on Benghazi and who broke the Fast & Furious story.CNN irrelevant/inaccuratePew Reports that MSNBC is by far
the most partisan netwrk in its NEWS stories and opinion fills 85% of the
channel's airtime.So it is true Fox is the only one who
actually follows stories others try to suppress. Good
@Ernest T - CBS has also felt a journalistic burden to find the truth about this
matter. We certainly can't put the burden of proof on NBC, CNN, or ABC,
given that they see no evil, hear, no evil, and speak no evil about our current
administration. There are clearly no Woodward and Bernsteins on the trail
regardless of anything Obama might do, even though the Benghazi incompetence and
cover-up are far, far more serious than anything Watergate turned up.
Corruption only matters when Republicans are involved.
Counter: The burden of proof is upon you and faux news
@Mike RichardsObama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden the
following day. Within 2 weeks after the attacks the Administration had it
straightened out and had dropped the video matter in relation to Benghazi.
Secretaries Clinton and Rice were not given talking points from Obama but were
given information from others. It is those other people who made things
messy.@Counter IntelligenceThere's a difference between
lying and being wrong. I suppose I can forgive you and Mike for not knowing the
difference since I can't tell if the two of you are just wrong or lying.
@counterproductiveRepublican ICON President Ronald Reagan spent 19
months spinning/lying about IRAN-CONTRA.No problem?
Moderate went into a long rant about Mike Richards, and ignored the obvious.
Obama/Hillary liedErnest - An Ostrch response does not work - the
entire hearing was about giving voice to the whistle blowers providing the
details you claim do not exist - you simply choose to ignore the inconvenientOne vote - So lying about an incident where Americans were murdered in
order to protect politcal status is a non-story? Only if the source it is a
horrifically biased left wing news outlet (that is the point)
This non stroy is hardly to be discovered on objective news, but four to five
articles on extreme right wing agencies.
Where is the documentation that the White House ignored additional security? Who
are the people being threatened and suppressed (per Chaffetz)? So far the right
wing only makes vague references but when pinned down for details they
can't provide any.
The new talking points:1. Label the investigation into what took
place in Benghazi as partisan politicizing. 2. Say that this was already
looked into long ago.3. Accuse all Republicans involved in the hearings of
being only interested in hurting Hillary Clinton's chances in 2016.4.
Blame an un-named low-level staff person.5. Keep Obama clean.And the Deseret News, as always, obliges.
Mike Richards went into a long rant about President Obama, and ignored the
obvious. This dust up by the Republicans isn't about Obama. They are
posturing for 2016. Find the truth? No, they don't even care about
finding the terrorists.I hope they don't think Benghazi is their
ticket to win the next election. But if they want to run with it, good luck.
As they run ads touting how they care about the security of American lives, the
Democrats need only run a commercial of Jason Chaffetz proudly talking about his
security cutting vote because "choices have to be made".Benghazi
will only hold Republican interest as long as Hillary Clinton is a potential
candidate. They'll latch on to something new if another candidate looks
strong. Whatever they latch on to, it will have nothing to do with Obama. That
Rather than have actual witnesses (whistle blowers) testify of what they
experienced first hand, let's attack them and try to shatter their
credibility to save Hillary's credibility!
Paul mischaracterized Sec. Clinton's response.Clinton stated
"Congressman, that cable did not come to my attention. I have made it very
clear that the security cables did not come to my attention or above the
assistant secretary level … 1.43 million cables a year come to the State
Department. They are all addressed to me. They do not all come to me. They are
reported through the bureaucracy.”Officilas at the Defense
Department. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
testified in February that he had heard about the concerns in the August cable
via a weekly report sent to him by Gen. Carter Ham, head of U.S. Africa
Command.But, backing up the account of the slow-moving State Department
bureaucracy, Dempsey told the Senate Armed Services Committee that “we
never received a request for support from the State Department, which would have
allowed us to put forces on the ground.” He added: “General Ham
actually called the embassy to see if they wanted to extend the special security
team there and was told no.”
@Moderate,So Obama's failure to protect Americans on American
soil is Jason Chaffetz's fault? Maybe Jason should be sitting in the Oval
Office.People died. Obama lied. Jason did not ask Obama to lie.
Jason did not ask Obama to issue a "stand down order" to the military.
Jason did not tell Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice to lie about the attack.
Those were all Obama's doings. Obama wanted to sit in the Oval Office more
than he wanted Americans to live. His upcoming election was more important to
him than his duty to Americans. He got his wish. He gets to sit in the Oval
Office. I hope he enjoys that office. The day will come when he
will make a full accounting to someone who will not accept his excuses nor allow
him to lie. On that day, he will certainly have a different perspective on what
an oath means and what duty should have required.
The White House, Ms. Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney have all been documented
as mendacious. It was pathetic watching Mr. Carney twisting in the wind as
reporters asked direct questions and were given "stylistic" answers. Mr.
Obama's feigned indignation during the debates when Romney implied that
there was a Benghazi cover up, was pure deceptive theater. The president should
extend an apology to Mr. Romney for lying during the debates.
"I reminded Mrs. Clinton that multiple requests were sent to the State
Department asking for increased security measures," Paul said in an op-ed
for the Washington Times.I am reminded of the smug smile
Representative Jason Chaffetz had when proclaimed he "absolutely" voted
to cut funding for embassy security.