Thread: Anyone want to still blame Obama?

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

It's now clear why you fix floors instead of being a lawyer.

I feel like the last two days you've been deliberately trying to push buttons. Trying to see just exactly what we're going to let you get away with. I'm going to lay it out for you very clearly.

Attack or address the topic. Do not attack the person. Most everyone has done a pretty damn good job of this since we showed that we weren't going to let shit slide any more. There may be a few less posts in the drama forum for it, but it's been a hell of a lot nicer place to read and discuss these types of topics.

If you want to attack the idea of it being an accessory to murder, then by all means. Go for it. Bring up specifics on why that is wrong. Lay out the letter of the law. But I'm warning you... for a FINAL time... You better figure out the difference between person, and topic very quickly or the first person to take a vacation in a while due to rampant asshattery is going to be you.

Well HO-LY SHITBALLS. This is on MSNBC people. Even they can't spin this... Amazing. Latest rumor building is that Obama was the actual person who gave the orders to stand down and not protect the folks in Benghazi (that is not in this video btw). We'll see if that pans out, but... Either way, it actually looks like we may see impeachment in Obama's future. This wasn't any lying under oath about a blowjob, either. Wow!

Originally Posted by CivilWars

I would settle for a, "We fucked up, it's classified, we are taking steps to prevent a similar fuck up in the future." The truth will come out eventually, and I am sure it is somewhere in the middle of, "There was nothing more we could do." and "10,000 Marines were 5' away, but told to stand down and let people die.(or only had rubber bullets or some other shit)"

Maybe I can get a job as an adviser to some of these politicians. Check the date on that bad boy...

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Maybe I can get a job as an adviser to some of these politicians. Check the date on that bad boy...

Yeah props man. I was also talking about all that and was told I needed a tin foil hat by the libs on here. I also pointed out the details about the special forces team at AFRICOM being 2 hours away, etc. which has panned out since and was personally attacked along the lines of "our resident military expert" or some shit like that.

Obama gave an order to stand down and went to bed. That's what I think happened. Probably something close to that.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

But they didn't say no comment due to a on going investigation. They flat out knowingly lied. That is a big difference in reality and in law. Plus these particular individuals are NOT the investigators. Then you show up to a congressional hearing and do it again? Plenty of items to charge them with.

Why are they at the congressional hearing if they aren't investigators?

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Because they were answering questions to the investigators. You know kind of like when a cop drags you ass into the police station for questioning.

Were they witnesses? or just random people?

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

I think that we all agree that lies are bad. If Hilary lied, then she should bear the political and legal repurcussions that come with that. My problem is that her lies after the fact seem to be getting mixed up with the deaths of the people during the attack. Is there any evidence that she was at fault for the deaths of these people? If so, then yes, she should be held responsible. If not, then that should be dropped from the conversation, because it's a red herring.

I do not necessarily think that her lies, the re-written talking points or the concocted story that some movie trailer led to the attack are in any way the cause of lost lives. What i think is, the lies and deceit were an attempt to cover up failures in policy that would distract people from the elections, perhaps even cause them to lose confidence in the Dems. Failures that most likely were not the current administrations fault even, failures that may not have even been failures, but would have been perceived that way by the public. We all know that public pressure is the only way to affect policy in Washington outside of being a big contributor to the party in charge. The administration did not want details coming out in September, there was too great a risk that they would not be able to recover from the potential public pressure.

I could be wrong, only time will tell. Like i said in another thread, there will be aspects of this that we will never know, and without all the facts its tough to form a complete picture. So though i may not no what breakdowns in communication there might have been, or if it would have even been possible to get help there any quicker than they did, i do know that obfuscating the facts and burying the story only delays making changes that may even save the lives of other Ambassadors.