Republicans won't let Benghazi go . . .

and as expected this is the third time you ignored the fact that they was denied permission to go and help what dam difference what order they was given it doesn't make a difference if the was told to "stand down" or "remain in place" the truth is they was denied permission to go and help until you can give me a fact that they wasn't denied permission to go and help the premise of Fox news remains truthful and all you have is silly word games

 

Your baseless say-so versus the findings in the bi-partisan Senate Intelligence Report after a year of investigation:

no evidence of intentional delay or obstruction by the Chief of Base or any other party. ... The Committee has reviewed the allegations that U.S. personnel, including in the IC (Intelligence Community) or DoD, prevented the mounting of any military relief effort during the attacks, but the Committee has not found any of these allegations to be substantiated.

http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/benghazi2014/benghazi.pdf

There was no "stand down" order, no intentional delay, no prevention of military relief effort.

You've been duped again by RW propaganda. When will you learn you cannot trust it?

 

I watched this last night and I have to tell you, Benghazi is a total joke; http://on.msnbc.com/1gxYDyR

 

no kidding, pretty sad of them to try and use the victims of terrorists in this way

 

it's already been proven that we knew before the attacks, we had it in our Intel, hindsight is 20\20

 

Lt. Col. Gibson
“I was not ordered to stand down. I was ordered to remain in place"

http://www.armedservices.house.gov/...?File_id=AAEBCAA5-4C8F-4820-BACD-2DB9B53C3424

so there you have it the order didn't matter the result where the same Lt. Col. Gibson was denied permission to go to Benghazi to help

 

No they weren't! LMAO!

Sorry that you don't understand facts. LMAO! Its the REASON we can question your intelligence. You supply the evidence and then get mad when we believe it! Now that is the funniest and dumbest thing I have ever heard someone say.

Thanks for the laugh! WHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

 

So why lie and pretend there was a "stand down" order, when there clearly wasn't. They were not sent because they could not get there in time.................not because of some conspiracy.

But if you've been duped by the conservative media, you will avoid the facts at all costs, just to make up your own reality! Extremely sad, but funny at the same time!

 

stand down order and remain in place are basically the same thing both mean don't go and help
and how in the hell did they know they wouldn't get there in time did they have a crystal ball knowing when the attack was going to stop?

 

Thanks for personifying the low information voter.

 

Thanks for not being able to understand facts despite trying extremely hard. Yeah, now we see who the low information voter is and his low information makes him think and project his low information onto others. It makes him feel all warm and cozy on the inside.

Thanks for running! LMAO!

 

But the "stand down order" is implied to mean that help wasn't sent......................because of some conspiracy.
Actually, there was no conspiracy(the GOP continues to lie), they were not sent because there was not enough time.

Now, in order for your claim to be correct..................please show us how they did have enough time.

 

Are you really serious? You can't be!

We have sent people to the moon and rovers to mars, but yet we have no idea how long it takes for a plane flying at X speed to go distance Y???? We can't do simple math, but we can send people to the moon?

You guys are hilarious and don't even know it.

 

Instead, the site security team was ordered to remain in Tripoli to defend the embassy and its staff in case terrorists also struck in the capital while the Benghazi post was under attack, and to assist the wounded who were being evacuated to Tripoli after the first phase of the fighting had ended, the statement said.
Col. Gibson “acknowledged that, had he deployed to Benghazi, he would have left Americans in Tripoli undefended. He also stated that, in hindsight, he would not have been able to get to Benghazi in time to make a difference, and as it turned out, his medic was needed to provide urgent assistance to survivors once they arrived in Tripoli,” the statement said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/lawmakers-no-stand-down-order-given-benghazi/

Ordered to stay in Tripoli is much different than an order to not go to Benghazi. He wasn't ordered to stand down or to not go.............he was ordered to stay in Tripoli.
Secondly, he clearly states that the time it would have taken wouldn't have made a difference.

 

As much as they would like I to! The POTUS is the Commander in Chief...he had the final authority and he did nothing while our citizens were being killed...oh wait: he did do something, he went to bed so he would be fresh to go campaigning. And if it was a Republican that did that...I would have the same reactions!

 

What about not stopping to read a book to school children when our country/embassy was under attack. Impeachable, huh? Nothing was done. Not one apology. Sadly we have already seen Obama apologize for being wrong, but conservatives............NEVER.

 

After all of the security incidents in Benghazi and repeated requests for additional security due to the clear and present danger, Hillary Clinton's State Dept incredulously REDUCED security in Benghazi instead of increasing it. Then with all the advanced warnings Hillary Clinton's State Dept had they failed to make an evacuation/defense plan coordinated with the U.S. Navy, the CIA and the Libyan Government.

The left wants to frame Benghazi in the narrow margin of what happened that same day. The Middle East including Libya was and still is one of the hottest spots for anti American hostility in the world.

60 Minutes: Al Qaeda Flags Were Flying All Over Benghazi Before 9/11 Attack

Read the article. To me, there had to be a complete and total breakdown of leadership in the State Dept under Clinton for Benghazi to have happened the way it did.

 

Obama was missing for HOURS and nothing much was said about it. Bush took two minutes so the children wouldn't panic and he was vilified then and now.

 

I don't blame Republicans for not letting go of Benghazi. I blame them for not letting go for really stupid and partisan reasons. They aren't making a big deal about it because they care one way or another about the actual problems it brings up. They are doing it to get all up in Obama's grill.

The simple and undeniable truth is that the security arrangements at the Benghazi compound were ridiculously inadequate, and that any person with even the slightest understanding of security would have immediately said "Whoa. Maybe it's not a good idea to only have ten guards, half of whom are stationed a mile away, in the middle of an unstable country, in a town patrolled by Islamic militias, in a compound that had no aerial escape route. Maybe given all these things, we should increase security, so that if a fight breaks out, we can hold out until reinforcements arrive."

Americans should want to know that whoever made these arrangements is fired for gross negligence. Unfortunately, the Republicans can't pass up the opportunity to use a national tragedy for political gain. The Democrats would do the same in their position, of course, but I think that speaks to the quality of representation in the US. One thing is for sure: Obama and Clinton aren't to blame. They should accept responsibility as leaders, but the real fault lies with the terrorists first, and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the Diplomatic Security Service second.

 

you do know the attack was still going on when the remain in place order was given? and I will ask both of you again how in the hell did they know when the attack was going to end there for knowing they wouldn't get there in time.
the only possible way they knew they wasn't going to get there in time is if they knew when the attack was going to end. so explain how in the hell did they know when the attack was going to end
did the terrorist call them and tell them we are going to stop the attack at X time

Im doing my damnedest not to insult either of you but my god you make it hard not to

 

Dont speak for me. I care about why four Americans died and I want to know what our President did immediately following being notified of the attack and I also want to know why he repeatedly instructed his staff to tell us the cause was from a youtube video when we knew it was organized terrorism. The only people making this political are the crazy leftist obama kool aid chuggers. If we are wrong and they are so right then Obama should have no problem telling the nation what he did and why. The fact he refuses is telling. The fact that lefties wet themselves defending him on this means they know he is guilty as sin as well. The difference between us is only one of us cares that four Americans died.
Lastly to correct you on your common leftist strawman. We arent blaming Clinton and Obama for the terrorist attack occuring. We are asking what he did and why FOLLOWING THE ATTACK<<<<<<<<re read that<<<<<<<<<<<<< Last time I checked terrorists didnt make Obamas minions tell the nation on multiple occasions the cause was a youtube video when they knew it wasnt. Last time I checked terrorists didnt make Obama refuse to answer questions on the subject. Thats all on Obama. Of course you could prove me wrong and post the video of Obama explaining what he did and why or not and prove me correct.

 

Exactly correct. I guess if you are waiting for Obama to send help to you, you better hope you are standing next to david letterman, beyonce or a nail bomb terrorist like Bill Ayers.

 

What he did following the attack was open his big mouth without first applying the appropriate level of scrutiny to the evidence he was given. It was a terrible decision for him to speak without all the facts. I am 100% in agreement that his handling of the crisis was subpar, and not at all up to the standards we should have for a Commander-in-Chief.

That said, I can accept the fact that mistakes were made. I can even accept the hypothesis that he latched onto the explanation most convenient to his political campaign. What I cannot stand is that the emphasis is on Obama's actions, when frankly, the emphasis ought to be on making sure that whoever arranged security for that compound is fired immediately. That is what matters... well, that and making sure such mistakes are not repeated again.

Once this gets solved, go ahead and crucify Obama. I could care less. Guy is nothing but a corporate, MIC buttslave in my mind.

 

ONCE is a mistake, his administration stuck with that statement for weeks. We have it all on video.

 

And again, the Republicans are focused on Obama's mistake, not the far more urgent and important mistakes made by those responsible for diplomatic security.

Solve those first, and I'd be more than glad to get behind a serious investigation into why Obama said what he did, and when. Until then, it is just more mindless partisan bickering IMO.