New report: Hillary knew Benghazi was a planned attack. Continued to lie.

Syrian Sarin wrote:

gullible libtard wrote:

The difference between you and me is that you believe Bush didn't lie.

WOWZA THAT IS DUMB

If you don't think that Assad got the Sarin Gas he used to murder his own people from Iraq you are beyond stupid.

Cool story bro.

Guess Bush was telling the truth all along. Zing.

2/27/03 US diplomat John Brady Kiesling resigns, citing the "distortion of intelligence" and "systematic manipulation of American opinion."

1/11/03 Bush tells Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar that he plans to go to war two days before he tells Secretary Powell.

Note: this is the same Bandar that we now know had personally funded and aided Al-Quiada operatives planning 9/11

If you guys are grasping at straws this hard to say Bush wasn't lying, then how can you sit there and ridicule libtards for doing the same with Hillary?

Hillary lied.

Bush lied.

The evidence is pretty damning for each.

I wish people were more skeptical of all sides of the government instead of sheepishly following one over the other.

You keep relying on "mother jones" for your "truth" Libtard.

The rest of us will remain in the "real world."

gullible libtard wrote:

If you guys are grasping at straws this hard to say Bush wasn't lying, then how can you sit there and ridicule libtards for doing the same with Hillary?

Hillary lied.

Bush lied.

The evidence is pretty damning for each.

I wish people were more skeptical of all sides of the government instead of sheepishly following one over the other.

I am always skeptical. The difference being, the faction of libtards in this country are a cancer that serves 1 cause. The destruction of America and our way of life.

Liberalism is as evil as Marxism, Nazism, and Communism. Anyone aligned to such ideologies are enemies to America.

The day Republicans want to disarm, control, dominate and control every facit of my life is the day they are my enemy too.

True Story

Libtard Detector wrote:

gullible libtard wrote:

If you guys are grasping at straws this hard to say Bush wasn't lying, then how can you sit there and ridicule libtards for doing the same with Hillary?

Hillary lied.

Bush lied.

The evidence is pretty damning for each.

I wish people were more skeptical of all sides of the government instead of sheepishly following one over the other.

I am always skeptical. The difference being, the faction of libtards in this country are a cancer that serves 1 cause. The destruction of America and our way of life.

Liberalism is as evil as Marxism, Nazism, and Communism. Anyone aligned to such ideologies are enemies to America.

The day Republicans want to disarm, control, dominate and control every facit of my life is the day they are my enemy too.

True Story

Glad to see that you applied the same objective skeptism to Bush... Citing UN resolutions? Weakest cover story ever. The US and other countries don't listen to the UN half the time but you don't see full-scale invasions based on that. It was unilateral and Bush/Cheney found any way to justify it with whatever weak ass dog and pony show he could... even if it meant throwing a great man like Colin under the bus!!!

Sheep be sheep.

BAAAAAAAH STORY

backtracking wrote:

Syrian Sarin wrote:

If you don't think that Assad got the Sarin Gas he used to murder his own people from Iraq you are beyond stupid.

Cool story bro.

Guess Bush was telling the truth all along. Zing.

Is there a counter argument to my factual statement?

No? Did not think so. Stay stupid...STUPID!

Still defending your buddy Saddam I see.

Iraq, Saddam, gave us the ammo. We used it to kill him.

The REAL STORY.

The TRUE STORY.

Here is one theory:

You, like many other men, served in the military and did your job because those were your orders. You did a good job, and people did a lot of good over there.

I am saying that the politicians who started the war - which has nothing to do with what ultimately took place - were liars. This doesn't take anything away from what the military did over there.

Nobody wants to think that what they did was related to some scheme. Everybody did their job and did it well. Of course you need some justification to do what you do every day. However, that doesn't mean you can't call out the money-grubbing losers sitting in office for lying.

We didn't find what we were looking for because it was forced through as a lazy excuse. I at least expected them to find something related to the trailers Colin was talking about.

They f#cked over Colin and he lost major credibility and I am pissed at that. They lied to get a war started that could have been waged against any other dictatorship doing bad shit. It wasn't for WMD. Period.

This applies to ALL liars in my mind. Hillary lied. Bush lied. People got killed. It is some serious bullshit.

If that is what floats your boat so be it.

I personally would not change a thing. Eradicating Saddam from the planet earth and being apart of it will always be something I will never regret.

Looking back, I would not change a thing.

Libtard Detector wrote:

RWNJ detector wrote:

You are obviously butt hurt. Don't forget the K-Y the next time you try to take on people smarter than you.

You are obviously speaking from experience.

What is "K-Y?" You seem to know all about it.

Is it something YOU apply to YOUR Butt?

I think the answer obvious.

I am not surprised at your ignorance regarding K-Y. It is why you are so butt hurt.

Yes, I have experience fucking fools like you up the ass. Your bleeding anus is a testament to my dominance over you.

True story.

I think he should have suffered more and I think the same thing of a couple of other dictators . . . so no disagreement there.

I'm not a really bright or informed guy, but I do know if something stinks. It usually goes from benefit of the doubt, to uuummmm, to that is f$cking shady.

Example 1:

- Benefit of the doubt: we invaded country because we thought a proven mass murderer had WMD and was helping terrorists, but no real WMDs found.

- Ummmmmm: looks like the source of that intel re yellowcake was pretty shaky at best.

- SHADY: the company formerly run by VP who advocated the invasion gets a gazillion dollar contract to rebuild the country, making his friends very wealthy, and WITHOUT BIDDING behind closed doors! THAT is anti-capitalist, self-serving, and freakin unamerican IMO. Plus they threw Colin under the bus. Shady.

Example 2:

- Benefit of the doubt: embassy gets attacked and SecState says it was a one-off attack and started by some youtube video.

- Ummmmmm: looks like it was preplanned and there were warning about it but they were ignored.

- SHADY: 30,000 emails are DELETED from a PERSONAL server? WTF? Got anything to hide? Shady.

I get the same sick taste in the back of my mouth when I find out about this stuff. I don't even want to know about it anymore. I don't have any strong political affiliations but know when something is SHADY, so that is where I am coming from.

Gonna go run a 10 miler now ahhh yeahhh!

You know that the liberals have schooled the haters when frogpawn shows up to scream the loudest.

Great work all

The basic problem is your version of history is easily contradicted with recorded historical evidence, like transcripts.If I look at Susan Rice's comments in the transcript, the "message" was clearly couched with qualifiers about gathering intelligence, investigations, and best assessment to date:http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-us-ambassador-united-nations-susan-rice/story?id=17240933&page=2We also already know that Hillary did not "make up" the video story -- this was the current CIA intelligence that didn't get corrected for about a week.The second problem is that, even if the WH and SofS willingly told fabricated stories about the video's role in causing the Benghazi attack -- this is not a scandal by any absolute measure. There is still no controversy. The gravity of the lie should be measured by any potential or real consequences arising from the lie, and there appear to be none in this case.The link to AQ is feeble and coincidental -- this was not an Al-Qaeda attack.Everyone "corrected themselves" after about a week, once the CIA updated their intelligence.Regarding the e-mails, she did turn over about 30,000 e-mails to the State Department as a response to Congressional subpoena, and erased about as many, deemed personal. I'm trying to imagine what new Benghazi related evidence could be stored only on her private server, that wouldn't be available elsewhere. Did the CIA use her server? Did the Embassy in Tripoli? The "deleted e-mails" seems to be another desperate clutching of straws to keep the "Benghazi scandal" alive until after the elections.

Oh, okay. Thanks for the clarification.

A quick post-Memorial Day bump.

Is this a serious attempt at trying to prove your ridiculous version of history?

Here's is the exact language Rice used taken right from the transcript you cited:

RICE: Well, Jake, first of all, it's important to know that there's an FBI investigation that has begun and will take some time to be completed. That will tell us with certainty what transpired.

But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous -- not a premeditated -- response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.

We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to -- or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in -- in the wake of the revolution in Libya are -- are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there.

We'll wait to see exactly what the investigation finally confirms, but that's the best information we have at present.

That hardly qualifies as couching the assessment. Note that this was 5 days after the attack and the government had plenty of information by this point that the idea that this was a spontaneous attack caused by a video was false. It was completely outlandish for her to present this as the cause of the attack on 9/16. Notice that she never says anything about AQ or that the sources were very sketchy or anything else that would lead one to think that it was anything other than spontaneous. It's not like this interview was done on 9/12. If she had been honest, she very easily could have said something like "we still are receiving very conflicting reports. one explanation is that it was a spontaneous attack caused by a video. however, there also is strong evidence that this may have been a premeditated attack by AQ. at this point, i am unable to provide you with anything definitive here."

You also laughably think that Clinton corrected herself. She did but it wasn't when she knew the truth. How many months later was it? You clearly don't know that this Rice interview was 5 days later if you incorrectly think that everyone "corrected" themselves a week later. That is just pure fiction on your part.

Your email paragraph is probably your most ridiculous one. She deleted 30,000 emails that she and she alone deemed personal. Do not really not understand how a private email server works??? No, the CIA and the embassy did not use her private server? Really????

The deleting in and of itself is illegal because someone neutral -- not her -- must be the judge of what is personal. She already has been caught in multiple lies here (she only used 1 PDA, she only had 1 email address, she only used the server for personal emails, etc) so she gets zero benefit of the doubt here. I don't know what was on the emails but whatever it is she was willing to break the law and jeopardize her entire POTUS run over deleting them so they must be chock full of awful details and she decided that deleting them was worse than having their contents released. My guess is that the emails are more involved with the bribes she was taking via the foundation from all sorts of rogue characters around the globe than Benghazi but that remains to be seen at this point.

After reading your entire short novel, I am sold. I want her as my next President. Those are the exact qualities that are necessary for leadership of this country. Thank you.