Benghazi Smoking Gun???

[Dedicated Mind]

what is the issue of wrong doing? the state department edited talking points to spin bad news during an election season. where is the wrong doing? where is the focus of the benghazi issue? was it the real time response or the cover up over statements? I don't see focus on wrongdoing and I don't see a smoking gun fact of wrong doing. someone please enlighten me.

[Luke]

What about the order to stand down to the special forces that were ready to fly over to help those in the consulate? What about the obvious lies to cover up the fact that four Americans were simply left to die? What about the fact that an American citizen is is prison still to this day for making a YouTube video that had nothing to do with the attacks while the attackers have gotten away free? What about the fact that the survivors were specifically forbidden to talk to the congressional investigators?

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by Luke

What about the order to stand down to the special forces that were ready to fly over to help those in the consulate? What about the obvious lies to cover up the fact that four Americans were simply left to die? What about the fact that an American citizen is is prison still to this day for making a YouTube video that had nothing to do with the attacks while the attackers have gotten away free? What about the fact that the survivors were specifically forbidden to talk to the congressional investigators?

all of those questions have been answered by the review board. you are providing generalities that can be dismissed as partisan rhetoric. what is the specific act of wrongdoing? who did it? when?

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

what is the issue of wrong doing? the state department edited talking points to spin bad news during an election season. where is the wrong doing? where is the focus of the benghazi issue? was it the real time response or the cover up over statements? I don't see focus on wrongdoing and I don't see a smoking gun fact of wrong doing. someone please enlighten me.

They flat out lied. It is more than simply "editing" talking points. They flat out lied to the American people. They knew from the beginning it was never about a stupid video. It was always about an act of terrorism. They purposely created the lie to mislead the nation - including the mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons and daughters of the murdered Americans. Then they (Hilary Clinton) had the audacity to use their flag draped coffins as props and perpetuated the myth they created - that lie about an internet video. That is disgusting at best and treasonous at worst.

They were warned about it previously but did nothing. To make matters worse they denied increased security requests. People claimed "Bush lied and people died" well guess what. Obama lied and people died. Where is the outrage?

Then to top all this off Obama knew there was an attack on the embassy yet went to bed so he could get up in the morning and go to a fund raiser. Americans were battling for their lives and he knew and did nothing. That IMO is treasonous.

They lied when they said there were no "forces" close enough to provide relief. There in fact were. They were told to stand down - twice. Treasonous. They said they had no air tanker for aircraft to fly over. They lied because they never even sought permission for a flight. They never intended to send an aircraft. Treasonous.

I could go on and on such as the threats against those who spoke the truth. Now they are victims again of a ruthless, treasonous administration IMO. Those brave men are being attacked in the liberal media. I believe it was Hicks who was demoted after previously being praised.

Still I could go on...
They are liars and not worthy of the public trust.
It is worse because lives were lost.
Their families deserve to know why they lied.
These families deserve to know why the Special Forces were ordered to stand down, condemning their loved ones to death.
These families deserve to know why they lied about a stupid video when there was absolutely no hint of that as a reason yet, Susan Rice lied and it was perpetuated by the administration. It was a concoction of liars period.
These families deserve to know why the President went to bed not caring about their loved one's. Then instead of taking command went to a fund raiser.
These families deserve to know why they were repeatedly denied added security even when terrorism in the area was on the rise and they were warned by the Libyan government.

Do you need anymore?

[canam]

nixon didnt do anything wrong either ,it was the cover up that got him obam needs to resign also, the wh press is po'ed they were lied to and they wont let this go.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

what is the issue of wrong doing? the state department edited talking points to spin bad news during an election season. where is the wrong doing? where is the focus of the benghazi issue? was it the real time response or the cover up over statements? I don't see focus on wrongdoing and I don't see a smoking gun fact of wrong doing. someone please enlighten me.

The problem in all of this is that Congress, even though they know the answers, they can't legally, in the media or in a public hearing, answer the questions or ask anyone who really knows because of the level of classification. That's the main reason all that is getting covered in these hearings is the response or the lack of it.

Before Steven's was Ambassador to Libya, he was Special Representative to the Libyan Rebel Alliance.

The NT Times wrote an article, U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands, talking about how Steven's took care of applications that were coming from US dealers who were requesting licenses to sell to the Libyan insurgents.

He was, of course involved with the CIA, which brings us to Petraeus. Many people felt it was very suspicious he resigns over an affair. He was head of CIA and had met with Turkish officials at the beginning of September last year. About one week later a large shipment of cargo arrives in Libya. The Muslim Brotherhood and the Libyan insurgents both want control of the cargo. MB ends up with it. Four days after the ship arrives, Steven's meets with the Turkish officials, the shipping company and with the CIA. The next day he is dead. It isn't about a video and the classified information isn't going to give us much.

So, in a nutshell, it is probably about gun running. And maybe they just wanted all the witnesses dead and called for a stand down.

The glaring thing is that the ARB didn't even interview relevant witnesses. And Hicks, who was the top official in Benghazi wasn't allowed to see, to this day, the classified report.

[Dedicated Mind]

who is reporting on the gun running issue?

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

The problem in all of this is that Congress, even though they know the answers, they can't legally, in the media or in a public hearing, answer the questions or ask anyone who really knows because of the level of classification. That's the main reason all that is getting covered in these hearings is the response or the lack of it.

Before Steven's was Ambassador to Libya, he was Special Representative to the Libyan Rebel Alliance.

The NT Times wrote an article, U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadis’ Hands, talking about how Steven's took care of applications that were coming from US dealers who were requesting licenses to sell to the Libyan insurgents.

He was, of course involved with the CIA, which brings us to Petraeus. Many people felt it was very suspicious he resigns over an affair. He was head of CIA and had met with Turkish officials at the beginning of September last year. About one week later a large shipment of cargo arrives in Libya. The Muslim Brotherhood and the Libyan insurgents both want control of the cargo. MB ends up with it. Four days after the ship arrives, Steven's meets with the Turkish officials, the shipping company and with the CIA. The next day he is dead. It isn't about a video and the classified information isn't going to give us much.

So, in a nutshell, it is probably about gun running. And maybe they just wanted all the witnesses dead and called for a stand down.

The glaring thing is that the ARB didn't even interview relevant witnesses. And Hicks, who was the top official in Benghazi wasn't allowed to see, to this day, the classified report.

But Paul pushed this theory again this week on CNN. "I’ve actually always suspected that, although I have no evidence, that maybe we were facilitating arms leaving Libya going through Turkey into Syria," Paul said.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...looking/65092/

[Luke]

Dedicatedmind who gave the stand down order and why? Why did they lie about it being a demonstration that turned violent? Why is the American still in prison that made the YouTube video?

Please answer each of these questions for me.

[Dedicated Mind]

Originally Posted by Luke

Dedicatedmind who gave the stand down order and why? Why did they lie about it being a demonstration that turned violent? Why is the American still in prison that made the YouTube video?

Please answer each of these questions for me.

I didn't watch the review board hearings, but the military said that they could not respond in time. I don't know who gave the order. I am assuming Africa Command. Do you know who gave the stand down order and why?

they didn't lie about the incident, they spun the facts like all politicians, but the president had the rose garden meeting the following day and called it an act of terror. so there was no cover up. they were not positive about the facts so they proposed the video as a theory until the facts were known, just like obama did with the boston bombings. no criminal intent.

I don't know why that copt is still in prison. I believe he was arrested on a separate matter. not for the video. i think it was immigration status. not sure.

again no one has stated a definitive act of wrongdoing that hasn't been covered by the review board and acted upon by the state department.