Military Offered Rescue Team for Benghazi

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by n david

So. Dense.

Where is Trey Gowdy?
Where is Fox News?
How come this isn't being trumpeted?
Seems like this would blow the Hillary campaign out the water if it is true.

Oh I know! We will wait for Trey Gowdy to announce their new findings at a more politically opportune time!


Because ultimately, this is about politics.

Either they are saving this blow up for just the right moment, or it's not true.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Where is Trey Gowdy?
Where is Fox News?
How come this isn't being trumpeted?
Seems like this would blow the Hillary campaign out the water if it is true.

Oh I know! We will wait for Trey Gowdy to announce their new findings at a more politically opportune time!


Because ultimately, this is about politics.

Either they are saving this blow up for just the right moment, or it's not true.

Trey Gowdy is running an investigation that does not report what is going on with the people they have subpoenaed. The only people made public on the questioning are those that ask to have it public, i.e. Hillary, who had her Democratic allies on the panel go to bat for her. That was her intention.

The media, obviously and conveniently, refused to focus on the substantiative questioning.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Pressing On,
If this is true, and I still have my doubts, but if this is true, then the only reason there hasn't been a press conference held by Gowdy now is because they are waiting for a more politically opportune time.

At the end of the day, this is about politics.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Pressing On,
If this is true, and I still have my doubts, but if this is true, then the only reason there hasn't been a press conference held by Gowdy now is because they are waiting for a more politically opportune time.

At the end of the day, this is about politics.

Military conflicts usually involve politics, which includes Hillary's part in it as well.

You can follow the process here on the Benghazi Committee:

They just interviewed their 60th witness.

http://benghazi.house.gov/

[deacon blues]

This investigation has uncovered the fact that Hillary lied---multiple times---it can't be denied, altered, or excused. They were blatant and purposeful lies to the American public. That matters---should matter---will matter in the 2016 election. It will be one of several reasons why Hillary will lose.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

This investigation has uncovered the fact that Hillary lied---multiple times---it can't be denied, altered, or excused. They were blatant and purposeful lies to the American public. That matters---should matter---will matter in the 2016 election. It will be one of several reasons why Hillary will lose.

She did not purposefully lie when less than 24 hours she said one thing and then, when given new and different intel, she said something else within 72 hours.

You're not being reasonable.

The thing is, there WERE INDEED protests happening at American embassies around the world on the same day and at the same time as the Benghazi attack.

Benghazi was a pre-planned, terrorist attack that happened at the same time as several spontaneous, violent protests at American embassies around the world.

[n david]

You're being intellectually dishonest and ignorant here, JD.

It wasn't that she said something, then got better intel and corrected it. They knew what happened and they changed the narrative. The only intel coming in was that it was a terrorist attack.

The emails are proof and only the most partisan political hack ignores the evidence and claims something else.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by n david

You're being intellectually dishonest and ignorant here, JD.

It wasn't that she said something, then got better intel and corrected it. They knew what happened and they changed the narrative. The only intel coming in was that it was a terrorist attack.

The emails are proof and only the most partisan political hack ignores the evidence and claims something else.

Benghazi was a pre-planned, terrorist attack that happened at the same time as several spontaneous, violent protests at American embassies around the world.

It is PLAUSIBLE for the intel community to not have all the answers solidified within 24 hours of an attack, within 72 hours of an attack, within 96 hours of an attack.

Information changes, things look clear, look murky, look clear...

Bottom line, if you want to believe that she knew all that she needed to know within less than 24 hours after the Benghazi attack that happened at the same time as other attacks were happening around the world, then so be it.

I think it is very reasonable, given all that was going on, not just in Benghazi, but around the world, it is PLAUSIBLE for Clinton to not have all of the facts straight within 24 hours, 72 hours, and 96 of the Benghazi attack-- an attack that happened at the same time as several American embassy attacks around the world.

You just want to ignore the context of that fateful day and just believe Hillary is a devil.

Just think about it.

24 hours, 72 hours, 96 hours-- it is simply not enough time to have all the information you need to be 100% correct on an attack that happened on the other side of the world.

How don't you see that?

[n david]

Because the emails prove they knew it was a terrorist attack but instead of admitting it, decided to claim it was because of some dumb YouTube video.

I get you don't want to see that. You're intentionally putting your hands over your eyes, claiming you can't see it. Yet the reason is because you don't want to see it.

Even if Hillary addressed the nation and said they knew but lied and changed the narrative...you would still refuse to believe it.

Go ahead and continue to offer your theories and how your hypotheticals may be plausible or not...the evidence is there and you can't change the evidence. It is what it is.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by n david

Because the emails prove they knew it was a terrorist attack but instead of admitting it, decided to claim it was because of some dumb YouTube video.

I get you don't want to see that. You're intentionally putting your hands over your eyes, claiming you can't see it. Yet the reason is because you don't want to see it.

Even if Hillary addressed the nation and said they knew but lied and changed the narrative...you would still refuse to believe it.

Go ahead and continue to offer your theories and how your hypotheticals may be plausible or not...the evidence is there and you can't change the evidence. It is what it is.

I love you-- albeit in a general sense, I do.