Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: More on Benghazi

  1. #1

    Default More on Benghazi

    I wonder if wikileaks has Hillary's e-mails on this.....

    The other shoe could be very entertaining if it drops anytime soon. If the Russians have them, but not wikileaks, one would expect them to keep it quiet for later leverage. Boo.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-attacked.html

  2. #2

    Default

    If they were on wikileaks then they would be public knowledge by now. Maybe Russia has them but I doubt it considering how close Trump is to Putin he probably would have used that card last week instead of asking Russia to find the emails. Personally I'm tried of this which hunt on Clinton she cleared fucked up but not as bad as we would like so I'm tired of hearing about it and tired of people on both sides creating and stretching facts. Benghazi got more congressional investigations than 9/11 and they still couldn't find any criminal wrong doing, its time to move on... If we are going to keep beating this dead horse then I want to know where is the which hunt on Bush for letting 9/11 happen on his watch?

  3. #3

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Acan View Post
    If they were on wikileaks then they would be public knowledge by now.
    Why is that? Do you have special knowledge about their publishing habits?



    Maybe Russia has them but I doubt it considering how close Trump is to Putin he probably would have used that card last week instead of asking Russia to find the emails.
    You ought to get your sarcasm detector looked at. That was a tongue in cheek statement.

    Trump is close to Putin? Where did you get that? I know they've made statements about each other, but I don't believe they've ever met.



    Personally I'm tried of this which hunt on Clinton she cleared fucked up but not as bad as we would like so I'm tired of hearing about it and tired of people on both sides creating and stretching facts. Benghazi got more congressional investigations than 9/11 and they still couldn't find any criminal wrong doing, its time to move on... If we are going to keep beating this dead horse then I want to know where is the which hunt on Bush for letting 9/11 happen on his watch?
    You mean similar to the first bin Ladin attempt on the World Trade Center that happened on Bill Clinton's watch?

    More generally, I agree with you that there's been a lot of undocumented, unverified and unwarranted hype over the incident, and the American death toll was small in the great scheme of things, but two undeniable facts remain that have yet to be adequately explained:

    1. Hillary and her minions invented the cover story about a spontaneous demonstration caused by a youtube video, sticking with the lie when even the most dense of us knew it for what it was.

    2. Hillary called in sick until after the 2012 election rather than tell the truth (or perjure herself...) in front of Congress.

    If it turns out that recent rumors of a CIA gunrunning operation are true, that would explain it. Truth be told, I'd be more OK with the lie and the faux illness if that were the reason, even though our history of picking sides in revolutions in a region where everyone hates us has been spotty at best. We'll see.

    Edit: A third thing that has never been addressed afaik, where was BHO during all this and what part did he play?

  4. #4

    Default

    Wikileaks publishes everything they get. That's how they operate and if the emails were on there someone would have found them by now. Unless you are implying they have an agenda, and idk perhaps they do but I haven't seen evidence of that in the past.

    Well Trump doesn't believe they have met either, but that varies by when you ask him. Like when he claimed he met him when they were featured on the same episode of 60 minutes despite being interviewed thousands of miles apart. Trump also makes excuses that Putin will never invade Ukraine despite that having already happened. more here The real question is do you want someone who jokes about matters of national security to be your president? That doesn't seem a bit irresponsible to you?

    I agree the whole situation reeks and Clinton shouldn't be off the hook but I'm just so tried of it. Clearly nothing is going to happen and I just want everyone to move on. Maybe this election could focus on the issues of our nation and world for once instead of Trump's penis size or Clinton's private server which most top level state department people are guilty of. Everyone should be held to a higher security standard including all elites.

  5. #5

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Acan View Post
    The real question is do you want someone who jokes about matters of national security to be your president? That doesn't seem a bit irresponsible to you?
    Better than someone who is as (clueless, devious, or corrupt, take your pick) about it as Mrs. Clinton seems to be. It would be irresponsible if you, me, and Mr. Trump didn't know that the Russians very likely already know more about Mrs. Clinton's e-mails than any of us. As do the Chinese, Brits, Japanese, Israelis, Iranians, and anyone else on the planet with a competent intelligence service.

  6. #6

    Default

    but those same adjectives fit Trump extremely well... The only difference is Clinton is neither dumb enough to start a war or charismatic enough to get any real damage done to the nation. Trump is both of those things

  7. #7

    Default

    Nearly a dozen congressional investigations later, this zombie continues to refuse to die.

    Benghazi was an act of terror that inconveniently occurred 1 month before an election. It's not clear what, if anything, Republicans were hoping to find, but they've been sure, absolutely sure that something bad must have been covered up because bad things might have swung the election. Endless investigations and taxpayer dollars spent retreading the same ground... it's still just a terror attack on a consulate, which is tragic but not a scandal.

    When there is some actual evidence of a scandal that has somehow managed not to get uncovered by the dozen or so reputable congressional plus credible third-party investigations over the years, I'm sure we'll all hear about it.

  8. #8

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Fruitkitty View Post
    Nearly a dozen congressional investigations later, this zombie continues to refuse to die.

    Benghazi was an act of terror that inconveniently occurred 1 month before an election. It's not clear what, if anything, Republicans were hoping to find, but they've been sure, absolutely sure that something bad must have been covered up because bad things might have swung the election. Endless investigations and taxpayer dollars spent retreading the same ground... it's still just a terror attack on a consulate, which is tragic but not a scandal.
    There's still the issue of why even that obvious fact was denied. Cover-up of a CIA operation would certainly make that less puzzling, and would also explain why the show of a congressional investigation went on without results, and without actually compelling Hillary to testify.



    When there is some actual evidence of a scandal that has somehow managed not to get uncovered by the dozen or so reputable congressional plus credible third-party investigations over the years, I'm sure we'll all hear about it.
    And that's where the e-mails and wikileaks become so much more interesting. I have less sympathy for "ambassador" Stevens and company if they were in fact hip-deep in a CIA operation. You have to know what you're getting into with that sort of thing. It would still make me angry if they were hung out to dry for political reasons, ie, "the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions". Its hard to believe that some sort of air support couldn't have been managed in the time available. Even more telling is that no attempt was made, as far as anyone knows.

    Perhaps you'd prefer to believe that Mrs. Clinton really is THAT inept.

    There's way too much smoke for there not to have been a fire. We just don't know what kind of fire it was.....yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.