Typical GOP lies and cheap shots.

With all this spectacular BS from the republican party about “cover-ups” concerning statements made by UN Ambassador Susan Rice, it is interesting to learn that her statements were a.) standard procedure for the public release of intelligence related material – only an idiot (of a republican) would release ALL information if the release would compromise sensitive sources, and b.) agreed to by the Senate intelligence committee, among whose members may be found the following republicans (Saxby Chambliss, Olympia Snow, Richard Burr, Jim Risch, Dan Coats, Roy Blunt, and Marco Rubio AND, as Ex officio members – TA-DA!!! - John McCain and Mitch McConnell). Phrased differently, the GOP attack and blame squad, if they want to be honest (fat chance), should also attack themselves.

 

Also, I just saw on the web where McCain supposedly skipped a long briefing on Libya to complain in a news conference that he wasn't briefed on Libya, and then got mad when a reporter pointed this out.

WAYTAGO, JOHNNY!

 

So...

A briefing is sent down from our CIA to the White House... the information is relayed to the country and is not only absent the intelligence facts, but COMPLETELY wrong, and misleading, mirroring the red herring causality the president already laid...

And NOBODY knows who changed the CIA briefing?

You don't think that might be... at the very least... a national security issue, that our representatives have no idea where fundamental intelligence statements come from, how they are altered or by who? "I just read the teleprompter" is not a JOB the TAXPAYERS need to pay for.

And I guess you don't find it odd that while in her departments hands, the named terrorist organization is not only REMOVED from the briefing, but a completely fabricated cause was given?

Not odd at all? Not... strange?

Pretend for a moment, you liberals are good at pretending... pretend for a moment this was the Bush administration, that Rumsfeld's briefing underwent this sort of deceptive change...

How outraged would you be?

 

I also love how the stick your dick in it liberals beliefs flutter based on whether or not an R or D in front of their names.

When it was Clinton it was "So what, he got some head... between him and his wife." Just general outrage... when it is Petraeus? Silence.

I believe stepping down was the appropriate thing to do... you can't keep your word to your wife, who you probably like more than me... I don't much trust you with the worlds secrets... but where is the liberal outrage? That (*)(*)(*)(*) doesn't matter to you...

Don't find the timing at all odd either?

 

^^^^this.

An official CIA intelligence statement contained the phrase "Al-Qaeda involved" and this statement is spread to media sources and PR officials like Susan Rice without that statement - and all the OP can fart out is blather about blaming Republicans?

Holy psychotic cognitive dissonance.

 

the rest of the world is fascinated with american's obsession about other people's sex lives ....

 

Actually we were again lied to about Rice.That she relies on the available Intel
she receives.NOT True.Obama changed her status as to that of a cabinet level
and therefore Ambassador Rice has available to her whatever Intel those other
cabinet posts have.
There has still been no accounting of who exactly EDITED Petraeus' original
Intel concerning Benghazi.Therefore hearings will continue until someone or
ones,under Sworn Testimony clears this up.It would not be a stretch to assume ALL
The Presidents men tell the same story under Oath.But I doubt their Timeline and
past statements will jive under questioning.
This is the problem with a Cover-up.Eventually the narrative starts to break down.
New hardened facts emerge.Witnesses flip and then important careers turn on each
other.

 

It is an issue of trusting our foremost legal authorities. If you cannot keep your word, you are not trustworthy. It is that simple. If you violate your most sacred values when presented an attractive alternative... you don't get to have THAT much power.

The rest of the world is stupid. I don't much care about that.

 

This is the CIA, dear. They have to be above and beyond blackmail and they have to be trustworthy. You're not hearing people criticizing rock stars for being unable to keep it in their pants, just people with public trust.

 

I seem to have touched a nerve.

Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.

 

It would take an idiot of epic proportions to believe standard procedure involves blaming youtube videos while inventing spontaneous demonstrations......

Clearly...it would take an Obamabot.
.
.

 

Your goal should perhaps have been to represent the truth, rather than what you're touching.

 

Notice how the repub echo chamber is so eager to change the subject?

 

The only echo chamber I'm noticing is the sound bouncing off the bare insides of leftist skulls.

The CIA intel dispatch on the Benghazi attack plainly attributed the action to Al Qaeda. Rice's PR appearances on all major news outlets blamed a video instead.

You have no explanation for that, nor are you willing to remain on that very important subject.

 

i dont even have to read this or know what the topic is

even if the GOP "lie" about something

it is NOTHING compared to the way the Left lies

and if you are honest w/ yoursel

you have to admit that YOU lie as well...

we all do

it is called the human condition...

even those of us who are devout Christians tell "little" lies sometimes... stretch the truth, etc...

anyone who claims he has never lied

he is the biggest liar of all

lefties lie by saying such dumb things (thinking such things) as

you can fornicate all you want & its "good"

abort all you want... ditto

commit adultery... ditto

"God, if he even exists, doesn't care about us killing our children or committing adultery"

how utterly stupid

there are BIG lies and not so big ones

big ones KILL

one way or the other

 

Reading? Repubs don' need no stinkin' reading. Or facts. Or thought. Or brains.

 

Please provide a link to the statement.

 

Republicans require no brains to read your posts.

And judging from the number of hits on your threads, they also do not require fingers or eyes.

 

Who is changing the subject?

Cmon...tell us again how standard procedure entails blaming youtube videos and intenting spontaneous demonstrations......

......maybe if it was Obama (R), you might take offense to your governemnt LYING TO YOUR FACE.
.
.

 

Rational thought processes, credible information and a minimum of reading comprehension is helpful:


Petraeus Says U.S. Tried to Avoid Tipping Off Terrorists After Libya Attack

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/w...affair-is-focus-at-hearings.html?pagewanted=2

 

Hmm, so changing "unclassified" material to give a different story during a campaign where Obama said "Al Qaeda" was on the run is just something you believe because THE ONE said it. Gotcha.

 

Are you saying the Muhammad YouTube video was NOT responsible for the demonstrations throughout the entire ME and it was entirely unreasonable to initially think that's what was happening in Libya? Do you also believe it's good national security policy to immediately blurt out everything you know to the entire world and risk letting the terrorist groups know that you know who they are and you're looking for them and also risk confidential informants who gave us information? That there's no value whatsoever in giving such a serious situation serious thought and gather all information possible before you get in front of the microphones - it's more important to empty your gut to people who are going to accuse you of lying no matter WHAT you tell them?


I haven't had any reason so far to think Obama has been lying to my face but I can tell you that I took very serious offense to Bush, Cheney, C. Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of that criminal administration lying in the faces of the entire country in order to take us into an unnecessary war that a FOOL would have known was the biggest mistake made by a sitting president in the entire history of the country and would bring us to where we were when the cretins left office. And as I recall, when no WMDs were found and thousands of our troops died, the Right used the fact that it was "bad intelligence" to excuse Bush&Co for their incompetence, ignorance and malfeasance.

 

Will you please tell me what that has to do with ANYTHING? Bush said it for 8 years. He said bin Laden was on the run living in caves in the mountains. He said he "hardly thought about him any more". The Right thought that was WONDERFUL that their Warrior President was so cool that he had so handily disposed of any threat from bin Laden. The truth is as we know now that bin Laden was living very comfortably in Pakistan and still planning attacks against the U.S.

Sooner or later, cons are going to have to swallow their bile and get over the fact that PRESIDENT OBAMA GOT HIM - EXACTLY AS HE PROMISED HE WOULD. And no puling and whining by the Right trying to make that unimportant or irrelevant is going to change that. Just suck it up and live with it.