Panetta: ‘From The Beginning’ I Knew Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack

I stopped believing Obola in 2008 when he lied about public financing. Just another huckster trying to scam an election.

.

 

Just so.

And it leaves us with a decent test for intellectual honesty, especially amongst the previously Richard Sucking media.

Have they come around at least a little? Many have. Those that can't see the Boy King has no clothes are hopeless and must be discounted to near zero.

 

It's the MSLSD repeated spin/lies/agitprop. They mainline this crap and it becomes the 'current truth'.

Face it. They could not buy into this POS without their entire friendly media pumping them full of BS. The FAIL is that big. The poop stink is that strong.

 

What's really " fishy" is how all the democrats are turning on the big guy . What a lovely group of dedicated urchins you guys on the left have as leaders of your party and for some reason I got the feeling more sellouts are on the way. The whole party stinks from the head.

 

Yeah! We need more passion in our leader! Like Mussolini! Or Hitler! Or countless other outlandish characters who wielded their power like a kid on the playground with a big stick. To hell with thoughtfulness!

Way to go Leon.

 

No more fishy that the IRS, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and the numerous other lies from Obama and company. You should have watched the interview with Panetta and O'Reilly, it was very revealing

 

Oh gee, I don't know, I guess you feel the same about the opinion of whistle blowers, rapes, or any other opinions from those that were there

Stupid post Jonsa

 

Correct me if I'm wrong. Obama and his administration agree that it was a terrorist attack and that the intelligence that suggested it was a spontaneous demonstration that got out of control was false right? I mean, I've heard Obama say this himself. So how is Obama proven a liar by Panetta on Benghazi?

 

.[/QUOTE]

How short our memories are. If one remembers what Obama ran on, getting us out of these useless, wasteful, unaffordable wars, the fact that he tried to keep at least that campaign promise is lost on chicken hawks.

The right side nuts have been going after him from day one for not indulging in their madness in regards to these wars, which solve nothing, but only create more terrorists. Well, you guys finally dragged him into it, albeit with him kicking and screaming.

Americans were sick of Bush and Cheney's wars, and how quickly some of us forget that. The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again, yet expecting different results.

The warmongers on the right are a grave danger to my country. And the war mongers on the left are just as dangerous. Why do these guys want to destroy America? To spend even more on war, when we won't be able to even pay the interest on the national debt once interest rates go back up.

 

And yet, with all the investigations by Issa, not a single shred of actual evidence has been found about any of that. It's always conjecture and opinions. Believe me, should any actual evidence come forth by someone who actually has direct involvement, I will listen.

 

“Secretary Panetta and others are echoing what is obvious from the outside, but it’s more powerful when it’s coming from people on the inside.”.... Gov. Bobby Jindal

 

I didn't bring up the subject Nat Turner did. I just qualified his statement as to the source of the Obama "Birther" discussion. However, there you go dragging up some of the Clinton past problems. Funny how even Liberals remember them too. What difference does it make?

 

Yeah, if only all those computers that all failed at the same time and the director after apologizing, takes the 5th twice. Naw, no suspicion there of corruption. I'll take Panetta's word for Obama being a total inept liar (my words)

Is there any wonder why governments become so corrupt when the lemmings fall for their BS stories.

 

Suspicion doesn't equal evidence. I agree that we don't have the full story, and more then likely their is something rotten with the IRS issue, but I'm pretty sure you need more then circumstantial evidence to convict....

 

This will only become a big deal when the other side starts using the IRS as a weapon. It makes sick that Americans buy into to this BS that it is only one side that will see this sort of corruption. The democrats made Issa into the bad guy for trying to do a thorough investigation, and you can bet this will be another story when the shoe is on the other foot

 

Is everyone who has written a book is a huckster, or just those saying something you either don't happen to agree with or just don't want to hear?

 

Everybody knew it was a terrorist attack......and no one knew better than Obama, Hillary, Panetta, and other administration officials who LIED and CONCOTED stories. It was very clear that the attempted cover-up was about the election......because having another 9/11 terrorist attack did NOT fit with Obama's "I decimated al Qaeda" mantra. He believes all us peons out here are quite stupid......even and probably more so Democrats who he counted on falling for it hook, line, and sinker and voting for him anyway. Which they did!

 

The IRS has been used as a weapon for a long time by many administrations

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324715704578482823301630836

This isn't a new thing, and I doubt it will ever really change.

Everyone who has a new book on sale trying to build attention and sales becomes a huckster. That's how advertising works. It doesn't matter the content.

 

And that somehow renders whatever they have to say not worth hearing or reading? The content doesn't matter? What if every statement in the book is absolutely accurate and verifiable? How on earth can the content of a book not matter? That is completely absurd.

 

The content is fine, but by his own words it's his opinion. He has no direct knowledge of the matter, so he made his opinion known, in a book he wrote, that he makes money off of. That's fine and dandy for him, but it doesn't mean he is right.

 

Obama’s claim he called Benghazi an ‘act of terrorism’

Four Pinocchios

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...b65b83e-bc14-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html

why do liberals continue with the same lies over and over again when they have been exposed as lies

 

A moment ago it didn't matter.

It doesn't mean he is wrong either.

 

Sorry, not what I meant. I meant that he is free to write his opinions. But to try and pass them off as fact is disingenuous.

Unfortunately the standard of proof is much lower in the court of public opinion. Luckily the Justice System has higher standards.

 

Please get back to me with how one actually "disproves" another person's personal opinion of yet another person's thoughts and actions.

Particularly without context nor any evaluation criteria mentioned?

I wouldn't say your post is stupid, merely fallacious, but I shouldn't be surprised since you do love strawmen so.

 

Obama did not specifically say "Benghazi was a terrorist attack." And further proof he was not talking about Benghazi is when he sent Rice out on a PR campaign to convince the voters it was a protest. So why was Obama's message as you claim different than his PR person's claim?