New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Benghazi

middleview

President
Supporting Member
There was NO civil war going on in either Libya or Syria.

Call them by any name your wish we are talking about paid ( by differing interested parties ) mercenaries who were/are not bound by any conventions such as Geneva. A monster let lose on peaceful civil societies.

Some Syrian Soldiers were lured by big bucks but most of them went home early on.
Again inventing your own version of history. I don't know why you'd invest so much effort supporting dictators like Gaddafi and Assad or that you'd deny the truth...that the
FSA and the Libyan rebels were primarily soldiers from the armies of Gaddafi and Assad.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Can you prove the attack was not motivated by the video? The only way to know would be to ask the people who planned the attack. Several reporters on the ground the day after the attack reported it was about the anti-islam video. Obama, Clinton and Rice all said that the video was no excuse for terrorism.

The investigation wasn't about the dead Americans...it was an attempt to blame Obama and Clinton for their deaths...or at least keep it in the headlines even if they found nothing...

If they were investigating the murders then why have Hillary testify for 11 hours?
It was an attempt to illustrate that the Obama Administration had downplayed the attack, including by not adequately defending the consulate in Benghazi, in order to support the (false) campaign slogan that he had "al Qeada on the run."
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
1. Postponing having to come clean about their illegal spying on the Trumpies?

2. That is, in fact, not a fact:

The filings indicate that by Jan. 4, 2017, the FBI had drafted a document summarizing findings on a probe — code-named “Crossfire Razor” — of whether Flynn had been acting as a Russian agent during the 2016 campaign. The partly redacted document, which was included in the court filings, indicated the FBI had no “derogatory” information on Flynn and was prepared to close the case.


What was illegal about it was that it was begun without adequate predicate, which makes it a political, and not an intelligence, operation.
So you think that Flynns name was leaked to postpone the revelation that there was illegal spying on the Trump campaign? Where the f*ck did you come up with that?
It makes no sense at all.

That some FBI agent or agents drafted a document recommending closing Crossfire Razor does not mean those agents knew anything at all about the phone calls on December 29th between Flynn and Kislyak.

Your definition of why it was illegal is laughable. The old "adequate predicate" law...right? It is truly funny how "predicate" became your new favorite word. You don't even try to hide that your source of info is RNC talking point memos.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
So you think that Flynns name was leaked to postpone the revelation that there was illegal spying on the Trump campaign? Where the f*ck did you come up with that?
It makes no sense at all.

That some FBI agent or agents drafted a document recommending closing Crossfire Razor does not mean those agents knew anything at all about the phone calls on December 29th between Flynn and Kislyak.

Your definition of why it was illegal is laughable. The old "adequate predicate" law...right? It is truly funny how "predicate" became your new favorite word. You don't even try to hide that your source of info is RNC talking point memos.
It makes all the sense in the world. As the incoming NSA they would eventually have to brief him on "crossfire hurricane," which was (allegedly) a, you know, "national security" investigation. By getting him out of the way they bought themselves enough time to engineer a "special counsel" investigation (that provided continued cover for their treason).

Are you suggesting that in January 4, the DAY BEFORE IT WAS PRESENTED BY COMEY AT THE WHITE HOUSE MEETING, that the FBI agents in charge of the investigation were clueless about it? That is inane!

Every investigation requires "predicate." The idea that it is a non-issue in this matter is preposterous. The evidence is overwhelming that they did not have adequate evidence to open a national security investigation into a candidate for President of the United States. That you ignore that fact and cling to the ridiculous position that a flimsy third hand "tip" about alleged Russian interference in the election, with ZERO corroborating evidence, was enough to do so simply shines a 100,000 watt spotlight on your partisan hackery.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
It was an attempt to illustrate that the Obama Administration had downplayed the attack, including by not adequately defending the consulate in Benghazi, in order to support the (false) campaign slogan that he had "al Qeada on the run."
1. "It was an attempt to illustrate that the Obama Administration had downplayed the attack"? And that was not for political purpose? Are you thinking, even if true, that was a crime and should have resulted in 10 investigations?
2. The only request made was for two more agents and it was denied by Charlene Lamb. She was juggling multiple requests and with a limited budget. Two more armed agents would not have made a difference.
3. Al Qaeda was on the run. A hundred guys in a militia, somehow affiliated with Al Qaeda is not a sign of a resurgent AQ. Did you notice that even though the attack was in September and there was nothing new learned about the attack after late october...Obama won the election? So much for your pretending it had to do with the campaign.

There were attacks on US embassies and consulates around the world the day before the attack...and all because of the video. Why wouldn't they assume the attack in Benghazi was the same?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
It makes all the sense in the world. As the incoming NSA they would eventually have to brief him on "crossfire hurricane," which was (allegedly) a, you know, "national security" investigation. By getting him out of the way they bought themselves enough time to engineer a "special counsel" investigation (that provided continued cover for their treason).

Are you suggesting that in January 4, the DAY BEFORE IT WAS PRESENTED BY COMEY AT THE WHITE HOUSE MEETING, that the FBI agents in charge of the investigation were clueless about it? That is inane!

Every investigation requires "predicate." The idea that it is a non-issue in this matter is preposterous. The evidence is overwhelming that they did not have adequate evidence to open a national security investigation into a candidate for President of the United States. That you ignore that fact and cling to the ridiculous position that a flimsy third hand "tip" about alleged Russian interference in the election, with ZERO corroborating evidence, was enough to do so simply shines a 100,000 watt spotlight on your partisan hackery.
Pure farging nonsense. Flynn would be replaced by someone else...

Yes, January 4th someone sent an email about closing the Crossfire razor investigation.

Strzok saw it and 20 minutes later said don't close it. Why would the FBI agents working on Crossfire Razor know about a wiretap on the Russian ambassador and calls from Flynn? How many people do you think work at the FBI? Do you honestly think that the intel report detailing the wiretap was widely circulated?

Again...where is the "Predicate" law documented. You said it was illegal to do an investigation without predicate.

"Flimsy tip"? Your opinion...The investigation was into the Russian hack and whether or not the Trump campaign was in on it. The FBI already knew the Russians had hacked the DNC. The tip indicated possible campaign knowledge of the hack. Would Downer have been considered a flimsy source?
 
Again inventing your own version of history. I don't know why you'd invest so much effort supporting dictators like Gaddafi and Assad or that you'd deny the truth...that the
FSA and the Libyan rebels were primarily soldiers from the armies of Gaddafi and Assad.
Honestly middleview --- we have already done this subject to death many times over.

I just can't be bothered but for to say you are wrong and me - I am right!
 

EatTheRich

President
Democrats are still angry about the fact that Gowdy's investigation (the only that was worth anything) are the ones that discovered that Hillary was using a private email server. Of course anyone with a brain knows why, so she could peddle influence and run her family slush fund... I mean charity.

As for Benghazi, it's self, they lied about it from day one then got mad when anyone dared question them...
Powell advised her to use a private email, as he did, because they were concerned that the State Dept.’s obsolete system wasn’t secure enough. Her charitable foundation was one of the most reputable ever according to nearly half a dozen independent audits.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Powell advised her to use a private email, as he did, because they were concerned that the State Dept.’s obsolete system wasn’t secure enough. Her charitable foundation was one of the most reputable ever according to nearly half a dozen independent audits.
Looooooooooool What? Are you writing that with a straight face EatTheRich?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Honestly middleview --- we have already done this subject to death many times over.

I just can't be bothered but for to say you are wrong and me - I am right!
You have nothing at all to support your opinions. I have supplied numerous links to document the actions of both Assad and Gaddafi. They brought on their own civil wars by the suppression of peaceful demonstrations and the murder of unarmed demonstrators.

You clearly support those dictators. That is the bottom line. The US was involved in neither of those civil wars at the outset. The US cooperated with Nato in enforcing a no fly zone in Libya. You claim it was mercenaries who were attacking Gaddafi's forces and that it was mercenaries again attacking Syrian forces loyal to Assad.

Where did those people come from? Who was paying them...show one single credible source for your accusations.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Powell advised her to use a private email, as he did, because they were concerned that the State Dept.’s obsolete system wasn’t secure enough. Her charitable foundation was one of the most reputable ever according to nearly half a dozen independent audits.
over 100 Bush WH appointees used the RNC email server and nobody went to jail, even though those emails disappeared and could not be produced in reponse to a congressional subpoena.
 
You have nothing at all to support your opinions. I have supplied numerous links to document the actions of both Assad and Gaddafi. They brought on their own civil wars by the suppression of peaceful demonstrations and the murder of unarmed demonstrators.

You clearly support those dictators. That is the bottom line. The US was involved in neither of those civil wars at the outset. The US cooperated with Nato in enforcing a no fly zone in Libya. You claim it was mercenaries who were attacking Gaddafi's forces and that it was mercenaries again attacking Syrian forces loyal to Assad.

Where did those people come from? Who was paying them...show one single credible source for your accusations.
Night night middleview.
 

EatTheRich

President
over 100 Bush WH appointees used the RNC email server and nobody went to jail, even though those emails disappeared and could not be produced in reponse to a congressional subpoena.
Wikipedia says 88, of which for 51 the RNC preserved none of their emails (unlike Clinton who according to the FBI made a good-faith effort to preserve every government email and turned over every email under subpoena). A total of 22 million or more emails went missing (compared with 30,000 for Clinton ... over 98% of them personal based on any reasonable inference from the recovered deleted emails).

It seems emails were almost certainly deliberately deleted in an attempt to cover up, among other things:

1) the corrupt firing of U.S. attorneys for refusing to go along with White House voter suppression schemes and to hyper-politicize their departments.
2) the retaliatory outing of a covert CIA operative because her husband’s scientific assessment contradicted White House dogma
3) use of taxpayer dollars to provide luxuries for high muck-a-mucks in the White House
 
That email server was one of the most horrific chapters in American History. I feel lucky to have survived it, though I did so in tatters. Also, Hillary Clinton’s aide had a husband who sent dick pictures. The 10 Benghazi investigations virtually saved America also. Thank God for those brave GOP congressmen who kept churning them up over and over again for 5 years. When 400 US Marines were slaughtered in Lebanon during the Reagan Administration, the evil Democrats who controlled the House of Representatives conducted exactly 0 investigations against Secretary of State George Shultz. These lefty’s just don’t play fair, I tell ya!
Got it. Your betters are continually lying to you and you are ok with that.
 
ou repeat the same crap as if you've discovered something important and then get pissed when your "facts" are ignored,
Nobody ignores facts like yourself.

The entire set of talking points from the RNC/Trump camp has been that the investigation starting in July 2016 was about defeating Trump and not actually
finding fact related to the Russian hack on the DNC (which is a crime) and whether or not members of the Trump campaign encouraged that crime, even if it was simply implied that policies beneficial to Russia would result.
The Russian Collusion narrative has been debunked yet you repeat the same sorry talking points supplied to you by your betters. Now you are pathetically comparing to WhiteWater... How [Unwelcome language removed] stupid can you be?
 
How [Unwelcome language removed] clueless can one person and one party be?

You are demonstrating exactly that on a daily basis.
The Russian Collusion narrative you are desperately clinging to has been debunked. As a whole the entire Democratic Party has been lying to you for over nearly 4 years now and you keep repeating the same shit, every single day.
 
Powell advised her to use a private email, as he did, because they were concerned that the State Dept.’s obsolete system wasn’t secure enough. Her charitable foundation was one of the most reputable ever according to nearly half a dozen independent audits.
The "Powell did it too" talking point by Democrats was debunked long ago. He never told her to use it exclusively and he never told her to use it for classified material.

All things she did.
 
Top