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

Benghazi

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
Beg to differ:

Today is a day we mourn and remember those we lost in Benghazi. In this event, we lost more people than the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined. This is their day. The 4 biggest heroes in the country’s existence.


That's snarky.

Let's not pretend it isn't.
It spits on every Veteran that died in Wars and remembered today, of course, nw posted those that served were high school failures and had to serve.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
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...
Where do you get your misinformation? Gowdy didn't discover her email server. Guccifer did when he hacked Blumenthal's email.

You referred to the CGI as the "family slush fund". Can you show that any money donated to the CGI ever went into family accounts? Did any of the Clintons get any money from CGI?

There has been an investigation by Barr's DOJ into the CGI for well over a year. Any sign of an indictment?
 

Mr. Friscus

I think, therefore, I poop
I love it.

"YOU ABUSED YOUR POWER, AND YOUR INVESTIGATIONS WERE BOGUS JUST TO GET HILLARY AND OBAMA"

"WE DIDN'T ABUSE OUR POWER, AND OUR 3 YEAR INVESTIGATION WITH NO EVIDENCE WAS LEGIT"

It's as if 2 personalities are running around upstairs.
 
Today is a day we mourn and remember those we lost in Benghazi. In this event, we lost more people than the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined. This is their day. The 4 biggest heroes in the country’s existence.

The good news is that they were exploited for political gain. One day, Obama and Holder will get the executions they deserve for a tragedy that made 9/11 look like a minor inconvenience. And Hillary won’t just be “locked up” in prison. But rotting in hell next to the devil herself for being there and pulling the trigger on each and every one of them. All while screaming “DEATH TO AMERICA”.

RIP.
'Death to America' is not meant literally. It is conceptual as in 'stop American negative influence in our lands'.

As far as I have ever been able to find out Libya was Hillary's baby. Paid well by Goldman Sachs Libya ( a peaceful land) was destroyed for two reasons and one was to destabilize Syria in order to gain Syrian assets. Gaddafi's arms were sent to Syria to arm the mercenaries ( ISIL). Your people were caught, somehow, in the middle of that.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
It's telling that you can't even come up with your own stuff. Once again proving that Democrats rarely if ever has thought of there own.
You repeat the same crap as if you've discovered something important and then get pissed when your "facts" are ignored, having been debunked previously, and start throwing insults. My opinion is that your insult fits you more than me.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
I love it.

"YOU ABUSED YOUR POWER, AND YOUR INVESTIGATIONS WERE BOGUS JUST TO GET HILLARY AND OBAMA"

"WE DIDN'T ABUSE OUR POWER, AND OUR 3 YEAR INVESTIGATION WITH NO EVIDENCE WAS LEGIT"

It's as if 2 personalities are running around upstairs.
What reason was there to justify 10 investigations into Benghazi? What was the evidence used to keep the White Water investigation going for 6 years?

The evidence to justify the Crossfire investigation was the conversation between Downer and Popadopolous in April of 2016 where Downer was told the Russians had dirt on Hillary...he said nothing about it until the DNC emails were released by Wiki.

When a crime is committed it is reasonable to look to who benefited from the crime...
Suggesting there was no evidence ignores the dozens of conversations between the Russians and members of the campaign, the fact that an advisor to the Kremlin was also working on the campaign and traveled to Moscow to meet with the deputy prime minister.
 

Mr. Friscus

I think, therefore, I poop
What reason was there to justify 10 investigations into Benghazi? What was the evidence used to keep the White Water investigation going for 6 years?

The evidence to justify the Crossfire investigation was the conversation between Downer and Popadopolous in April of 2016 where Downer was told the Russians had dirt on Hillary...he said nothing about it until the DNC emails were released by Wiki.

When a crime is committed it is reasonable to look to who benefited from the crime...
Suggesting there was no evidence ignores the dozens of conversations between the Russians and members of the campaign, the fact that an advisor to the Kremlin was also working on the campaign and traveled to Moscow to meet with the deputy prime minister.
Just looking at who benefits from a crime isn't evidence, it's speculation.

Speculate away, but don't expect others to accept your mere speculation as any sort of legitimate evidence. I have my suspicions on Obama in areas, but I admit they aren't provable to the extent that I can make the claim.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
'Death to America' is not meant literally. It is conceptual as in 'stop American negative influence in our lands'.

As far as I have ever been able to find out Libya was Hillary's baby. Paid well by Goldman Sachs Libya ( a peaceful land) was destroyed for two reasons and one was to destabilize Syria in order to gain Syrian assets. Gaddafi's arms were sent to Syria to arm the mercenaries ( ISIL). Your people were caught, somehow, in the middle of that.
So the French, Italians and British wanted to overthrow Gaddafi to arm the Syrian rebels? Wow...so they started a civil war, somehow tricking Gaddafi into ordering his troops to open fire on peaceful demonstrators...and then going to the UN to condemn Gaddafi and persuading Obama to help them with the no-fly zone....

Pretty tricky those Frenchmen.

The fact is that ISIS/ISIL/ISI came from AL Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq was armed to the teeth because "W" disbanded the Iraqi army, sending them home without disarming them...250,000 potential AQI fighters with no hope of finding a job...They didn't need any more AK-47s from Libya.

The Libyan civil war began in February 2011 and ended in October. The Syrians civil war began in March 2011 and began when Syrian forces fired on demonstrators in Aleppo.
Members of the Syrian military rebelled to form the FSA.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Just looking at who benefits from a crime isn't evidence, it's speculation.

Speculate away, but don't expect others to accept your mere speculation as any sort of legitimate evidence. I have my suspicions on Obama in areas, but I admit they aren't provable to the extent that I can make the claim.
Who stood to gain by releasing negative info on the DNC and the Clinton campaign?
 

Mr. Friscus

I think, therefore, I poop
Who stood to gain by releasing negative info on the DNC and the Clinton campaign?
Airing the DNC's dirty laundry certainly benefited the GOP. It was nice to see under the hood at how corrupt and cynical the DNC is of the populace. However, that isn't evidence of GOP action. It's speculation.

Meanwhile, there's no credible evidence that it was even Russia, so you really have to stop strutting around here claiming it as some sort of fact.

The source of the claim that Russian agents had hacked the DNC server was cyber security company CrowdStrike, hired by the Democratic Party to investigate its data breach. But, when interviewed by the HIC in December 2017, CrowdStrike President Shawn Henry admitted they had no good evidence that data was even hacked from the DNC’s server, let alone that Russian hackers had done so


But, let's not stop here...

The Democrats stood to gain from Flynn's name being leaked to the media. Does that mean that, in your eyes, they did it? Because that's very illegal.

The Democrats stood to gain by abusing power to keep open an investigation that had no evidence and was about to be shut down. Does that mean, in your eyes, they did it? Because that's illegal.

The list could go on. Either hold the consistent standard and condemn the Democrats, or just expose yourself as hack, it's your choice.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
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. Then after the election it was supposedly a coup to overthrow Trump.

You ignore that the WhiteWater investigation went on for 6 years and failed to find a single act they could pin on the Clintons...was that an attempted coup? The Paula Jones lawsuit was yet another republican tactic to hamstring Clinton or to engineer a perjury trap.

So when you guys accuse the democrats of having no reason to start the Crossfire investigation or to request a FISA warrant on Page...it looks more like you think the dems are simply retaliating for WhiteWater or the 10 Benghazi investigations...
Well, considering the fact that they investigated the Trump campaign (and not Russia) I don't think it is a stretch to say they were NOT actually "finding fact related to the Russian hack on the DNC (which is a crime)." No one had to "encourage" Russia to hack the DNC, just like the Russians don't do anything to "encourage" us to hack their electoral systems:


You know full well that I did not condone the Whitewater Investigation, so why do you keep bringing it up as a defense of Obama's corrupt pursuit of fake criminality wrt the Trump campaign? And yeah, I suppose it was an attempted coup, which does not excuse the dems using the same (but highly refined) tactics against Trump.

I don't know about others, but I'm simply pointing out the facts - and the facts demonstrate that there was never any predicate for the Russian "collusion" investigation. And the fact that the Republicans did something similar (albeit without all of the politicization of the intelligence apparatus) to Clinton doesn't make it right for Obama to have done this to Trump.

What I "think" is that the Dems were simply trying to overthrow the government to maintain their grip on the national agenda. There was never any valid reason to investigate any of the Trumpies. Period. End of story.
 
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...
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!
 
So the French, Italians and British wanted to overthrow Gaddafi to arm the Syrian rebels? Wow...so they started a civil war, somehow tricking Gaddafi into ordering his troops to open fire on peaceful demonstrators...and then going to the UN to condemn Gaddafi and persuading Obama to help them with the no-fly zone....

Pretty tricky those Frenchmen.

The fact is that ISIS/ISIL/ISI came from AL Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq was armed to the teeth because "W" disbanded the Iraqi army, sending them home without disarming them...250,000 potential AQI fighters with no hope of finding a job...They didn't need any more AK-47s from Libya.

The Libyan civil war began in February 2011 and ended in October. The Syrians civil war began in March 2011 and began when Syrian forces fired on demonstrators in Aleppo.
Members of the Syrian military rebelled to form the FSA.
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.
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
What reason was there to justify 10 investigations into Benghazi? What was the evidence used to keep the White Water investigation going for 6 years?

Lies 'it was due to a video' and slaughtered Americans
Murdered Americans evidently don't bother liberals
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Airing the DNC's dirty laundry certainly benefited the GOP. It was nice to see under the hood at how corrupt and cynical the DNC is of the populace. However, that isn't evidence of GOP action. It's speculation.

Meanwhile, there's no credible evidence that it was even Russia, so you really have to stop strutting around here claiming it as some sort of fact.

The source of the claim that Russian agents had hacked the DNC server was cyber security company CrowdStrike, hired by the Democratic Party to investigate its data breach. But, when interviewed by the HIC in December 2017, CrowdStrike President Shawn Henry admitted they had no good evidence that data was even hacked from the DNC’s server, let alone that Russian hackers had done so


But, let's not stop here...

The Democrats stood to gain from Flynn's name being leaked to the media. Does that mean that, in your eyes, they did it? Because that's very illegal.

The Democrats stood to gain by abusing power to keep open an investigation that had no evidence and was about to be shut down. Does that mean, in your eyes, they did it? Because that's illegal.

The list could go on. Either hold the consistent standard and condemn the Democrats, or just expose yourself as hack, it's your choice.
The DNC email showed nothing of the sort. Wiki hyped the headlines, but never actually produced a single email with anything all that bad...One guy proposed playing up Sander's faith, but that was ignored.

1. What did the democrats have to gain by leaking Flynn's name to the media? The election was over. No elections for two years and an electorate with remarkably short memories. Given the backbiting among Trump's family and transition team...are you sure one of Trump's own people didn't leak Flynn's name, just to get him fired? He had a pretty bad reputation from previous jobs...not an easy guy to work with or for.
2. What was illegal about keeping the investigation open? The recommendation to close it seems to have been made before knowledge of Flynn's conversation with the Russian ambassador was known to the FBI. The phone calls to Kislyak was on December 29th 2016. Clearly Strzok saw a chance to get cooperation from Flynn into the larger Crossfire investigation into the conspiracy accusation. Again, what was illegal about it?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
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?
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
The DNC email showed nothing of the sort. Wiki hyped the headlines, but never actually produced a single email with anything all that bad...One guy proposed playing up Sander's faith, but that was ignored.

1. What did the democrats have to gain by leaking Flynn's name to the media? The election was over. No elections for two years and an electorate with remarkably short memories. Given the backbiting among Trump's family and transition team...are you sure one of Trump's own people didn't leak Flynn's name, just to get him fired? He had a pretty bad reputation from previous jobs...not an easy guy to work with or for.
2. What was illegal about keeping the investigation open? The recommendation to close it seems to have been made before knowledge of Flynn's conversation with the Russian ambassador was known to the FBI. The phone calls to Kislyak was on December 29th 2016. Clearly Strzok saw a chance to get cooperation from Flynn into the larger Crossfire investigation into the conspiracy accusation. Again, what was illegal about it?
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.
 
Top