Zombie Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
PapaG

PapaG

Banned User
BANNED
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
32,870
Likes
291
Points
0
Way to go, Dems. My hat off to Democrat Reps. Elijah Cummings and Jackie Speier for actually staying to hear from the families, who simply want answers on why no arrests have been made.

130814-hillary-what-difference-does-it-make.jpg


http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...ore-testimony-from-benghazi-families-n1704732

During the second portion of a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing about Benghazi Thursday on Capitol Hill, the majority of Democrats on the Committee left the room and refused to listen to the testimony of Patricia Smith and Charles Woods. Ms. Smith is the mother of Sean Smith, an information management officer killed in the 9/11 Benghazi attack. Charles Woods is the father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, who was also killed.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I'd like to know the reason they left. If they did so for the reasons stated above, shame on them. The children of these people gave their lives in service to their country. Agree or disagree that the Executive did all they could to save those people, it doesn't matter. Their families deserve respect. Leaving was profoundly disrespectful.
 
Btw, does it bother anybody else that the life of one diplomat is considered more important than the thousands of military personnel killed in Iraq?
 
In Iraq, if a platoon had been left to die while there was still a way to get them out, I think there'd have been a bit of an uproar and some hard questions asked.

If the bin Laden SEAL team had been left to die in the compound b/c a chopper broke, and we didn't do everything we could to get them out, there would've been some questions asked.

In Afghanistan, two two-star Marine generals were fired because they didn't do all he could to ensure perimeter security on their base, leading to a loss of 2 Marines and 8 airplanes. And they didn't have "prior warning" of the attack.

The ambassador is the de facto President of the US for any country where the President isn't there or until the President overrules. The military has to listen to him/her. I mean, I understand that no one in America knew who the guy was (or his staff were), and few cared about a backwater north African country run by a dictator with terrorist ties, but this isn't the same as kidnapping a POW or planting an IED that blows up a convoy or something.
 
PapaG said:
Way to go, Dems.
Click to expand...

Nice try, but you are just repeating Republican spin.

It turns out the vast majority of the R's also skipped out on the hearing.

And really, why shouldn't they? What could the parents of the dead possibly have to say that would be relevant to a congressional inquiry? Do they have more knowledge or insight than any other parents who lose a child overseas? The real question is why our tax dollars were wasted flying the parents to Washington to testify.

barfo
 
BrianFromWA said:
In Iraq, if a platoon had been left to die while there was still a way to get them out, I think there'd have been a bit of an uproar and some hard questions asked.

If the bin Laden SEAL team had been left to die in the compound b/c a chopper broke, and we didn't do everything we could to get them out, there would've been some questions asked.

In Afghanistan, two two-star Marine generals were fired because they didn't do all he could to ensure perimeter security on their base, leading to a loss of 2 Marines and 8 airplanes. And they didn't have "prior warning" of the attack.

The ambassador is the de facto President of the US for any country where the President isn't there or until the President overrules. The military has to listen to him/her. I mean, I understand that no one in America knew who the guy was (or his staff were), and few cared about a backwater north African country run by a dictator with terrorist ties, but this isn't the same as kidnapping a POW or planting an IED that blows up a convoy or something.
Click to expand...

Thank You.

Rep'd
 
BrianFromWA said:
In Iraq, if a platoon had been left to die while there was still a way to get them out, I think there'd have been a bit of an uproar and some hard questions asked.

If the bin Laden SEAL team had been left to die in the compound b/c a chopper broke, and we didn't do everything we could to get them out, there would've been some questions asked.

In Afghanistan, two two-star Marine generals were fired because they didn't do all he could to ensure perimeter security on their base, leading to a loss of 2 Marines and 8 airplanes. And they didn't have "prior warning" of the attack.

The ambassador is the de facto President of the US for any country where the President isn't there or until the President overrules. The military has to listen to him/her. I mean, I understand that no one in America knew who the guy was (or his staff were), and few cared about a backwater north African country run by a dictator with terrorist ties, but this isn't the same as kidnapping a POW or planting an IED that blows up a convoy or something.
Click to expand...

What are the rules for what happens to a president who uses fraud to drag us into a major war, just to rehabilitate his father's reputation?
 
barfo said:
What could the parents of the dead possibly have to say that would be relevant to a congressional inquiry? Do they have more knowledge or insight than any other parents who lose a child overseas? The real question is why our tax dollars were wasted flying the parents to Washington to testify.

barfo
Click to expand...

Total waste of tax dollars our children will be forced to repay to China. I expected outrage and condemnation from both sides for this PR stunt. Tired of the feds publicly pandering and catering to these ultra-select groups of "injured" citizens and using them to attain political aims at taxpayer's expense.
 
STOMP said:
13 vs 1 and it's the R :smiley-cheer: squad's fall back fake scandal de Jour yet again

go team?

STOMP
Click to expand...

There is really nothing D or R about this. Bush called them what they were, regardless of how it effected him personally or politically. Obama and his merry band of fools blamed the event on a fucking you tube video..then lied to the public for weeks..
 
When Republicans sense they are losing an argument, they revert to "Both sides do it, so it's okay that we do it." To the contrary, Democrats had class and didn't make a Federal case over these events. That's why we immediately forgot the events on the list. Republican hypocrites would have said, don't politicize national security.

DaLincoln, the list says the Karachi consulate was attacked 2-3 times. Why didn't Republicans whine about impeaching Bush for lack of protection after the 1st time? After the 2nd time? After the 3rd time?

The Yemen embassy was attacked twice. Why didn't Republicans whine on and on about lack of protection after the 1st time? After the 2nd time?
 
HAAK72 said:
...was Papa G right all along?! :dunno: --> A Deadly Mix in Benghazi
Click to expand...

The article by the NYT is complete horseshit, and flies in the face of many known facts that came out during congressional hearing. I knew somebody would post it, though, as some sort of "Gotcha!"

The NYT is little more than a mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton. Calling out FauxNews while at the same time relying on the NYT and treating its word as fact says a lot about the intelligence of the poster to me.
 
Last edited:
jlprk said:
When Republicans sense they are losing an argument, they revert to "Both sides do it, so it's okay that we do it." To the contrary, Democrats had class and didn't make a Federal case over these events. That's why we immediately forgot the events on the list. Republican hypocrites would have said, don't politicize national security.

DaLincoln, the list says the Karachi consulate was attacked 2-3 times. Why didn't Republicans whine about impeaching Bush for lack of protection after the 1st time? After the 2nd time? After the 3rd time?

The Yemen embassy was attacked twice. Why didn't Republicans whine on and on about lack of protection after the 1st time? After the 2nd time?
Click to expand...

Posts like this are why I went independent. Dumb, and clearly coming from a Democrat. You start your post by describing an action as if it's something only the Republicans do. No, it's something clearly that both sides do.

When Democrats sense they are losing an argument, they revert to "Both sides do it, blah blah blah". I'm sensing you're a Democrat and you're losing your argument.

To hell with both parties. The political and economic landscape are simply to complex to blindly accept and follow one party of the other. Which is why I really laugh at the Republic v. Democratic finger-pointing.
 
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...tewash-benghazi-not-just-wrong-but-futile.php

But more fundamentally, so what? The Times’ revisionism fails to answer any of the most important questions. Why didn’t Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of State, respond to any of Ambassador Chris Stevens’ several requests for increased security? The Times offers no answer to this fundamental question. On the contrary, it sets Stevens up as the principal American expert on the various militias and terrorist groups operating in Libya. Which means that his pleas for more security should have been viewed as highly credible. Stevens obviously was correct when he told Clinton that Benghazi needed better security, yet she ignored his repeated pleas. Why?

Where were Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the night of September 11, 2012, and what orders, if any, did they give? The news media’s lack of curiosity as to what Obama and Clinton were doing during the seven or eight hours that went by while four Americans, including an ambassador, were under attack and ultimately were murdered, is remarkable. If we had a real president or a real Secretary of State, they would have been in control that night, and would have taken responsibility for the decisions they made. Instead, Washington did nothing to try to help the besieged Americans, and no one knows whether either Obama or Clinton ever made any decisions at all, or whether they were off partying somewhere. Or fast asleep.

And finally: Why haven’t the perpetrators of the murders been found and punished? President Obama vowed to find and punish those responsible for the murders of the Americans. One would think that Hillary Clinton, too, would be interested in identifying and punishing those who killed an ambassador who was serving under her. And yet, even though many of those who participated in that night’s carnage have been happy to give interviews to New York Times reporters and others, nothing has been done to bring justice to the perpetrators of the greatest outrage against American honor in recent years.
Click to expand...
 
I want Bush and Cheney hanged for not increasing security enough to prevent repeat attacks in Karachi and Yemen!

Now! Hurry up! What's taking so long?

Waaahhhhh!!!!
 
SlyPokerDog is one dumb bastard Jillpoke. The example.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hope the fucking "victims" sperm all over SlyPokerDog. I'm so fucking sick of SlyPokerDog starting threads, crying over spilled milk, that I hate the fucking victims. Die, you fucking "victims."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jlprk said:
When Republicans sense they are losing an argument, they revert to "Both sides do it, so it's okay that we do it." To the contrary, Democrats had class and didn't make a Federal case over these events. That's why we immediately forgot the events on the list. Republican hypocrites would have said, don't politicize national security.

DaLincoln, the list says the Karachi consulate was attacked 2-3 times. Why didn't Republicans whine about impeaching Bush for lack of protection after the 1st time? After the 2nd time? After the 3rd time?

The Yemen embassy was attacked twice. Why didn't Republicans whine on and on about lack of protection after the 1st time? After the 2nd time?
Click to expand...

you avoid my point with dedicated resolve, regardless of the lacking your argument represents. I was not saying "both sides do it Blah blah blah" I was pointing out that Bush owned up to the events being as they were, not a false and fictionalized version that the Dems gobbled up.

Hey..Obama had his "I got Bin Laden " film out in less than 9 months ..we still have not had many questions answered about Benghazi
 
PapaG said:
The article by the NYT is complete horseshit, and flies in the face of many known facts that came out during congressional hearing. I knew somebody would post it, though, as some sort of "Gotcha!"

The NYT is little more than a mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton. Calling out FauxNews while at the same time relying on the NYT and treating its word as fact says a lot about the intelligence of the poster to me.
Click to expand...

It sure doesn't explain why the Brits and the red cross had to leave a few days earlier. I always wondered why BO never sent Destroyer Squadron Sixty to Benghazi when the ruckus began or at least some where during the proceedings. A 5 inch gun is a tremendous asset to take out a mortar position. Hell they were based in Naples about one day away at flank speed. I don't think BO knows what to do with things like destroyers, what did he
tell Romney during the debate when Naval ships came up? Something about war ships and Obama said "we have AirCraft Carriers these days you know! Planes take off from them!" Jesus Christ, that was enlightening!
Task force 62 which can includes Destroyer Squadron Sixty was still in port as the attack concluded, 30 hours after it began, BO was on his way to Vegas by that time, I guess the Destroyer Squadron never crossed
his mind! Strange, sending a Destroyer Squadron post haste was option # one in previous times. Perhaps schooling in the deployment and use of Naval assets is in order for the current Commander in Chief.

Has anyone ever heard of a guy getting so pissed at some dumb ass video that he would go setup some mortar positions to blow the shit out of a US government position. Anybody? Any where?
 
Last edited:
SlyPokerDog is ignorant that 2 days earlier, people died, rioting about the video in Cairo? Figures...

Let's arrange a physical meeting so we can talk about what a pussy SlyPokerDog is. Feel free to PM me and make an appointment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jlprk said:
SlyPokerDog is ignorant that 2 days earlier, people died, rioting about the video in Cairo? Figures...

Let's arrange a physical meeting so we can talk about what a pussy SlyPokerDog is. Feel free to PM me and make an appointment.
Click to expand...

Geez I would love to meet you, Perhaps you can come to the next function SLY and the Blazer fans setup. You can express your best.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I bet you'd love to see me. After I'm done with you I can go see a game.

I just drove almost 600 miles roundtrip from Bellingham this weekend to see the Miami game, but I can do it again, same motel.

Your only hope is that I get lost in the dark again in the city of way too many bridges.

I shouldn't admit my weakness. Big cities suck.

And then there's the mile walk to your car. And the scalped ticket.
 
Last edited:
jlprk said:
I hope the fucking "victims" sperm all over SlyPokerDog. I'm so fucking sick of SlyPokerDog starting threads, crying over spilled milk, that I hate the fucking victims. Die, you fucking "victims."
Click to expand...

Is SlyPokerDog insane? I didn't bump this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
Politics House Democrat Demands Six Years of Trump Tax Returns From I.R.S.
2
Replies
31
Views
764
TorturedBlazerFan
TorturedBlazerFan
SlyPokerDog
Science 1491
Replies
2
Views
276
dviss1
dviss1

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top