You can forget about it,
You can forget that security was not beefed up as requested by the Ambassador, and was basically almost nonexistant the day that AL Quida decided to invade and kill out ambassador and others.
You can forget the fact that this admin. did not sent help- when they could have- during the attack.
You can for get the fact that the current admin. 'covered up' the event as merely a protest to an alleged video (not true), and publicly lied again and again to the press, etc., so the the 'uninformed public' would still be behind O BAM A and vote for the democraps.

But how can you think this is OK?

Here's just one- middle of the road article on the subject- the subject that if Repos had done it- impeachment proceedings, in the news for months; but when the current admin does it- borrowing from the criminal HRC- 'does it really matter?'

Yes, my value system that I live by, says yes HRC, it did matter.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-h...sting-white-house-cover-nbc-glosses-over

It's "What difference does it make?" not "does it matter?" Credibility comes from accuracy. If you really want to look into this checkout Zero footprint arms dealing. That's what it was all about and has been common knowledge since 2 months after it happened.

Zero footprint /For the record research

The cover up was the attempt by all official spokespeople to hide the fact that this was a secret CIA facility.

So... when you put the latest "smoking gun memo" into the time line of who did what and when....... no surprise... this is much ado about nothing new..
The white house was happy to jump on the CIA spin... and that is what the memo shows was happening... following the CIA lead on the spin at that time..

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...veals_that_obama_white_house_agreed.html

(Weigle is a libertarian leaning blogger)


Taking names and kicking global butt, unilaterally.... aka the good ol days ended when Bush bankrupted the country in Iraq. So, even tho we would love to THINK that the US could snap their fingers and make the world behave... We refuse to write that check for the politicians anymore!... US opinion says.. Nope.. We will NOT bomb Syria.. Nope, we will NOT bomb Russia. Ok.. how about Iran type huge financial sanctions... NOPE... The Germans are not going to suck it up for the "freedom" of the current crooks in power in Ukraine. That does not mean we LIKE the current state of affairs...... So.. much better to blame Obama for all the events and actions that the US can't (and shouldn't) try to fix in the world. BUT... we can dream about the glory that was Pre IRAQ and "presidential leadership" will make the world safe for US hegemony..
Rand Paul is the only Republican who gets it. Why don't you guys follow his lead.

The amazing thing about your blindered,apologist, Obama NEVER at fault view is that you never listen to anyone long enough to know who's lead they are following. You just proved that in your above statement. I don't understand how you can agree with Rand Paul at all because he is the antithesis of you, as am I.

Paul is the ONLY republican who makes any policy points that I agree with...
Criminal Justice Reform... I agree with him... Way too much money spent on prisons with no payoff for society and huge costs for non violent offenders.
I agree with his even handed approach to the mid east.
I agree with him on his rejection of most of the Patriot Act ..NSA spying provisions.
I agree with him on pulling back on foreign adventures....
His economic and social justice policies are wrong.

Of course he is swimming up hill to represent the Republican Party.... so...

I did not say Obama was not at fault.. Just that Bengazi (coverup) is BS political hackery.

Obama intervened in Lybia (leading from behind as the republicans ridiculed) because of the unique situation in lybia and it worked with the French leading the way... and stopped a major killing disaster. However, the followup policy is dicey and probably wrong... The military/hawk faction wants a footprint on the ground... to effectively deter "bad guys" we want to get rid of... See Afghanistan... (Obama wants a minimal footprint... and Max drone attacks if needed.) So they compromised... In Lybia... it bit them in the butt as they tried to navigate the post war period with a small footprint.. It's still chaos over there now but they fight over money and not religion... So no footprint or a very small footprint would have been the best call... It costs the USA human lives when we intervene... It cost the US three civilian lives in Libyia... Far better result tho then Iraq or Viet Nam and Afganistan.

Obama learned... They have 90% so far of the chem weapons out of Syria so far with one location to go... ... The factions are not tired of killing each other yet... we can't stop it... and so, we have a minimal footprint.

I like politicians who adapt...and don't screw up to the tune of Iraq or Viet Nam.

They have tried to hide the facts. To me that alone makes them guilty.Why would you try to hide the facts if you had done the honorable, right thing. You are an apologist. First sentence you say Obama is at fault and then spend the rest of the paragraph defending him. Make up your mind. Intentions don't mean crap, results do.

Right, sorry about the misquote

That statement is incorrect. The cover-up was to hide policy/administration failure before an election. No sense debating the rest of that as it's just expanding on a false premise.

Ah Context ..

Todd... it was a proper US role to lead from behind in Lybia protecting stopping a major humanitarian crisis.

MISTAKE to keep a footprint on the ground BECAUSE the CIA and Military want to influence events on the ground in what was and continues to be a grab for guns, and power among tribes.

Good Policy to get chemicals out of Syria...

Good policy to NOT arm sunni's in Syria so that they can go fight shitites and allowites... Let the Saudi's do it. They have been fighting for mecca for 800 years. Fact is... there is nothing we can do about it without costing the world a lot of money and non Syrian lives.

You get a scorecard as president.... some decisions bite you in the butt.... Benghazi policy on the ground was a mistake. Budget cuts leading to decreased security was a mistake (collect enough money to pay for important stuff)..

Now IRAQ was a disaster that will cost us for 40 years (vet health benefits at the very least).
Reagan's policy to intervene in Lebanon got 260 marines killed in a terroist bombing before we retreated and IT was a mistake.
Viet Nam was a disaster that cost us for 30 years.

Bengazhi is a mistake the size of a pimple!

As to your point..
"they have tried to hide the facts'.... uhm..... they have had TWO investigations... one by the ex Joint chief of staff appointed by Bush. .. The facts are known.

A political memo on a national security issue is not a FACT about natl security. ...it is NOT a fact about policy... its is a fact about politics in America... We let politicians play politics... we call it spin... Critical thinkers sort out the spin from the policy. The republicans are true believers in some crazy wag the dog story that this cost them the election....(hey.. it worked for Reagan to screw Carter... why wouldn't the Dem's use similar methods to screw Romeny) Now it is just politics.

Hell, the Republican military chair McKeonon just told the Republican ISSA.... that he has his head up his butt calling that retired general who had NO KNOWLEDGE of what was going on to further the POLITICS of this matter.

This is just politics.... and it is meaningless politics.... (unless you think you can keep this noise going till Clinton beats Paul in 2016.)

And there you have it. Faux News will keep Todd's impotent rage at a high boil until long after Hillary is elected. Depending on which dog whistle they blow, Todd will jump from B-E-N-G-H-A-Z-I, to Obamacare, to global climate change, to minimum wage increases, to something else pulled out of Faux's collective booties and then circle back around to start all over again.

Actually, his is close to my point of the OP.
My point is that this Admin. LIED on purpose about the event.

From the get go it was a terrorist attack on our embassy, our embassador was killed.
Then they lied their butt about it again, and again, and again.
Then, he changed his story a bit, after he and his staffed LIED.

Spin that any way want.

When you're done licking the windows and spilling your ice cream cone, care to elaborate on the upside to those topics?

Umm... those two reports investigating just this point... said... NOPE... No lies... just confusion... made worse by politics.

It is curious that you only worry about politics.... Which you lost... It seems that you believe the spin confused the american people. Facts are they voted for Obama at levels approaching Eisenhower..and they DON"T CARE about Benhazi Fox news politics.. The policy calls are another issue... the people agree with Rand Paul and Obama... No more foreign adventures...

(What are you going to do when Rand Paul takes the Republican Nomination...) PS... stock market hit an all time hi today.
You need new talking points.

Bush caused that.

That's your only barometer on the economy?

When the unemployment rate feel slightly, were you aware that the # of people in actually working is also way down?
You are aware that that stat is derived solely from those seeking unemployment benefits?

And Mark, do you keep up with current events? You were aware that on an open records act, they just found emails fabricating the whole - it was a video thing? Stick to MSLSD dude, they have all one side- no problem.

1:15 a.m.: The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,* having asked for talking points, gets a draft from the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis. It starts with this line, the one that would undo Susan Rice during her run through the Sunday shows: "We believe based on currently available information that the attacks in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. consulate and subsequently its annex."

12:23 p.m.: The CIA's office of general counsel adds a line about the "inspired by the protests" theory being inconclusive.

3:04 p.m.: The talking points are sent to relevant White House aides, including Ben Rhodes.

4:42 p.m.: The CIA circulates new talking points but removes a mention of al Qaida.

6:21 p.m.: The White House (Tommy Vietor, not Ben Rhodes) ads a line about the administration warning, on September 10, of social media reports calling for demonstrations.

7:39 p.m.: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland objects to some of the language because "the penultimate point could be abused by members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings."

8:09 p.m.: Ben Rhodes sends the "smoking gun" email, nine hours after the first draft of talking points from the CIA said that the attacks grew out of a demonstration.

So... ... the smoking gun... is just a spin story that follows the CIA lead... (who wanted to coverup the fact that they had a facility there... which is normal operating procedure)

What is fabricated is the politics... the policy issues are important... Bit of course... cutting funds for state department security.... well that was a house republican decision...

Hey Einstein,

Talking points?

Mark, what has the US economy been growing at? What rate?
Could you cut and paste that please?
'Cause I could swear it was at 1/10, of 1 percent.
Say it with me, 1/10th, of 1 percent. Say it again, and again, and again, and then tell me about your stock market highs.

And you think this slimey Charlatan is doing well, because the greed ravaged stock market hit an all timne high?

Einstein- what's a better measure? The growth rate of the economy- which has been on life support for many years; or the specluative stock market?

That's what I thought you'd say. How's that Kool Aid taste?

OH, but WAIT, Oh, you're really an OK liberal Mark- 'cause you actually like most of what Rand Paul says and stands for?
So you're a liberal, that actually has some conservative standards? Who'd a thunk?

And you're telling ME, to get some new talking points?
You and Mikee, you guys are hilarious

[/quote]

.. well that was a house republican decision... [/quote]

It's those Darn Repos- Big Ears says it at least once a day to the press.

It's never his, or his admins. fault

Oh wait, isn't your idol Rand Paul a ..............Repo?

I thought you were concerned about the


as to jerking your chain with Rand Paul policies that Obama agrees with... Well that is just sport.... (The real world of policy is a complicated place you know)

As to the threads point... you do understand that all spending bills begin in the house.. so... yes with respect to the POLICY in Lybia... you note the funding failures and the policy failures.

With respect to main street versus wall street issues... I though a pure republican capitalist like yourself would be celebrating American capitalism high water mark! If you are not jumping for joy at this all time high... ... well you would have no choice but to re regulate and or change the system.