http://www.facebook.com/WesternJournalism/videos/10153398044028984/?fref=nf
Remember the PDB'd (Presidential Daily Briefings) and the Media's continued attempt to Blame Bush for "failing to connect the dots" given the intelligence reports about Al Quada "planning to attack America"? They beat this story like a rented mule!
Less than two months before Obama's reelection, the attack on our embassy in Benghazi occurred on SEPTEMBER 11th, 2012. During the debate, the Libtard Monderator interupted Romney's question about what Obama may have known about this and when he knew it, regurgitating the Party Line cover story that this was all about a YouTube video and a spontaneous demonstration!
Well, JUDICIAL WATCH's FIOL Lawsuits are now revealing information that only groups like WJ (Western Journalism) dare to air (and only on th internet)....Not even FOX is presenting the truth about Benghazi and both Obama and Clinton's culpability. They're just beating around the Bush!
Quote from: wally on May 20, 2015, 03:58:52 AM
http://www.facebook.com/WesternJournalism/videos/10153398044028984/?fref=nf
Remember the PDB'd (Presidential Daily Briefings) and the Media's continued attempt to Blame Bush for "failing to connect the dots" given the intelligence reports about Al Quada "planning to attack America"? They beat this story like a rented mule!
Less than two months before Obama's reelection, the attack on our embassy in Benghazi occurred on SEPTEMBER 11th, 2012. During the debate, the Libtard Monderator interupted Romney's question about what Obama may have known about this and when he knew it, regurgitating the Party Line cover story that this was all about a YouTube video and a spontaneous demonstration!
Well, JUDICIAL WATCH's FIOL Lawsuits are now revealing information that only groups like WJ (Western Journalism) dare to air (and only on th internet)....Not even FOX is presenting the truth about Benghazi and both Obama and Clinton's culpability. They're just beating around the Bush!
Unfortunately we who do not facebook cannot access these little gems! :ohmy:
Quote from: kroz on May 20, 2015, 08:52:14 AM
Unfortunately we who do not facebook cannot access these little gems! :ohmy:
Yeah facebook is a great site to get news...
Quote from: steve folkster on May 20, 2015, 09:02:43 AM
Yeah facebook is a great site to get news...
People can post links to news stories on Facebook. They can also do this on Twitter. Do we add this to the list of things that everyone knows except Steve Folkster?
Quote from: wally on May 20, 2015, 03:58:52 AM
http://www.facebook.com/WesternJournalism/videos/10153398044028984/?fref=nf
Remember the PDB'd (Presidential Daily Briefings) and the Media's continued attempt to Blame Bush for "failing to connect the dots" given the intelligence reports about Al Quada "planning to attack America"? They beat this story like a rented mule!
Less than two months before Obama's reelection, the attack on our embassy in Benghazi occurred on SEPTEMBER 11th, 2012. During the debate, the Libtard Monderator interupted Romney's question about what Obama may have known about this and when he knew it, regurgitating the Party Line cover story that this was all about a YouTube video and a spontaneous demonstration!
Well, JUDICIAL WATCH's FIOL Lawsuits are now revealing information that only groups like WJ (Western Journalism) dare to air (and only on th internet)....Not even FOX is presenting the truth about Benghazi and both Obama and Clinton's culpability. They're just beating around the Bush!
Knew there would be an attack? I would say they were counting on there being an attack! Why else would the blame the civil unrest (which hadn't happened at the time) on a video, virtually no one had seen?
And why was no assistance rendered?
For some reason (I'll readily admit I don't know what it could be) the Obama Administration wanted to be rid of Ambassador Stevens - in much the same way as the Clinton Administration wanted to be rid of Ron Brown.
Quote from: kroz on May 20, 2015, 08:52:14 AM
Unfortunately we who do not facebook cannot access these little gems! :ohmy:
Disqus is owned by FB fwiw, which is why I won't use them myself. And I too don't do the FB thing, not since they insisted I can't use my artist pseudonym and instead must use my real ID and put that out there for every islamonut (some of whom have made death threats against me and my family in the past) can know just right where I live at.
Uh no thanks Mr. Zuckerberg not only is the use of a pseudonym a long established practice used by artists, but those of us who do choose to use one, do not as he claimed "lack integrity". Unless we are to believe that author's like Mark
Twain lacked integrity.
In which case of course we shouldn't be using his works to teach kids literature in schools. :)
This was a rather weird situation.....
Darrell Issa tried to enter Gowdy's private interrogation of Blumenthal..... but was thrown out.
Why do you think this was important?
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/16/rep-issa-visits-blumenthal-deposition-on-benghazi-escorted-out-by-rep-gowdy/
Who doesn't trust who? Was this just a matter of "authority" or was something more sinister taking place?
Whose grandstand was it? No poaching the spotlight!
Quote from: taxed on May 20, 2015, 10:34:47 AM
People can post links to news stories on Facebook. They can also do this on Twitter. Do we add this to the list of things that everyone knows except Steve Folkster?
For reasons similar to those expressed above about Facebook's policies, I too won't link to FB or use DisQuick (or whatever it is). There are many social-media outlets you are perfectly free to set up links for here. User freedom begins by being free to not use the feature, as opposed to being forced into something.
If something posted here is relayed elsewhere, and I am suddenly subjected to a far larger number of expected readers, that doesn't make my comment good or bad or indifferent. But it does force me to accept unwanted risks. Here I know my audience more or less. On some media site it turns me into a target. Sorry. The pen name stays, and I truly hope you don't fall for "real name registration" until you are legally served to comply with a court order.
Quote from: kroz on June 17, 2015, 05:44:47 AM
This was a rather weird situation.....
Darrell Issa tried to enter Gowdy's private interrogation of Blumenthal..... but was thrown out.
Why do you think this was important?
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/16/rep-issa-visits-blumenthal-deposition-on-benghazi-escorted-out-by-rep-gowdy/
Who doesn't trust who? Was this just a matter of "authority" or was something more sinister taking place?
"It's my circus, you had your time in the limelight, now go away"
I don't know, but Gowdy has proven his worth, or rather worthlessness.
Quote from: Solar on June 17, 2015, 06:11:57 AM
"It's my circus, you had your time in the limelight, now go away"
I don't know, but Gowdy has proven his worth, or rather worthlessness.
I'm not convinced it was ALL about spotlight time.
I suspect Issa wanted to be one of the first to know the scoop as dished out by Blumenthal. I thought he might be trying to act as a mole for Hillary. You can tell that I don't trust Issa any more than Gowdy. Issa has Chaired his own committee with dubious distinction.... allowing witness after witness to get away with murder! It was Gowdy who made his initial impression on the public by challenging Issa in Committee hearings. Now he continues to challenge Issa.
Gowdy may not be worthy of our trust..... but Issa is worse IMHO.
Quote from: Darth Fife on May 20, 2015, 03:01:30 PM
Knew there would be an attack? I would say they were counting on there being an attack! Why else would the blame the civil unrest (which hadn't happened at the time) on a video, virtually no one had seen?
And why was no assistance rendered?
For some reason (I'll readily admit I don't know what it could be) the Obama Administration wanted to be rid of Ambassador Stevens - in much the same way as the Clinton Administration wanted to be rid of Ron Brown.
Now that we KNOW an aircraft carrier battle group was offshore, that's precisely the question that should be asked. And the answer is simple, the POTUS would not authorize them to intervene. Obamco simply allowed not only what is an act of war against the U.S. under intl laws, but also allowed the murder of American citizen's to happen as well. So he could push his pro-muslim agenda on the geo-political stage.
Quote from: kroz on June 17, 2015, 07:35:20 AM
I'm not convinced it was ALL about spotlight time.
I suspect Issa wanted to be one of the first to know the scoop as dished out by Blumenthal. I thought he might be trying to act as a mole for Hillary. You can tell that I don't trust Issa any more than Gowdy. Issa has Chaired his own committee with dubious distinction.... allowing witness after witness to get away with murder! It was Gowdy who made his initial impression on the public by challenging Issa in Committee hearings. Now he continues to challenge Issa.
Gowdy may not be worthy of our trust..... but Issa is worse IMHO.
Gowdy was asked this question this morning on the FNC. He said there were no problem between him and Issa. There apparently is a House rule that only members of the committee can be present at a deposition, which this was . If it was just a hearing then any member is welcomed to attend. Gowdy was just following protocol.
Quote from: supsalemgr on June 17, 2015, 01:28:40 PM
Gowdy was asked this question this morning on the FNC. He said there were no problem between him and Issa. There apparently is a House rule that only members of the committee can be present at a deposition, which this was . If it was just a hearing then any member is welcomed to attend. Gowdy was just following protocol.
I realize that. But it did not sit well with Issa. He really wanted into that meeting for some reason.
Gowdy may have been baffled, but there is a REASON why it was important to Issa. He was extremely upset when denied entrance.... and threw his coke can forcefully into the trash can. Gowdy obviously knew Issa was upset because he shrugged and threw up his hands!
My question is..... why was it so important to Issa? :confused:
Quote from: daidalos on June 17, 2015, 11:21:26 AM
Now that we KNOW an aircraft carrier battle group was offshore, that's precisely the question that should be asked. And the answer is simple, the POTUS would not authorize them to intervene. Obamco simply allowed not only what is an act of war against the U.S. under intl laws, but also allowed the murder of American citizen's to happen as well. So he could push his pro-muslim agenda on the geo-political stage.
He doesn't know how to act or think in a crisis. He's weak. And I mean
weak. The only solution was to be a 'pretend-president' too busy with 'pretend presidential-alities' to notice. -Igniting his
yes we can-team into coverup mode.
It's all still
grounds for Impeachment.
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 17, 2015, 02:54:10 PM
He doesn't know how to act or think in a crisis. He's weak. And I mean weak. The only solution was to be a 'pretend-president' too busy with 'pretend presidential-alities' to notice. -Igniting his yes we can-team into coverup mode.
It's all still grounds for Impeachment.
I agree but haven't we passed the point at which this would be of any effect that would count?
Quote from: keyboarder on June 18, 2015, 04:54:45 AM
I agree but haven't we passed the point at which this would be of any effect that would count?
We may've, key. I get angry and lose
perspective, but I think a 'high crime' was committed.
Quote from: keyboarder on June 18, 2015, 04:54:45 AM
I agree but haven't we passed the point at which this would be of any effect that would count?
Uh no. Why because if anything, it would send the message to any other would be tyrant President, that there are certain behaviors the American people, through their representatives in their government won't tolerate. For example, it would send the message for some time to come at least, that no, we won't just sit and tolerate the horrendous murders of our Ambassadors, and attacks upon our nation's sovereignty just to name two. So a POTUS can push his own personal religious beliefs upon the rest of us.