It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Bundy
"No matter how flat you make a pancake its still got two sides" - Dr. Phil.
Now lets say American politics is a pancake... Two sides... Same Pancake (agenda)... Same taste in your mouth after you take a bite (#).
originally posted by: Xcathdra
Again it matters a great deal as to what led up to their deaths. Trying to blame the Republicans or the 4 people who died instead of her taking responsibility is pathetic.
Hello? Anybody home? Face it, you lost the election. Now get over it. Start doing something positive for this country for a change. You’re wasting the taxpayer’s money, neglecting your responsibilities as public servants, making a laughing stock of this country around the world, and dragging it into the sewer with your incompetence. It’s not only pathetic, it’s anti-American.
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: Nephalim
I understand where you're coming from. The whole government situation including both sides is horrible. But I don't understand the Dems position on this. Why not want to be the winner after all this is over? Unless...of course...the truth will make the Republicans the winners.
originally posted by: catt3
This is a short reply. You know why, its not a waste of time and money. They are guilty of what is being investigated.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, testifying in January 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations committee, said "...what difference at this point does it make?" Clinton was speaking about the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans.
Well, Hillary, it does make a difference, as we are now finding out. A report of findings of a Republican led committee accuses Clinton of "...seeking to cover up failures by the State Department that could have contributed to the attack last year that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans."
But why was the attack successful? Why was there not adequate security at the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya? As it turns out, it was Hillary Clinton who denied adequate security. Page 2 of the report has:
Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the Department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel.
On page 5 of the report is this little nugget of information: "Prior to the Benghazi attacks, State Department officials in Libya made repeated requests for additional security that were denied in Washington despite ample documentation of the threat posed by violent extremist militias."
We get, on page 7 of the report, this: "...in a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi."
The report also makes this point:
Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. This fact contradicts her testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on January 23, 2013.