It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Benghazi Bombshell: Clinton State Department Official Reveals Details of Alleged Document Review

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
So Bush may have don the same thing so that ok's Obama and company doing it?

I didn't hear about those others, don't recall any official statements at the time (I was deployed so could have missed it), yet this time right off the bat the president and friends started out with some absolutely crazy allegations which brought the micro scope right on to them.

If Bush did covered up possible issues with it, it was wrong.. Obama and team did it and it is wrong.

Then they continued to put out half truths non-stop... the more they made excuses the more people looked.

This entire thing was made a problem by the oval office.




posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Are you saying that the Admin made no effort to cover up information re: Benghazi for political reasons?



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Lyxdeslic

The problem is Benghazi was an obvious and clear well documented and publicized event. One that not only resulted in deaths, but also was partially covered up/info obscured for obvious political reasons.

Regarding the Bush events, the details were significantly different. The embassies were not overrun, there was no obvious cover up, and the publicity from the events were low-key. I remember reading about a couple of them. I do not remember the details, however.

They also did not involve high profile people being killed, they did not involve requests for support which were denied.

Besides...I just have one question: When will Obama and supporters stop blaming Bush? LOL 6 years later and he is still at fault. It's a wonder no one has blamed Bush for Benghazi.

I am no Bush fan...but really? Did Clinton blame Bush I for anything? Did Bush II blame Clinton for anything? Did Reagan blame Carter for anything?

So much for the buck stops here. Obama's motto must be: "The buck stops at GWB". He cannot even take responsibility for his own actions.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:21 PM
link   
How is this committee any different than the other committees who found nothing?

Another committee to find nothing. Boy, our congress is sure good at nothing.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234
How is this committee any different than the other committees who found nothing?

Another committee to find nothing. Boy, our congress is sure good at nothing.


Oh not just any Committee.

The House *Select* Committee on Benghazi.

SELECT !!




posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Is the grading system somewhat like for beef? If so, then this is the lowest grade of Committee fit for human consumption. lol



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: LDragonFire

Are you saying that the Admin made no effort to cover up information re: Benghazi for political reasons?


I think republicans are doing this for political reasons!! Shows there desperation. I don't trust them, they lied about Iraq wmd lies, lied about Obamacare, birther lies, remember the fiscal cliff they launched us over, remember tax breaks will create jobs, trickle down economics, gay marriage is a attack on traditional families???

9 Congressional hearings have found no evidence of wrong doing!



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Is it on the dollar menu? Seriously how much are republicans spending on this? How many friend's are getting Paid for this circus?



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: chrismarco

There is no way you could possibly know not one democratic vote would change, and it matters because it may largely affect the 2016 democratic primary elections, which definitely will have an effect on the presidential election. And that is a pretty reckless comment lacking sympathy and all respect to the families and others who suffered losses resulting from the event.

-d



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: LDragonFire

Are you saying that the Admin made no effort to cover up information re: Benghazi for political reasons?


I think republicans are doing this for political reasons!! Shows there desperation. I don't trust them, they lied about Iraq wmd lies, lied about Obamacare, birther lies, remember the fiscal cliff they launched us over, remember tax breaks will create jobs, trickle down economics, gay marriage is a attack on traditional families???

9 Congressional hearings have found no evidence of wrong doing!
Everyone in Washington does something for "political reasons". The WH doesn't comply with requests for information for "political reasons". Pelosi says "we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it."

Stop defending the indefensible.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

The same amount when Dems do the same thing. Stop acting like Dems walk on water.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Is this the 10th attempt to make something stick?

Republicans spent $30 million investigating Clinton.

$8 million on 9/11.

And how much on Benghazi?


If it legitimately costs $30 and $8 million to do investigations in this country, well...we're allot more screwed than I previously assumed.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: LDragonFire

The same amount when Dems do the same thing. Stop acting like Dems walk on water.


You wanna compare unwarranted wireless surveillance compared to what? Drink sizes, healthy school lunches?



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Flesh699



April 1, 1998 The General Accounting Office announces that Starr had spent nearly $30 million on his investigation as of September 1997.

Washington Post

I can't even prove they spent up to $8 million on the 9/11 commission report.

Kean and former congressman Lee Hamilton, the panel's top Democrat, requested additional funding in a letter to the administration last week. The money was to pay for a staff of about sixty and their resources. Kean plans to field a separate task force for each of nine areas that the law establishing the commission requires it to investigate. The panel has until the end of May 2004 to complete its work, but it will spend the $3 million it was originally allotted by around August 2003 — if it doesn't get the supplement. "We hope that this request will be included in the supplemental appropriations proposal now being prepared by the administration," wrote Kean and Hamilton in a March 19 letter to a CIA official who is in charge of intelligence community budgeting. The request has been endorsed by the entire bipartisan commission at a recent meeting. In denying the request, the White House irritated many of the members of the commission. "This is very counterproductive if the White House's intention is to prevent the commission from being politicized, because it will look like they have something to hide," said a Republican member of the commission.

TIME

Republicans were budgeted to spend $3.3 million this year on Benghazi this is more than congress was gonna spend on the Ethics Committee ($3 million) & the Department of Veteran Affairs ($3 million)

I would support a $1 billion dollar budget to investigate the Bush Administration for War Crimes and 9/11.


edit on 16-9-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: macman

I only view them as 50% better based on all voting and legislation they have done in the last 14 years. They haven't stopped the most terrible republican laws from going in effect, so there worthless if your for liberty and freedom.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic
Total deaths - 60
Outrages - 0.
That's under Bush..

Now I'm not trying to bring up past news, but not a single peep was heard about these deaths. But four people die under Obama and H.Clintons watch and everyone throws a fit?


Not everyone, just some Republicans, and those with Obama Derangement Syndrome.


if republicans were so worried about security, why did they vote to cut money to keep embassies secure? Why are they continuing to try to cut the funds? You'd think that they would rather keep funding going and make sure that it goes to the security of these places, so another Benghazi doesn't happen.


They are not worried, they just want to whine about Obama and Clinton.



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Oh why did republicans approve $3.3 million for Benghazi investigation including hiring 30 staffers but only approved $3 million for the Veteran Administration? That just what they have spent this year!!!




posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Are you seriously #ing kidding me????

What is the NSA doing today again??? Spying on reporters you say?? Arming Mexican Drug lords? IRS? Libya and any other scandal going on with your beloved Dems.

I know your partisan, but good hell. Give it a rest.


When you want to pull your head out of your butt, let us know. We would love to have you in the world of reality....where it is understood that Govt as a whole is corrupt and not just limited to your hated GOP.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Because the VA couldn't find their ass in the dark with a fist full of fishhooks.

And what else was tied to the funding bill.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Terrible Republican laws???? Honestly...Where do you get this crap from?



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join