Debate Rigged, Crowley & Obama wait for Libya to come up before unveiling the new Libya Lie

Anyone who thinks for a second that the last presidential debate wasn't rigged from top to bottom need to double check the facts. Crowley was hand picked, Crowley hand picked every single question asked by the 'participants' she openly admitted this before the debate, therefore every question was loaded. The most obviously anticipated moment of the debate, the moment the hijackers were waiting for, is when Libya was mentioned, it was the moment Obama & Crowley were waiting for.

Starting at 1:26



ROMNEY: You said in the rose garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror, it was not a spontaneous demonstration?

OBAMA: Please proceed governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CROWLEY: It, he did in fact sir, so let me, let me, call it an act of terror.

OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder Candy?

******CLAPPING FROM AUDIENCE****** (against the rules, a signal showing the room is full of Liberal Obama supporters).

CROWLEY: He did call it an act of terror.

Candy Crowley wouldn't have had on the top of her head the transcript of Obama using the words "Act of Terror" in the rose garden on 9/12 unless Candy Crowley was briefed on Obama's new strategy concerning the Libya Lie, to take it another direction, flip flop and now claim he always did call it a Terrorist Attack from the beginning, which he did not, but Obama attempting to re-write history knows, that to many who are uninformed, who do not watch the news, may be watching this debate and knowing nothing about Libya would side with the lie.

Obama waited for Romney to use the Libya issue as an attack, he waited, he was so confident in this new flip flopping strategy, this flat out lie that he said "Please proceed governor", thinking to himself, "proceed, haha, this lie will leave your head spinning, Candy is in on this one". Candy Crowley being in on this new spin already read the transcript that very night, the transcript of Obama in the rose garden on 9/12, she read it because she knew it was going to be Obama's defense, so she could break moderator rules and side with Obama, the entire debate was rigged, yet Romney still won, barely, many say it was a tie, even if he tied, he tied 1 vs. 2, it was clearly Obama & Crowley against Romney from the beginning, Crowley interrupting Romney 28 times and Obama only 9 times, Obama ended up with over 2 minutes of time over Romney, Romney's first attempt at a rebuttal was denied by Crowley. The only reason Candy Crowley forgot about the 2 weeks of the Obama administration claiming it was protesters and a Youtube video is because she was briefed on the Obama administration's new plan, their new veiled strategy, a strategy to be unveiled when Mitt Romney would begin to attack Obama on the issue of Libya.

For those that didn't watch the news from September 11th to September 25th, The Obama administration's official story was that it was not an act of terror, but a protest which got out of hand a protest against a Youtube video that left 4 Americans dead. This lie was repeated many times by Obama's press secretary, Biden, among others.

Even as late as September 25th 2012, President Obama Address the U.N. General Assembly...

At 10:19 of this video... The president continues to talk about the video many times throughout his speech. Not once did he call the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Libya an Act of Terror, instead he is apologizing for the Youtube video.



"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world." --- President Obama Address at the U.N. General Assembly September 25th 2012

reply to post by Razimus


Already discussed in this thread here.

It's been clearly proven to be a lie. He made a statement the following morning about the attack being an act of terror.

Originally posted by olliemc84
reply to post by Razimus

 

Already discussed in this thread here.

It's been clearly proven to be a lie. He made a statement the following morning about the attack being an act of terror.

This thread isn't about the lie, that's common knowledge among those informed, this thread is about the rigging of the debate, specifically the rigging of Candy Crowley being in-on this strategy, it was a strategy which would have been Romney's strongest point in the entire debate, but because of the plan, ended up not being a strong point for Romney, I'm not simply spouting what's already been out there, I'm making the point that Obama asking Candy to check the transcripts, and Candy siding with Obama, and Obama asking Candy to repeat that a little louder, was clearly the most obviously rigged debate I've ever witnessed.

reply to post by Razimus


aw poor man thought the whole thing wasn't rigged.. Poor OP.

Obama did in fact mention Terror in the rose garden the next day.

~ He starts off calling it an attack at 2 minutes.
~ @ 2:50Bring to justice the Killers who attacked our people
~ @ 3:05 there is no justification for this senseless violence.
~ @ 5:55 after mentioning benghazi says : No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.




It wasn't Rigged if Romney knew when he was walking into it... Silly Romney should have payed more attention. Least these puppet wars are fun to watch. I don't know who will screw us next, but who really cares anyway?

reply to post by Razimus


OMG quit your crying already.

It's not a lie, it's FACT. He's on video saying, this is just absolute desperation and panic from the right.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya

Good morning. Every day, all across the world, American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interests and values of our nation. Often, they are away from their families. Sometimes, they brave great danger.

Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith. We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed. And today, the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.
...
No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

There is no doubt in my mind that you're right.

The zionists are preparing to show romney that obama is in control. But he can be prez if he agrees to their terms. We are simply seeing the not so invisible jewish hand at work.

Here's some info:

• Sept. 12: Media outlets report that Stevens and three other Americans have been killed in an attack by well-armed militants. Obama denounces an “outrageous and shocking attack” without mentioning the video or terrorism. Reuters reports for the first time that some administration officials believe the assault “bears the hallmarks of an organized attack.”

• Sept. 21: Clinton says “what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack,” highest official until then to say so.

Timeline of Libya Consulate attack reveals administration contradictions By Julian Pecquet
thehill.com...

And some more:
On 9/11 U.S. Ambassador’s Corspe Dragged Through Streets, Obama Goes To Vegas
Obama White House To Scapegoat Clinton State Depart

Originally posted by Razimus

Originally posted by olliemc84
reply to post by Razimus

 

Already discussed in this thread here.

It's been clearly proven to be a lie. He made a statement the following morning about the attack being an act of terror.

This thread isn't about the lie, that's common knowledge among those informed, this thread is about the rigging of the debate, specifically the rigging of Candy Crowley being in-on this strategy, it was a strategy which would have been Romney's strongest point in the entire debate, but because of the plan, ended up not being a strong point for Romney, I'm not simply spouting what's already been out there, I'm making the point that Obama asking Candy to check the transcripts, and Candy siding with Obama, and Obama asking Candy to repeat that a little louder, was clearly the most obviously rigged debate I've ever witnessed.

Are you kidding me?

If you were in a debate and your opponent just spouted out an absolute lie wouldn't you like to catch him dead cold in his lie then rub it in a little?

Most obviously rigged debate in history? Maybe Romney just # the bed.

His comment about gun control and babies needed to be born to married couples was the most ridiculous and completely off topic statement he made of the entire night.

Right after him getting blown up on a lie.

This is a battle of semantics. "Act of terror" may not translate to "terrorist attack" to everyone. And yes, Obama addressed the topic two days after the fact, but White House officials were still pointing fingers at the youtube video and claiming retaliation for offending Muslims for apparently 2 weeks afterwards. Also during the debate when the moderator supported Obama in his claim, she also said it took 2 weeks but that part of the clip keeps getting cut off on every left leaning outlet I have seen it on. I recall hearing discussions on radio and tv the week after the attacks and the commentators were asking why the White House was still claiming the Youtube video protests to be the event that sparked the attack. Obama himself may have believed it was a terrorist attack and even thought that he made that fact clear, but members of his staff were saying something else. Leaves a lot up to personal interpretation in my opinion.

reply to post by Razimus


Romney was wrong. He specifically said it took Obama

14 days to call it an "act of terror". Romney did NOT say the words terrorist attack as some confused right wingers seem to think.

Obama DID call it an act of terror the NEXT DAY in the Rose Garden, There is NO lie on Obama's part. Mitt Romney was wrong, get over it.

Plus all of the questions and moderators are approved by both parties prior to the debate. The whole thing is rigged.

And regarding the OP, Pretty sure Candy just paid attention to politics and their speeches before the debate. Would make sense, it's not hard to remember if you have a good memory.

*

Originally posted by 3chainz

Romney was wrong. Romney specifically said it took Obama 14 days to call it an act of terror.

But Obama DID call it an act of terror the next day in the Rose Garden,

There is NO lie

Plus all of the questions and moderators are approved by both parties prior to the debate.

And regarding the OP, Pretty sure Candy just paid attention to politics and their speeches before the debate. Would make sense, it's not hard to remember if you have a good memory.

An act of terror from an angry mob created by a video.... An act of terror is a very generic thing...To say heavily armed terrorist attacked our embassy and killed our ambassador is a totally different view.

On Sept 25th, two weeks after, his UN speech was about the video and how we need to protect freedom of speech....We now know today the video had nothing to do with it...

To say the word terror once or twice in two weeks and video a 100 times I tend to think they were suggesting it was an angry mob cause by the video.

So you tell me...

reply to post by Xtrozero


What don't you understand?

Romney specifically asked if Obama called it "an act of terror" the next day. Those were Mitt Romney's words. Romney did NOT say terrorist attack.

Romney was wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Obama called it an "act of terror" the very next day.

ROMNEY: You said in the rose garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror, it was not a spontaneous demonstration?

OBAMA: Please proceed governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

reply to post by Razimus


What a way to diffuse a potential situation!

A great thread, and a superb conspiracy!

SnF

Originally posted by 3chainz

Romney specifically asked if Obama called it "an act of terror" the next day. Those were Mitt Romney's words. Romney did NOT say terrorist attack.

Romney was wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Obama called it an "act of terror" the very next day.

You win...you are right....

Does that change the fact the President either didn't know what the hell was going on, OR was covering it up? I think that was the direction Romney was going...not so much as suggesting the word "terror" was never used.

Am I wrong here? Or we going a debate a word that was never used in the context that terrorist attacked our Embassy.

No to argue with you, I really do not know what you want to prove here. Are you saying the president from day one said it was an act by a heavily armed terrorist group with the purpose to kill our ambassador on 911 with no connection to the video?

If not, then his use of the word "terror" is moot, and you are quibbling over something that has nothing to do with the president failing on this....

Everything about Benghazi is not what it seems. Use your logic. Chicago style politics at play here. Everything about Benghazi screams DC Fabrication. It's a trap for Romney to go into the third debate and talk about Benghazi. Take my word for it.

Everything about Benghazi is not what it seems. Use your logic. Chicago style politics at play here. Everything about Benghazi screams DC Fabrication. It's a trap for Romney to go into the third debate and talk about Benghazi. Take my word for it.

Everything about Benghazi is not what it seems. Use your logic. Chicago style politics at play here. Everything about Benghazi screams DC Fabrication. It's a trap for Romney to go into the third debate and talk about Benghazi. Take my word for it.

Originally posted by 3chainz
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

What don't you understand?

Romney specifically asked if Obama called it "an act of terror" the next day. Those were Mitt Romney's words. Romney did NOT say terrorist attack.

Romney was wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Obama called it an "act of terror" the very next day.

ROMNEY: You said in the rose garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror, it was not a spontaneous demonstration?

OBAMA: Please proceed governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

edit on 18-10-2012 by 3chainz because: (no reason given)

Daaarrr

That's not what Fox news saids!

That video is a hoax by the liberal meteors!

So... Romney won the first debate - and that's AOK.
Biden whipped up on Ryan - and that moderator was brought into question.
Now Obama beats Romney and this moderator is brought into question....

Pattern seems pretty clear to me. If anything, I'll give the right credit. They're good at asymmetrical warfare.

~Heff