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

So, um. . .

Hillary Clinton takes the blame.
Susan Rice goes on 5 news shows a week afterwards and says it's the video not terrorists.
Obama goes on Letterman, The View, The UN and blames the video, not terrorists
Jay Carney says it's the video and not terrorists.

A month later, the world realises that is was terrorists.

And Obama says, "I've been saying that all along!"

And all the dems are supporting this?

ohmygod!

reply to post by beezzer


They like to mention right wing backwards logic. So...your point is kind of lost on them I think.

I'm just surprised that everyone is focusing on wordplay in a debate instead of the situation the wordplay derived from. Why are the supporters of the honorable Mr. Obama not calling him and his people out for an obvious cover-up? Seems asinine to me that they are trying to avoid the situation like the people responsible for it until after the election. The same people who were all over Bush whether he was choking on a pretzle or invading Iraq.

Wow, one of the most original and well thought out posts I've seen on ATS. You did an excellent job laying out and making your case.

If this is true, it is REALLY sleazy.

About as sleazy as it can get...

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.

Just my opinion. But I believe when Obama replied saying "check the transcripts" that was directly to Romney. I dont think Obama was anticipating the instant fact check.

Romney seemed to want to GO THERE badly. Obama even replied saying "proceed governor" and then Romney continued to press the issue directly at Obama, instead of continuing to make his point to the audience. He actively, and intentionally engaged the President Intentionally.. Unless Obama and Crowley KNEW Romney would be aggressive and pressing about this specific point, I cant assume it was intentional.. because Romney had to play his part for it to get to that point. If he would have continued to make his point to the audience instead of the president directly, Obama wouldnt have had opportunity/reason to continue speak. Romney engaged him.

reply to post by Razimus



I could care less about both candidates they both sit at the same table at the country club.


It will interesting to watch as new posters come to ATS and push propaganda back and forth. I am sure they are not paid posters just concerned voters. Remember the health care debate? I wonder what happened to all those posters. They must have got bored. ATS has become a tool for TPTB. This really is a brave new world.

Originally posted by Hefficide

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

What questions did the moderator answer themselves in the first debate?

Originally posted by 3chainz
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.

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

You're right, and still completely wrong. You're missing the forest through the trees. Romney's point was that Obama flat out lied about what happened. We were told for weeks that a Youtube video sparked an angry mob protest which led to the death of the Diplomat.

Romney's point was that there was NO protest. There was NO angry mob. It was NEVER a protest gone awry as Obama and his staff said for weeks. It was a calculated and planned act by a Terrorist group. Obama tried to deflect Romney with semantics. The moderator assisted Obama. The fact still remains Romney is 100% CORRECT with his point that the American people were flat out lied to for WEEKS regarding what happened.

Originally posted by beezzer
So, um. . .

Hillary Clinton takes the blame.
Susan Rice goes on 5 news shows a week afterwards and says it's the video not terrorists.
Obama goes on Letterman, The View, The UN and blames the video, not terrorists
Jay Carney says it's the video and not terrorists.

A month later, the world realises that is was terrorists.

And Obama says, "I've been saying that all along!"

And all the dems are supporting this?

ohmygod!

And remember, too, during the VP debate Biden claims "We didn't know". The next day Jay Carney had to explain it the VP and President Obama were the ones who didn't know, leaving Hillary to take the blame (which she did) Intelligence gave them inaccurate information.

Now that Obama claims he said it was an 'act of terror' the day after the Embassy attack then that makes him responsible. He just opened that door during the debate, which could potentially make it worse for him.

So, which is it? Did he or did he not know? Geez...I just can't keep up with the lies being told with this Benghazi attack story.

reply to post by texasgirl


Yes, Obama and Biden have both flat out lied in debates. Assuming Biden is telling the truth, that they had no idea people were requesting more security, who did know, who made the decision, why weren't they fired?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by texasgirl

 

Yes, Obama and Biden have both flat out lied in debates. Assuming Biden is telling the truth, that they had no idea people were requesting more security, who did know, who made the decision, why weren't they fired?

I like Biden's remark: "Folks, use your common sense. Who do you trust on this?" Hahahahaha...

Originally posted by texasgirl

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by texasgirl

 

Yes, Obama and Biden have both flat out lied in debates. Assuming Biden is telling the truth, that they had no idea people were requesting more security, who did know, who made the decision, why weren't they fired?

I like Biden's remark: "Folks, use your common sense. Who do you trust on this?" Hahahahaha...

However, State Department officials told a congressional hearing on Wednesday that they requested more security but were turned down by headquarters in Washington.

I will trust the people under oath and testifying Mr. Vice President. I do not trust you.
www.cnn.com...

Just for the Obama lovers here who refuse to admit the truth. What does Crowley, the moderator say?

“It was one of those moments, and I could even feel that here, you know, when you say something you’re not expecting,” Crowley insisted, admitting she simply couldn’t help herself from unprofessionally inserting herself into a heated dispute between presidential candidates.

“He was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word,” Crowley said, echoing the extremely legalistic reading of the facts about what President Obama meant when he said “acts of terror” in reference to the Benghazi attack.

newsbusters.org...

The moderator herself says Romney was RIGHT with what he said.

This debate was a joke and the questions were certainly loaded in Obama's favor. The most stunning question asked of Romney.... How are you going to be different from George Bush? WTH was that. This is not the 2008 election all over again. 4 years with Bush out of office and Crowley picks that question?? Why no questions asked of Obama regarding how he is different from Jimmy Carter??? Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times compared to 9 times for Obama. Obama also got 4 more minutes of speaking... She reffed. the debate not moderated ...

As for as the Benghazi fiasco and the well calculated play and preparation between Crowley and Obama.... Spot on!! Note how quick both were able to make reference to Obama's vague statement in the Rose Garden. Just like clockwork... as was the out of line applause coming from the crowd as initiated by Michelle Obama herself. I guess she was waiting for the same moment as well....

These debates are garbage.. Only 3 debates and all three are moderated by liberal journalists. Monday's debate is hosted by Bob Schieffer. They are all water carriers for Obama. Schieffer campaigns for obama weekly on "Face the Nation"

reply to post by Dustytoad


actually if people were more adept at understanding things in context.......youd know that what he was calling terror was in context to OTHER things he mentioned in his speech......

It was only AFTERmentioning those things did he say the word terror.........

I cant believe people buy into spin so easy and are so easily swayed by this man.........

Thats why he went on even AFTER this "rose garden" event.......to blame the video multiple times.......

reply to post by texasgirl

So, which is it? Did he or did he not know? Geez...I just can't keep up with the lies being told with this Benghazi attack story.

Thats just it, and him and his supporters cant have it both ways........if they want to claim that he knew, good then hes responsible for his actions afterwards and all the other crap involved with it......

If they want to say he DIDNT know, then that makes him negligent to the point of being criminal......

So which is it libs? you cant have it both ways

The one fact that seems to fly over everyone's head is that Obama was speaking in general when he said "act of terror" there's a difference between act of terror which can describe thousands of acts(me scaring my cat is an act of terror)It is NOT the same as admitting "terrorism" as we've come to know it.

Get over it. Even if Obama meant terrorism, during ONE SPEECH, he quickly backed off of that ideal for other reasons until the day, weeks later, after countless speeches made by his group, the white house finally admitted that yes, it was terrorists at work. You all know what Romney meant. Get over it. Move on. And lol at whatsherface for breaking protocol and racing to the President's defense like she's some kind of white knight in shining armor and failing at it because she can't tell the difference between acts of terror and terrorist assholes doing their thing. Lol at people jumping the gun to call any and everything terror. Lol at Romney for not stomping their asses when they slung that crap at him. Maybe this stuff really is rigged, or he just sucks THAT much himself at debating.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Razimus

 

What a way to diffuse a potential situation!

A great thread, and a superb conspiracy!

SnF

Yeah, what a way to deflect from what was obviously a major flub from Romney! Make up a totally ridiculous conspiracy! Yay!

Originally posted by jibeho
This debate was a joke and the questions were certainly loaded in Obama's favor. The most stunning question asked of Romney.... How are you going to be different from George Bush? WTH was that. This is not the 2008 election all over again. 4 years with Bush out of office and Crowley picks that question?? Why no questions asked of Obama regarding how he is different from Jimmy Carter??? Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times compared to 9 times for Obama. Obama also got 4 more minutes of speaking... She reffed. the debate not moderated ...

As for as the Benghazi fiasco and the well calculated play and preparation between Crowley and Obama.... Spot on!! Note how quick both were able to make reference to Obama's vague statement in the Rose Garden. Just like clockwork... as was the out of line applause coming from the crowd as initiated by Michelle Obama herself. I guess she was waiting for the same moment as well....

These debates are garbage.. Only 3 debates and all three are moderated by liberal journalists. Monday's debate is hosted by Bob Schieffer. They are all water carriers for Obama. Schieffer campaigns for obama weekly on "Face the Nation"

First off, the Bush question was a great question - very relevant since he was the last Republican president, was a disaster, and many of Romney's proposed policies reflect those of Bush. Second, Crowley was forced to interrupt Romney because he kept going over and off topic. Third, when Romney won the first debate, you guys were all "Romney kicked a$$!", now that he got a whooping, you cry fowl - the debates are obviously rigged. Ridiculous.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Dustytoad

 

actually if people were more adept at understanding things in context.......youd know that what he was calling terror was in context to OTHER things he mentioned in his speech......

The entire rose garden speech was ABOUT the libya attacks! How much more contextual can you get?!?

First of all Romney picked Candy as well.
And how do you guys deny the truth over and over.
It's on video right after the incident "Acts of Terror"
Bill Maher is right about the not reality bubble.