Obama Snaps Back at Ed Henry Over Benghazi Justice Question

Closing in on one year since the deadly Benghazi attacks, President Barack Obama repeated his vow to bring those responsible to justice — noting that it took a while to get Osama bin Laden as well.

I also said that we’d get Bin Laden and I didn’t get him in 11 month,” Obama responded. “So we have informed, I think, the public that there is a sealed indictment. It’s sealed for a reason, but we are intent on capturing those who carried out this attack.

How dare you question me peon !


To be perfectly clear here Obama did not get Bin Laden, that was the work of many people, and Seal Team Six.

Here is the thing though his party made it a great issue of 'letting Bin Laden go' , and how Obama made it his 'personal' mission to kill Laden.

That comment is rather hilarious the 'informed' the public ?

Informed ?

A sealed indictment ! ! ! ! !

It's sealed for a reason he says ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Benghazi?

Covered up as it happened.

Where is the effing transparency Mr. President ??

Where?

Oh for such a 'phony' scandal why all the need to 'seal' the Benghazi indictment ? ? ?

Mr. President I don't believe on damn word you say.

reply to post by neo96


Neo I'm curious.

To be perfectly clear here Obama did not get Bin Laden, that was the work of many people, and Seal Team Six.

If the GOP were in the White House during the whole OBL issue, would you have claimed no credit for POTUS?

As far as I understand it, Seal Team Six doesn't do anything unless the President orders it.

As for Benghazi, I have my own theory.

I believe that they are keeping this under wraps because the CIA among others provided weapons to rebels, who then used them to kill Americans in that attack. This is what they are trying to hide IMO.

I believe the sealed indictment is probably for some CIA patsy or PMC who will get the blame for jumping ship so to speak and joining the ranks of those responsible for that attack.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower

If the GOP were in the White House during the whole OBL issue, would you have claimed no credit for POTUS?

Tenth just holding the current Potus to the same standards that the last Potus was bashed over the head with for years during his reign, and still to this day.

Was GW given credit for anything?

He has been blamed for pretty much anything, and everything.

As far as I understand it, Seal Team Six doesn't do anything unless the President orders it.

Those policies created under the last administration is what ultimately lead to the death of Bin Laden that the current Potus disparaged then turn turns around ,and does the same things.

I believe that they are keeping this under wraps because the CIA among others provided weapons to rebels, who then used them to kill Americans in that attack. This is what they are trying to hide IMO.

I have my own theory Benghazi would not have happened if the current Potus left iLibya alone.

30 years of silence then one day Obama decided to have a 'war record' and created the circumstances we are talking about.

Obama owns Benghazi.

I believe the sealed indictment is probably for some CIA patsy or PMC who will get the blame for jumping ship so to speak and joining the ranks of those responsible for that attack.

The sealed indictment is to cover up his duplicitous actions.

And related reading :

President Obama’s Letter to CIA Employees

reply to post by neo96

Tenth just holding the current Potus to the same standards that the last Potus was bashed over the head with for years during his reign, and still to this day.

I'm not holding anybody to any standard. I was pointing out that Obama made use of existing frame work to take action against something that was very popular for many Americans and was a corner stone goal of the War On Terror.

Was GW given credit for anything?

Sure, I give George a bunch of credit for a lot of things. Unfortunately, I don't believe George did a very good job at many of the things he did do. Blame and credit are actually the same thing if you think about it. It just all depends on whether or not your were successful in your endeavor.

George's Presidency is largely a failure and history will remember it that way, both economically and socially.

He has been blamed for pretty much anything, and everything.

That's not what I asked. Would you have claimed he didn't deserve credit, if it was a GOP president?

Those policies created under the last administration is what ultimately lead to the death of Bin Laden that the current Potus disparaged then turn turns around ,and does the same things.

That's true of any President after the first. They create frame work, the next president either makes use, expends or removes that framework.

How that fact precludes giving government officials credit for USING the existing systems, regardless of who put them there eludes me.

I have my own theory Benghazi would not have happened if the current Potus left iLibya alone.

I agree 100% with that.

The sealed indictment is to cover up his duplicitous actions.

I was under the impression that an indictment meant somebody was being charged with something?

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower

I'm not holding anybody to any standard. I was pointing out that Obama made use of existing frame work to take action against something that was very popular for many Americans and was a corner stone goal of the War On Terror.

Made use of the existing framework he campaigned against to get in to office

Sure, I give George a bunch of credit for a lot of things. Unfortunately, I don't believe George did a very good job at many of the things he did do. Blame and credit are actually the same thing if you think about it. It just all depends on whether or not your were successful in your endeavor.

If we need to give credit to people for doing their jobs?

I don't do pats on the backs others can all they want.

George's Presidency is largely a failure and history will remember it that way, both economically and socially.

But we are talking about Benghazi here are we not ?

That ain't on GW.

That's not what I asked. Would you have claimed he didn't deserve credit, if it was a GOP president?

So i created thread about Obama and you want to talk about the GOP ?

If the GOP were in the White House during the whole OBL issue, would you have claimed no credit for POTUS?

They weren't had they been they prolly would have invaded Libya boots on the ground and that shock and awe.

I was under the impression that an indictment meant somebody was being charged with something?

Was Bin Laden charged with a 'sealed' indictment ?

He was just killed.

reply to post by neo96

Made use of the existing framework he campaigned against to get in to office

And how many Presidents have done that? Lacking the actual knowledge of how useful those frameworks are because they aren't privy to 1/4 of the information a POTUS is?

If we need to give credit to people for doing their jobs?

I don't do pats on the backs others can all they want.

Well it seems like you were actually trying to use the killing of OBL against Obama, as opposed to just giving him the credit for doing it.

If you are going to place blame on politicians for not doing their job, why not provide a little encouragement when they do?

But we are talking about Benghazi here are we not ?

That ain't on GW.

You made the partisan comment,I was simply challenging your cleverly placed ideological jab. Perhaps if the conversation hadn't started with a hint of bias, I would not have had the need.

So i created thread about Obama and you want to talk about the GOP ?

You created a thread that stated the following:

To be perfectly clear here Obama did not get Bin Laden, that was the work of many people, and Seal Team Six.

Don't say things if you don't want them challenged in the context of your thread.

They weren't had they been they prolly would have invaded Libya boots on the ground and that shock and awe.

Would you have supported that action? Would you dismiss outright the efforts of the administration in that conflict if they had been on your side of the fence?

I don't think you would have, like you did here.

Was Bin Laden charged with a 'sealed' indictment ?

He was just killed.

What does that have to do with anything?

An indictment (/ɪnˈdaɪtmənt/ in-DYT-mənt), in the common law system, is a formal accusation that a person has committed a crime. In jurisdictions that maintain the concept of felonies, the most serious criminal offence is a felony; jurisdictions that lack the concept of felonies often use that of an indictable offence—an offence that requires an indictment.

Source

So that would mean the indictment, actually has a name on it, that they are charging with a felony right?

And yes OBL was indeed Indicted by the US gov.

He was indicted on terrorism charges by law enforcement agencies in Madrid, New York City, and Tripoli.[69]

Source

So there's that.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower

And how many Presidents have done that? Lacking the actual knowledge of how useful those frameworks are because they aren't privy to 1/4 of the information a POTUS is?

Don't know how many Potus campaigned against war then waged more WAR, and was awarded a nobel peace prize.

Well it seems like you were actually trying to use the killing of OBL against Obama, as opposed to just giving him the credit for doing it.

Obama brought up Bin Laden in his own comments, why give credit to him ?

Seal Team Six pulled the trigger.

If you are going to place blame on politicians for not doing their job, why not provide a little encouragement when they do?

Nope just blame them no encouragement because they are still screwing us over on other things.

You made the partisan comment,I was simply challenging your cleverly placed ideological jab. Perhaps if the conversation hadn't started with a hint of bias, I would not have had the need.

Really do need to watch the partisan jabs for the rest of his conference today.

Don't say things if you don't want them challenged in the context of your thread.

Think I will say pretty much what I think.

Obama single handly took CREDIT for Bin Laden's Death, and has taken EXACTLY ZERO responsibility for Benghazi.

Which is a disservice to those men and women in the intelligence community, and Seal Team Six.

Then lied about it spinning the events over a video, and other nonsense.

Would you have supported that action? Would you dismiss outright the efforts of the administration in that conflict if they had been on your side of the fence?

So what is up with all the 'hypothetical's' ? ?

What does that have to do with anything?

I will tell you what It has to do with it because it is the same pre 9-11 mentality that lead us to the last decade of WAR.

4 times Clinton had the chance to kill BIn Laden didn't do it, treated it like a LEO matter, which is what they are doing with Benghazi.

That is WHAT !

reply to post by neo96


Ah, alright Neo, I'll stop being so difficult. I just find that sometimes these conversations get started with a political bias. Were both guilty of that and I think it does the conversation a disservice.

I agree with you over the whole Benghazi thing, people should go to jail for that, or worse.

~Tenth

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by neo96

 

Ah, alright Neo, I'll stop being so difficult. I just find that sometimes these conversations get started with a political bias. Were both guilty of that and I think it does the conversation a disservice.

I agree with you over the whole Benghazi thing, people should go to jail for that, or worse.

~Tenth

I agree the Potus remarks today did start with a political BIAS see full press conference for the details.

reply to post by neo96


Evidence seems to be pointing to Administration insiders for the killing of Stevens and the others. Since everything the bastards say is a lie, I'm thinking that "sealed indictment" simply means that it doesn't have a name on it yet (if, indeed, such an indictment even exists). As soon as they find the right stooge, there'll be a name to put on it and it can be unsealed. Then he can say: "See? Told ya so!"

But I think he thinks they can still get clear of this Benghazi thing—that it will eventually die down and no one will face any consequences. Which is another thing entirely: Even if blame were assigned, it's pretty certain from past evidence that no insider will ever be punished....