Any of you watching this? Getting a little rowdy 
Cliff notes? 
Hell of a show. lol
Whats the word
It's been investigated more than 9/11, and she's already been cleared
Just trying to tarnish her before 2016
Don't see the truth coming out, butthe ambassador's emails will show her negligence in providing security.
The big picture is Obama didn't want it to look like there was trouble since he ended terrorism, and brought world peace.
One thing is undeniable, they knowingly lied about video. She held the power to stop it, and did nothing. Her defense is "i don't know". If she did reply to any of those 100s of emails they are out there somewhere, and that's a smoking gun.
It's funny, not a liberal and I don't know how guilty or innocent she is; but these republicans that are up her ass are coming off like such assholes I think they're actually helping her.
reelfoot - One thing is undeniable, they knowingly lied about video. She held the power to stop it, and did nothing. Her defense is "i don't know". If she did reply to any of those 100s of emails they are out there somewhere, and that's a smoking gun.Yup
nsbm -This +1Pratty - It's been investigated more than 9/11, and she's already been cleared
Just trying to tarnish her before 2016
The fuck are you talking about? If she'd already been cleared, they wouldn't be having these hearings.
If by "already been cleared" you mean "Hillary has continuously lied, denied and covered up everything", then you'd be right.
They just started asking her about Blumenthal today, which means things are just starting to get interesting. He is key to showing Hillary's gross negligence and her corrupt pay to play State Department.
I am hoping that they eventually point out that there was no embassy in Benghazi (it was in Tripoli). What Benghazi was, was a CIA outpost where Stevens was overseeing arms shipments to Islamist terror groups doing America's dirty work in the Middle East. But that revelation is unlikely, since it would expose a lot more than Hillary's corruption.
Hillary got exposed in a couple of lies today.
In.
Pratty - It's been investigated more than 9/11, and she's already been cleared
Just trying to tarnish her before 2016
lol, hi Hillary!
nsbm -Pratty - It's been investigated more than 9/11, and she's already been cleared
Just trying to tarnish her before 2016
The fuck are you talking about? If she'd already been cleared, they wouldn't be having these hearings.
If by "already been cleared" you mean "Hillary has continuously lied, denied and covered up everything", then you'd be right.
They just started asking her about Blumenthal today, which means things are just starting to get interesting. He is key to showing Hillary's gross negligence and her corrupt pay to play State Department.
I am hoping that they eventually point out that there was no embassy in Benghazi (it was in Tripoli). What Benghazi was, was a CIA outpost where Stevens was overseeing arms shipments to Islamist terror groups doing America's dirty work in the Middle East. But that revelation is unlikely, since it would expose a lot more than Hillary's corruption.
Indeed
People keep talking about the "embassy" attack when it wasn't even an embassy and don't even question what was going on. It's all about Hillary for some reason. Not saying she shouldn't be investigated but there is something much, much bigger which needs to be addressed with that debacle. Sadly, I don't think anything will come of it.
Highlights:
Hillary claimed to not even have a computer in her office.
600 requests for additional security at that embassy, all denied.
An email sent from Hillary to a non-government employee (personal friend) the night of the attacks saying it was a terrorist event.
An email sent the following day from Hillary to the Egyptian prime minister saying it was an AQ-like group, despite the official spin being it was a riot due to the "Innocence of Muslims" film.
Hillary claimed the only person using her email account in her office would have been Sydney Blumenthal ("Sydney, I'd like you to take a peek at the underside of this bus")
Fucking republicans might as well give Clinton the Presidency in 2016. This is the exact reason they keep falling behind. They try to play a similar game that libs have been running with the media and they can't. They can't be the party who throws mud because they will always lose.
People look at the right like their a bunch of old white grumpy men. This is exactly the kind of stuff that supports that type of thinking. Yes the left does the same shit but the difference is, they can get away with it and the right can't. Is it unfair? Sure is but thats life.
The right needs to stop getting themselves in these situations because it just makes them look bad. They will never be able to spin the story enough to where anything Clinton did will matter. It looks like they are going after Clinton because she is running for President.
The right needs to focus on issues and only issues, if they want to win. This mud slinging they have been worked into isn't helping them at all and allows the libs free reign to write whatever bullshit story they're going to write. This is going to make the right look horrible.
jettdogg -alkysmurf -nsbm -This +1Pratty - It's been investigated more than 9/11, and she's already been cleared
Just trying to tarnish her before 2016
The fuck are you talking about? If she'd already been cleared, they wouldn't be having these hearings.
If by "already been cleared" you mean "Hillary has continuously lied, denied and covered up everything", then you'd be right.
They just started asking her about Blumenthal today, which means things are just starting to get interesting. He is key to showing Hillary's gross negligence and her corrupt pay to play State Department.
I am hoping that they eventually point out that there was no embassy in Benghazi (it was in Tripoli). What Benghazi was, was a CIA outpost where Stevens was overseeing arms shipments to Islamist terror groups doing America's dirty work in the Middle East. But that revelation is unlikely, since it would expose a lot more than Hillary's corruption.
You guys actually believe this shit. You're fucking idiots who believe shit you read on Breitbart. The funny thing is, the two arrogant little turds running this 27th "hearing", Gowdy and Chaffetz, are just as dumb as you guys are. Oh, and they are the ones who cut security funding for these embassies. Keep on keeping on dipshits.
jettdogg, do you really believe this was anything other than a terrorist attack? The main issue here is calling it was it really was instead of trying to sugarcoat the situation by blaming in ourselves saying it was a protest that got out of hand.
Nevermind the fact that Hillary was so out of her league as Sec of State that she couldn't even secure our officials abroad even though intel was telling her to beef up security or get out of the area for months ahead of the actual attack, now she wants to lead the entire country!
jettdogg - Source for the "arms shipments" Stevens was supposedly receiving? Lets see it. I need to laugh more.
Okay then, what were our guys doing there?
David@accu -I guarantee that the GOP takes the White House. What they're doing is working, trust me.
Fucking republicans might as well give Clinton the Presidency in 2016. This is the exact reason they keep falling behind. They try to play a similar game that libs have been running with the media and they can't. They can't be the party who throws mud because they will always lose.
People look at the right like their a bunch of old white grumpy men. This is exactly the kind of stuff that supports that type of thinking. Yes the left does the same shit but the difference is, they can get away with it and the right can't. Is it unfair? Sure is but thats life.
The right needs to stop getting themselves in these situations because it just makes them look bad. They will never be able to spin the story enough to where anything Clinton did will matter. It looks like they are going after Clinton because she is running for President.
The right needs to focus on issues and only issues, if they want to win. This mud slinging they have been worked into isn't helping them at all and allows the libs free reign to write whatever bullshit story they're going to write. This is going to make the right look horrible.
jettdogg - Benghazi Biopsy: A Comprehensive Guide to One of America's Worst Political OutragesLOL, an unoriginal copy and paste. And look at the author...fucking Moussa Koussa! Yes, an unbiased source for sure.
Moussa Koussa.
That is the name of the "classified source" in an old email from Hillary Clinton released last week by Republicans purportedly investigating the 2012 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Under the instructions of the Benghazi committee's chairman, Republican Representative Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, Koussa's name was blacked-out on the publicly issued email, as Republicans proclaimed revealing his identity would compromise national security. The media ran with it, saying Clinton had sent classified information through her personal email account.
But the CIA never said the name was secret. Nor did the Defense Intelligence Agency or the FBI. No, Koussa's role as an intelligence source is about as classified as this column. He is the former intelligence chief and foreign minister of Libya. In 2011, he fled that country for Great Britain, where he provided boodles of information to MI6 and the CIA. Documents released long ago show Koussa's cooperation. Government officials have openly discussed it. His name appears in newspapers with casual discussions about his assistance. Sanctions by the British and the Americans against Koussa were lifted because of his help, and he moved to Qatar. All of that is publicly known.
But, as they have time and again, the Republicans on the Benghazi committee released deceitful information for what was undoubtedly part of a campaign--as Kevin McCarthy of the House Republican leadership has admitted--to drive down Clinton's poll numbers. Republicans have implied--and some journalists have flatly stated--that Clinton was reckless and may have broken the law by sending an email that included thirdhand hearsay mentioning Koussa's name. The reality is that the Republicans continue to be reckless with the truth.
Related: Hillary Clinton to Benghazi Committee: 'I Took Responsibility'
The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don't fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government--one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment--has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party's leading candidate for president. Comparisons from America's past are rare. Richard Nixon's attempts to use the IRS to investigate his perceived enemies come to mind. So does Senator Joseph McCarthy's red-baiting during the 1950s, with reckless accusations of treason leveled at members of the State Department, military generals and even the secretary of the Army. But the modern McCarthys of the Benghazi committee cannot perform this political theater on their own--they depend on reporters to aid in the attempts to use government for the purpose of destroying others with bogus "scoops" ladled out by members of Congress and their staffs. These journalists will almost certainly join the legions of shamed reporters of the McCarthy era as it becomes increasingly clear they are enablers of an obscene attempt to undermine the electoral process.
The consequences, however, are worse than the manipulation of the electoral process. By using Benghazi for political advantage, the Republicans have communicated to global militants that, through even limited attacks involving relatively few casualties, they can potentially influence the direction of American elections. The Republicans sent that same message after the Boston Marathon bombing, where they condemned Obama for failing to--illegally--send the American perpetrators to Guantánamo, among other things. They slammed the president because federal law enforcement agents read the failed underwear bomber his rights after they arrested him in 2009. Never mind that federal agents did the exact same thing under President George W. Bush when they arrested the failed shoe bomber years earlier. Republicans even lambasted Obama when he spoke about ISIS decapitating journalists, saying the president did not sound angry enough.