False outrage against HRC?

christiefan915 said:
You do understand that almost nothing is totally destroyed on computers and a talented expert can recover supposedly lost information.
Click to expand...

You should have sent Hillary an E-Mail, telling her that, before she tried to lie and say that her E-Mails had been destroyed and if you would have marked it TOP SECRET; because that way she would have gotten it sooner. :D
 
NOVA said:
The cover up of why and who attacked and murdered our people in Benghazi is already public knowledge....it was a spontaneous demonstration because of an internet video, I believe...

Thats what she told the public and the parents of those that were killed......thats still the story right ?

Yeah,......rrrrrrriiighhtttt.....
Click to expand...

Rubio Is Lying About Hillary Lying

The Republican candidate’s claims about Hillary Clinton and Benghazi fall apart under scrutiny.

...In the CBS interview, Rubio insisted “there was never, ever any evidence that [the Benghazi attack] had anything to do with a video.” That statement contradicts eyewitness reports. According to the New York Times, witnesses in Benghazi saw a militant named Ahmed Abu Khattala “directing the swarming attackers who ultimately killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. ... Abu Khattala told fellow Islamist fighters and others that the assault was retaliation for the same insulting video, according to people who heard him.” The Times also reports that according to witnesses, “there was no peaceful demonstration against the video outside the compound before the attack. ... But the attackers, recognized as members of a local militant group called Ansar al-Shariah, did tell bystanders that they were attacking the compound because they were angry about the video.” So the facts are more complex than Rubio lets on. Militants, while executing the attack, used the video at least as a public pretext. Rubio’s statement—that there was never any evidence that the attack had anything to do with the video—is false...

Rubio’s core allegation against Clinton is that she went “around the country” and “in front of the press for over a week,” telling “the American people” that the attack was “because of some video that someone produced that led to a spontaneous uprising.” On right-wing websites, you’ll find plenty of affirmation for this myth. National Review, Red State, Townhall.com, the Daily Caller, and other outlets agree that Clinton “blamed the ‘awful Internet video’ for the massacre,” told “the American public that the anti-Islam video was what caused the attack,” and “was the author of the lie about what caused the attack.” But when you click their links and study their evidence, the case falls apart.

Townhall.com presents video recordings of Clinton’s remarks after the attack. One recording is titled,”Hillary Clinton Claims Youtube Video Responsible for Benghazi Attack." But the recording doesn’t show that. Instead, it shows Clinton addressing “the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries.” And that’s true: According to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Benghazi attack coincided with “approximately 40 protests around the globe against U.S. embassies and consulates in response to an inflammatory film...”

...So, how many times did Clinton publicly blame the Benghazi attack on the video? The full timeline of her post-attack statements, compiled by Factcheck.org, shows the answer: zero. Clinton chose her words carefully because, although some reporting suggested a connection between the video and the attack, the exact relationship wasn’t clear. “There were scores of attackers that night, almost certainly with differing motives,” she later wrote in her autobiography. “It is inaccurate to state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video. It is equally inaccurate to state that none of them were.”

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...o_is_lying_about_hillary_clinton_lying.2.html
 
LOL, as it appears more and more likely Hillary did in fact do something wrong, instead of call her out, the liberals cry - they did it too!

LMFAO
 
Militants, while executing the attack, used the video at least as a public pretext. Rubio’s statement—that there was never any evidence that the attack had anything to do with the video—is false...
Click to expand...
perhaps that much is true. But this was no spontaneous reaction to a video - Cairo was, but not Libya,and it's evident HRClinton knew this the night of the attack. Her Emails show that.

Ansar al-Sharia is basically AQ in east Africa (and beyond), it's more blowback from US/NATO interventionism in Libya.

Ansar al-Sharia in Libya

Ansar al-Sharia was formed during the Libyan Civil War and rose to prominence after the killing of Muammar Gaddafi. Made up of former rebels from the Abu Obayda Bin Aljarah Brigade, Malik Brigade and February 17th Martyrs Brigade and many more,[7] the Salafist militia initially made their name by posting videos of themselves fighting in the Battle of Sirte, the final battle in the war.[12]
 
At the House Benghazi Committee's hearing Thursday, Jordan highlighted the messages as an indication that Clinton knew the attack was not related to a protest over an anti-Islam video.

Here's what the then-secretary of state wrote in an email to her daughter on the night of the attack: "two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al-Qaeda like group."

In another email on the day after the attack, Clinton told the Egyptian prime minister that "we know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest."

Yet another email detailed the notes from a phone call between Clinton and the Libyan president while the attack was going on.

Clinton spoke of a "gun battle ... which I understand Ansar al-Sharia is claiming responsibiliy for."


http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/10/...helsea-during-benghazi-attack-blames-al-qaeda
 
Konono said:
LOL, as it appears more and more likely Hillary did in fact do something wrong, instead of call her out, the liberals cry - they did it too!

LMFAO
Click to expand...

No matter how many people tell cons their Hillary derangement syndrome is bogus they insist on believing they know better.
 
anatta said:
perhaps that much is true. But this was no spontaneous reaction to a video - Cairo was, but not Libya,and it's evident HRClinton knew this the night of the attack. Her Emails show that.

Ansar al-Sharia is basically AQ in east Africa (and beyond), it's more blowback from US/NATO interventionism in Libya.

Ansar al-Sharia in Libya

Ansar al-Sharia was formed during the Libyan Civil War and rose to prominence after the killing of Muammar Gaddafi. Made up of former rebels from the Abu Obayda Bin Aljarah Brigade, Malik Brigade and February 17th Martyrs Brigade and many more,[7] the Salafist militia initially made their name by posting videos of themselves fighting in the Battle of Sirte, the final battle in the war.[12]
Click to expand...

If you read the entire Slate article at the link, the above is addressed.
 
christiefan915 said:
Rubio Is Lying About Hillary Lying

The Republican candidate’s claims about Hillary Clinton and Benghazi fall apart under scrutiny.

...In the CBS interview, Rubio insisted “there was never, ever any evidence that [the Benghazi attack] had anything to do with a video.” That statement contradicts eyewitness reports. According to the New York Times, witnesses in Benghazi saw a militant named Ahmed Abu Khattala “directing the swarming attackers who ultimately killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. ... Abu Khattala told fellow Islamist fighters and others that the assault was retaliation for the same insulting video, according to people who heard him.” The Times also reports that according to witnesses, “there was no peaceful demonstration against the video outside the compound before the attack. ... But the attackers, recognized as members of a local militant group called Ansar al-Shariah, did tell bystanders that they were attacking the compound because they were angry about the video.” So the facts are more complex than Rubio lets on. Militants, while executing the attack, used the video at least as a public pretext. Rubio’s statement—that there was never any evidence that the attack had anything to do with the video—is false...

Rubio’s core allegation against Clinton is that she went “around the country” and “in front of the press for over a week,” telling “the American people” that the attack was “because of some video that someone produced that led to a spontaneous uprising.” On right-wing websites, you’ll find plenty of affirmation for this myth. National Review, Red State, Townhall.com, the Daily Caller, and other outlets agree that Clinton “blamed the ‘awful Internet video’ for the massacre,” told “the American public that the anti-Islam video was what caused the attack,” and “was the author of the lie about what caused the attack.” But when you click their links and study their evidence, the case falls apart.

Townhall.com presents video recordings of Clinton’s remarks after the attack. One recording is titled,”Hillary Clinton Claims Youtube Video Responsible for Benghazi Attack." But the recording doesn’t show that. Instead, it shows Clinton addressing “the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries.” And that’s true: According to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Benghazi attack coincided with “approximately 40 protests around the globe against U.S. embassies and consulates in response to an inflammatory film...”

...So, how many times did Clinton publicly blame the Benghazi attack on the video? The full timeline of her post-attack statements, compiled by Factcheck.org, shows the answer: zero. Clinton chose her words carefully because, although some reporting suggested a connection between the video and the attack, the exact relationship wasn’t clear. “There were scores of attackers that night, almost certainly with differing motives,” she later wrote in her autobiography. “It is inaccurate to state that every single one of them was influenced by this hateful video. It is equally inaccurate to state that none of them were.”

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...o_is_lying_about_hillary_clinton_lying.2.html
Click to expand...

Slate, left wing Slate, is lying......

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.
The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan , indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.
In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.
“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.


Sept 11, 2012....the night of the attack, Hillary confirmed Benghazi was a terrorist attack, not a demonstration.....

Her own emails prove she is a liar.....
 
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): You just gave a long answer, Madam Secretary, to Ms. Sanchez about what you heard that night, what you're doing. But nowhere in there did you mention a video. You didn't mention a video because there was never a video-inspired protest in Benghazi. There was in Cairo but not in Benghazi.

Victoria Nuland, your spokesperson at the State Department, hours after the attacks said this, "Benghazi has been attacked by militants. In Cairo, police have removed demonstrators."

Benghazi, you got weapons and explosions. Cairo, you got spray paint and rocks.

One hour before the attack in Benghazi, Chris Stevens walks a diplomat to the front gate. The ambassador didn't report a demonstration. He didn't report it because it never happened. An eyewitness in the command center that night on the ground said no protest, no demonstration; two intelligence reports that day, no protest, no demonstration.

The attack starts at 3:42 Eastern time, ends at approximately 11:40 pm that night.

At 4:06, an ops alert goes out across the State Department.

It says this, "Mission under attack, armed men, shots fired, explosions heard."

No mention of video, no mention of a protest, no mention of a demonstration.

But the best evidence is Greg Hicks, the number two guy in Libya, the guy who worked side by side with Ambassador Stevens. He was asked, if there had been a protest, would the ambassador have reported it?

Mr. Hicks's response, "Absolutely."

For there to have been a demonstration on Chris Stevens' front door and him not to have reported it is unbelievable, Mr. Hicks.

He said, secondly, if it had been reported, he would have been out the back door within minutes and there was a back gate.

Everything points to a terrorist attack. We just heard from Mr. Pompeo about the long history of terrorist incidents, terrorist violence in the country.

And yet five days later Susan Rice goes on five TV shows and she says this, "Benghazi was a spontaneous reaction as a consequence of a video," a statement we all know is false. But don't take my word for it. Here's what others have said.

"Rice was off the reservation," off the reservation on five networks, White House worried about the politics. Republicans didn't make those statements. They were made by the people who worked for you in the Near Eastern Affairs bureau, the actual experts on Libya in the State Department.

So if there's no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start?

It started with you, Madam Secretary.

At 10:08, on the night of the attack, you released this statement, "Some have sought to justify the vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."

At 10:08, with no evidence, at 10:08, before the attack is over, at 10:08, when Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty are still on the roof of the annex, fighting for their lives, the official statement of the State Department blames a video.


The lies are so obvious its a wonder some pinheads are still denying the facts......
 
Democrats Released Hillary’s Controversial Email Denying Video Role in Benghazi Attack – Media Ignored

Kristinn Taylor Oct 22nd, 2015 3:16 pm 14 Comments

The Democrat half of the House Select Benghazi Committee issued a partisan report on Monday that disclosed, but buried (on page 28), the shocking news that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emphatically stated in private that the Benghazi attack was not motivated by an anti-Islam video as she was saying in public.

The news media which had access to the report all week did not report Clinton’s startling contradictory statement. Instead it was brought up by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) at Thursday’s hearing.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-video-role-in-benghazi-attack-media-ignored/


Why must we go over this every few weeks.....its a done deal....Hillary lied, Obama lied, Rice lied.....there is no debate ..... the facts are in and have been for months....
 
christiefan915 said:
You're hopeless. Read the Slate article.
Click to expand...

why?.......because I haven't gotten my quota of liberal lies yet today?.....the brainless bitch went on national TV the morning after the attack and told the world that the attack occurred because of civil unrest over a movie.....we now know that that explanation was created by her between the hours of 1:00 am and 10:30 am....we also know that you will never believe this, because she's your brainless bitch and you will never believe the truth about her.........idiots.....
 
NOVA said:
Slate, left wing Slate, is lying......

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.
The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan , indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.
In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.
“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.


Sept 11, 2012....the night of the attack, Hillary confirmed Benghazi was a terrorist attack, not a demonstration.....

Her own emails prove she is a liar.....
Click to expand...

Where are the words she said that we're a lie?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
why?.......because I haven't gotten my quota of liberal lies yet today?.....the brainless bitch went on national TV the morning after the attack and told the world that the attack occurred because of civil unrest over a movie.....we now know that that explanation was created by her between the hours of 1:00 am and 10:30 am....we also know that you will never believe this, because she's your brainless bitch and you will never believe the truth about her.........idiots.....
Click to expand...

Liar
 
Jarod said:
Liar
Click to expand...

You're right Jughead.....it was the second day....

Sept. 13: Clinton meets with Ali Suleiman Aujali — the Libyan ambassador to the U.S. — at a State Department event to mark the end of Ramadan. Ambassador Aujali apologizes to Clinton for what he called “this terrorist attack which took place against the American consulate in Libya.” Clinton, in her remarks, does not refer to it as a terrorist attack. She condemns the anti-Muslim video, but adds that there is “never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”

"Unfortunately, however, over the last 24 hours, we have also seen violence spread elsewhere. Some seek to justify this behavior as a response to inflammatory, despicable material posted on the Internet. As I said earlier today, the United States rejects both the content and the message of that video. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. At our meeting earlier today, my colleague, the foreign minister of Morocco, said that all prophets should be respected because they are all symbols of our humanity, for all humanity."

Sept. 13: Clinton met with Moroccan Foreign Minister Saad-Eddine Al-Othmani. She condemned what she called the “disgusting and reprehensible” anti-Muslim video and the violence that it triggered.


Then Obama took over.............

Sept. 14: White House Says No Evidence of Planned Attack​
Sept. 14: Clinton spoke at Andrews Air Force Base at a ceremony to receive the remains of those killed in Benghazi. She remarked that she received a letter from the president of the Palestinian Authority praising Stevens and “deploring — and I quote — ‘an act of ugly terror.’ ” She, however, did not call it an act of terror or a terrorist attack and neither did the president.
Sept. 14: At a State Department press briefing, spokeswoman Nuland says the department will no longer answer any questions about the Benghazi attack. “It is now something that you need to talk to the FBI about, not to us about, because it’s their investigation.”
Sept. 14: At a White House press briefing, Press Secretary Carney denies reports that it was a preplanned attack. “I have seen that report, and the story is absolutely wrong. We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent. That report is false.”

Do you feel better now ?

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/
 
NOVA said:
Slate, left wing Slate, is lying......

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.
The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan , indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.
In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.
“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.


Sept 11, 2012....the night of the attack, Hillary confirmed Benghazi was a terrorist attack, not a demonstration.....

Her own emails prove she is a liar.....
Click to expand...

Do you understand reading in context?
 
Jarod said:
Where are the words she said that we're a lie?
Click to expand...


The lies came later when she was telling the American what happened.....then suddenly it became a demonstration about an internet movie....

The Democrat half of the House Select Benghazi Committee issued a partisan report on Monday that disclosed, but buried (on page 28), the shocking news that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emphatically stated in private that the Benghazi attack was not motivated by an anti-Islam video as she was saying in public.


The truth in private, lies in public......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top