So what is the excuse for Benghazi?

With the release of emails, we know that:

The terrorists telegraphed their intentions on Facebook two weeks ahead of time.
The Libyan theater was known by the White House to be very dangerous.
The White House pulled extra security and the bug out plane from Benghazi in order to "normalize" relations.
A hole was blown in a wall weeks before the attack to either test the response (none) or to create an access point.
There was no protest that got out of control.
The State Department watched the attack in real time.
The Ambassador asked for extra security the day of the attack.
Security being provided (Libyan nationals) were poorly armed and poorly trained.
The attack lasted seven hours.
The consolate, the ambassador, and a CIA intelligence post were the targets.
Two hours into the attack terrorist claimed responsibility for the attack.
Only someone on site would know and could have taken credit.
Barack Obama was either not informed,refused to be disturbed, or was unable to take action.
Assets were available in the Med. that could have arrived before the end of the attack.
Our ambassador was killed, an intelligent analyst (read CIA), and two former Navy Seals (CIA???) were also killed.
24 hours after the attack the White House and State Department KNEW that it was a planned attack, that there was no protest, and it was pre-announced.
We know what happened next; the Big Lie. It was a video that no one has watched, it was a protest gotten out of control, there was no warning, and nothing could have been done to prevent or stop the attack.

1. Barack Obama was not told; why is no one fired in disgrace for such a failure?

2. Barack Obama didn't want to be disturbed; what was so important and is his command over his people so powerful that they won't take the chance to disturb him. What did he think was so much more important other than flying to Vegas the next day, going on Letterman, or having a party with Beyonce'.

3. Barack was told but was unable to take action. He was in over his head and allowed people to die for his failure. He was incapacitated (stoned, drunk, psychologically out of touch). He did not want to take action. He put the ambassador there, he pulled the security, and his state department ignored the internet posting. Take your pick.

So what do you want to accept for an excuse knowing what we know now?

The closer the election the more desperate the opposition gets..

not an issue

willard didnt even bother to mention it during the last debate

not an issue

willard didnt even bother to mention it during the last debate Originally Posted by CJ7

WRONG! Heads are going to ROLL on this one.

WRONG! Heads are going to ROLL on this one. Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

and heads prolly should roll over this ... as bad as all the rightwing pukes want it to be its not an issue determining the outcome of the election ..

carry on

The closer the election the more desperate the opposition gets.. Originally Posted by ekim008

Really Mikey? It's "desperate" to expect the President to protect our diplomats and tell the truth, instead of going fundraising and on late night comedy shows?

You are truly an idiot. Not name calling, simply stating a fact.

this one yes idiot.

Proved my point. Dyed in the wool Obamaton. Will defend ANYTHING!

Proved my point. Dyed in the wool Obamaton. Will defend ANYTHING! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I keep telling you to put on a cap and nobody will notice your point

This goes beyond the election. This borders on criminality.

I think we need you wingnuts imput in the next cabinet meeting. COG can go along as your fluffer!

Why don't you ask Condi JD?

Condi Rice Pours Cold Water On ‘Benghazi-Gate’

By Hayes Brown on Oct 25, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice broke with the majority of her party last night on Fox News, as she tried to hit the brakes on the right wing’s politicization of the recent attack in Libya.
Host Greta Van Susteren asked Rice directly and repeatedly about a set of emails uncovered by Reuters. In what has been dubbed “Benghazi-Gate,” the conservative media has jumped on the emails as definitive proof that the Obama administration has been lying about what it knew and when in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Rice’s response was likely not what Van Susteren expected:

RICE: But when things are unfolding very, very quickly, it’s not always easy to know what is really going on on the ground. And to my mind, the really important questions here are about how information was collected. Did the various agencies really coordinate and share intelligence in the way that we had hoped, with the reforms that were made after 9/11?
So there’s a big picture to be examined here. But we don’t have all of the pieces, and I think it’s easy to try and jump to conclusions about what might have happened here. It’s probably better to let the relevant bodies do their work.

Watch Rice’s full interview here:
Throughout the interview, Rice highlighted the difficulty that comes in a “fog of war” situation, with multiple stories coming in which need to be processed and verified. Her statements strongly align with the evolution of the Obama administration’s understanding of what happened in Benghazi. Rice also joined current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in dismissing the big picture importance of the emails from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, as a small portion of the overall communication between the mission and the State Department.
With her reasoned response, Rice stands apart from other former Bush administration officials, including former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Both Rumsfeld and Bolton have repeatedly insisted that the Obama administration has performed a cover-up of the events in Benghazi.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/20...bya/?mobile=nc

pragmatic responses to difficult situations seperated Condi from the rest of the idiots and earned her a seat in the corner ...

Proved my point. Dyed in the wool Obamaton. Will defend ANYTHING! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

time to change your depends again you have a problem understanding me don't you...

No, I have the problem of understanding you. That's why I can safely tell you are an Obamaton who will defend ANYTHING the President does or says, no matter how dishonest or ridiculous.