(02-03-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:59 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm on topic. The media doesn't do investigative reporting anymore so unless more stuff comes out on its own, they are simply going to move on. Quit trying to make Benghazi happen. No one cares.

Benghazi did happen... but I guess you are too ignorant to understand that 4 people died in that attack. I wonder if you wanna go tell their families that no one cares about their deaths.

Just keep carrying that water...

Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

Please show me where I stated that I was the spokeman for the families, but good try at deflecting...

I'm not the one who brought up the families. Did you actually think I was talking about them? I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you. I was talking about who in the general public cares about Benghazi. Your so silly.lol

Then you should have been more specific... So you truly think that no one in the general public cares?

(02-03-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:59 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm on topic. The media doesn't do investigative reporting anymore so unless more stuff comes out on its own, they are simply going to move on. Quit trying to make Benghazi happen. No one cares.

Benghazi did happen... but I guess you are too ignorant to understand that 4 people died in that attack. I wonder if you wanna go tell their families that no one cares about their deaths.

Just keep carrying that water...

Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

Please show me where I stated that I was the spokeman for the families, but good try at deflecting...

I'm not the one who brought up the families. Did you actually think I was talking about them? I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you. I was talking about who in the general public cares about Benghazi. Your so silly.lol

Anyone with a heart that noticed that American died. Admittedly, that's a lower and lower figure in today's "me first" society.

(02-03-2016 10:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:16 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 09:53 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 09:32 AM)Crebman Wrote:  [quote='Machiavelli' pid='12962083' dateline='1454468473']
Only time I hear if it is when I come on here. It's getting no traction in the main stream press. It does have me honestly worried though.

Hey Mach - you probably aren't old enough to remember the Russian "news" media called TASS. They were no more than the media arm of the Communist government and only reported stories showing the government as benevolent and suppressed any and all stories of the bad stuff that government did to their people.

The mainstream media you tout (ABC, NBC, CBS) has become basically like that in this country for the Democratic party and just like TASS - they try and pass themselves off a unbiased journalists. If they were honest - they'd wear cheerleader outfits with a big "D" on the front during their newscasts.



They pretty much looked the other way during Bush's war too. I don't think it's carrying water for one party as much as it is just lack of investigative reporting. They are either lazy or no longer have the resources.

This is about Hillary, not Bush... stick to the topic.

I'm on topic. The media doesn't do investigative reporting anymore so unless more stuff comes out on its own, they are simply going to move on. Quit trying to make Benghazi happen. No one cares.

Could be because when someone does do undercover investigative journalism a rouge DA's office may charge them with a crime..

(02-03-2016 11:31 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:16 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 09:53 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 09:32 AM)Crebman Wrote:  [quote='Machiavelli' pid='12962083' dateline='1454468473']
Only time I hear if it is when I come on here. It's getting no traction in the main stream press. It does have me honestly worried though.

Hey Mach - you probably aren't old enough to remember the Russian "news" media called TASS. They were no more than the media arm of the Communist government and only reported stories showing the government as benevolent and suppressed any and all stories of the bad stuff that government did to their people.

The mainstream media you tout (ABC, NBC, CBS) has become basically like that in this country for the Democratic party and just like TASS - they try and pass themselves off a unbiased journalists. If they were honest - they'd wear cheerleader outfits with a big "D" on the front during their newscasts.



They pretty much looked the other way during Bush's war too. I don't think it's carrying water for one party as much as it is just lack of investigative reporting. They are either lazy or no longer have the resources.

This is about Hillary, not Bush... stick to the topic.

I'm on topic. The media doesn't do investigative reporting anymore so unless more stuff comes out on its own, they are simply going to move on. Quit trying to make Benghazi happen. No one cares.

Could be because when someone does do undercover investigative journalism a rouge DA's office may charge them with a crime..

So, are you advocating for DA's to not charge for crimes when they uncover evidence that leads them to believe they occurred???

(02-03-2016 11:34 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:31 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:16 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 09:53 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Hey Mach - you probably aren't old enough to remember the Russian "news" media called TASS. They were no more than the media arm of the Communist government and only reported stories showing the government as benevolent and suppressed any and all stories of the bad stuff that government did to their people.

The mainstream media you tout (ABC, NBC, CBS) has become basically like that in this country for the Democratic party and just like TASS - they try and pass themselves off a unbiased journalists. If they were honest - they'd wear cheerleader outfits with a big "D" on the front during their newscasts.



They pretty much looked the other way during Bush's war too. I don't think it's carrying water for one party as much as it is just lack of investigative reporting. They are either lazy or no longer have the resources.

This is about Hillary, not Bush... stick to the topic.

I'm on topic. The media doesn't do investigative reporting anymore so unless more stuff comes out on its own, they are simply going to move on. Quit trying to make Benghazi happen. No one cares.

Could be because when someone does do undercover investigative journalism a rouge DA's office may charge them with a crime..

So, are you advocating for DA's to not charge for crimes when they uncover evidence that leads them to believe they occurred???

Yep... just like they prosecuted that news guy (david Gregory) who had a 30 round magazine on tv in DC in violation of the law.

But, they will prosecute based on trumped up political charges to stifle exposing the selling of baby parts.

(02-03-2016 11:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:08 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:59 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Benghazi did happen... but I guess you are too ignorant to understand that 4 people died in that attack. I wonder if you wanna go tell their families that no one cares about their deaths.

Just keep carrying that water...

Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

So, now she was never Secretary of State. Jeez, was she responsible for ANYTHING during those years?

What exactly could she have done to prevent it?

Spent more money...sent in more security for him beforehand...pulled him out of a dangerous country...

I believe both were reviewed by staff underneath her and they decided against it for one reason or another. I guess she could have been involved in every decision at state, but that would be a tall task even for someone as gifted as her.

Pathetic answer. So nobody is responsible for their department? Who hired those people? Who gives them general direction? Who knew the relevant intelligence data?

Absolutely pathetic.

(02-03-2016 11:30 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 10:59 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Benghazi did happen... but I guess you are too ignorant to understand that 4 people died in that attack. I wonder if you wanna go tell their families that no one cares about their deaths.

Just keep carrying that water...

Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

Please show me where I stated that I was the spokeman for the families, but good try at deflecting...

I'm not the one who brought up the families. Did you actually think I was talking about them? I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you. I was talking about who in the general public cares about Benghazi. Your so silly.lol

Anyone with a heart that noticed that American died. Admittedly, that's a lower and lower figure in today's "me first" society.

Of course when it happened people were concerned and upset. I don't think anyone who doesn't follow politics still feels however that there are still unanswered questions.

(02-03-2016 12:04 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:30 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

Please show me where I stated that I was the spokeman for the families, but good try at deflecting...

I'm not the one who brought up the families. Did you actually think I was talking about them? I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you. I was talking about who in the general public cares about Benghazi. Your so silly.lol

Anyone with a heart that noticed that American died. Admittedly, that's a lower and lower figure in today's "me first" society.

Of course when it happened people were concerned and upset. I don't think anyone who doesn't follow politics still feels however that there are still unanswered questions.

(02-03-2016 12:04 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:30 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

Please show me where I stated that I was the spokeman for the families, but good try at deflecting...

I'm not the one who brought up the families. Did you actually think I was talking about them? I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you. I was talking about who in the general public cares about Benghazi. Your so silly.lol

Anyone with a heart that noticed that American died. Admittedly, that's a lower and lower figure in today's "me first" society.

Of course when it happened people were concerned and upset. I don't think anyone who doesn't follow politics still feels however that there are still unanswered questions.

Your reply just reaffirms the bolded part above.

Well, it is the #1 editorial in today's Chicago Tribune.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...story.html

(02-03-2016 12:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:08 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

So, now she was never Secretary of State. Jeez, was she responsible for ANYTHING during those years?

What exactly could she have done to prevent it?

Spent more money...sent in more security for him beforehand...pulled him out of a dangerous country...

I believe both were reviewed by staff underneath her and they decided against it for one reason or another. I guess she could have been involved in every decision at state, but that would be a tall task even for someone as gifted as her.

Pathetic answer. So nobody is responsible for their department? Who hired those people? Who gives them general direction? Who knew the relevant intelligence data?

Absolutely pathetic.

Well except for the Governor or Michigan...

(02-03-2016 12:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:08 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:02 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Benghazi happened and the families are mourning. Hillary however had nothing to do with it. Since when did you become the spokesman for the families?

So, now she was never Secretary of State. Jeez, was she responsible for ANYTHING during those years?

What exactly could she have done to prevent it?

Spent more money...sent in more security for him beforehand...pulled him out of a dangerous country...

I believe both were reviewed by staff underneath her and they decided against it for one reason or another. I guess she could have been involved in every decision at state, but that would be a tall task even for someone as gifted as her.

Pathetic answer. So nobody is responsible for their department? Who hired those people? Who gives them general direction? Who knew the relevant intelligence data?

Absolutely pathetic.

I never said she had no responsibility. I only answered what they could have done beforehand. But hindsight is always 20/20.

And do you have any concept of how big the State department is and how many things they oversee?

From wiki:

Quote:Staff
United States Deputy Secretary of State: The Deputy Secretary (with the Chief of Staff, Executive Secretariat, and the Under Secretary for Management) assists the Secretary in the overall management of the department. Reporting to the Deputy Secretary are the six Under Secretaries and the counselor, along with several staff offices:

Chief of Staff
Executive Secretariat
Office of Global Intergovernmental Affairs
National Foreign Affairs Training Center (which houses the Foreign Service Institute)
Office of the Legal Adviser
Office of the Inspector General
Office of Management Policy
Office of Protocol
Office of the Science and Technology Adviser
Office of the Senior Advisor for Civil Society and Emerging Democracies
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Bureau of Legislative Affairs
Bureau of Budget and Planning

Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs: The fourth-ranking State Department official. Becomes Acting Secretary in the absence of the Secretary of State and the two Deputy Secretaries of State. This position is responsible for bureaus, headed by Assistant Secretaries, coordinating American diplomacy around the world:
Bureau of African Affairs
Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Bureau of International Organization Affairs
Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs
Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs
Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs

Under Secretary of State for Management: The principal adviser to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary on matters relating to the allocation and use of Department's budget, physical property, and personnel. This position is responsible for bureaus, headed by Assistant Secretaries, planning the day-to-day administration of the Department and proposing institutional reform and modernization:
Bureau of Administration
Bureau of Consular Affairs
Office of Children's Issues
Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS)
U.S. Diplomatic Security Service (DSS)
Office of Foreign Missions
Bureau of Human Resources
Bureau of Information Resource Management
Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations
Director of Diplomatic Reception Rooms
Foreign Service Institute
Office of Management Policy, Rightsizing, and Innovation
Office of Medical Services
Office of White House Liaison

Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment: The senior economic advisor for the Secretary and Deputy Secretary on international economic policy. This position is responsible for bureaus, headed by Assistant Secretaries, dealing with trade, agriculture, aviation, and bilateral trade relations with America's economic partners:
Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs
Bureau of Energy Resources
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
Office of the Science and Technology Adviser
Office of the Chief Economist

Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs: This Under Secretary leads functions that were formerly assigned to the United States Information Agency but were integrated into the State Department by the 1999 reorganization. This position manages units that handle the department's public communications and seek to burnish the image of the United States around the world:
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
Internet Access and Training Program
Bureau of Public Affairs
Spokesperson for the United States Department of State
Office of the Historian
United States Diplomacy Center
Bureau of International Information Programs

Office of Policy, Planning, and Resources for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs: This Under Secretary coordinates the Department's role in U.S. military assistance. Since the 1996 reorganization, this Under Secretary also oversees the functions of the formerly independent Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.
Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs
Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance

Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights: This Under Secretary leads the Department's efforts to prevent and counter threats to civilian security and advises the Secretary of State on matters related to governance, democracy, and human rights.
Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations
Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization
Bureau of Counterterrorism
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
Office of Global Criminal Justice
Office of Global Youth Issues
Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons

Counselor: Ranking with the Under Secretaries, the Counselor is the Secretary's and Deputy Secretary's special advisor and consultant on major problems of foreign policy. The Counselor provides guidance to the appropriate bureaus with respect to such matters, conducts special international negotiations and consultations, and undertakes special assignments from time to time as directed by the Secretary.

Office of the Global AIDS Coordinator: President's main task force to combat global AIDS. The Global AIDS Coordinator reports directly to the Secretary of State.

(02-03-2016 10:14 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=ch...t&start=10

Washington Examiner and facebook rants. Look for yourself. I'll look for left leaning defenses.

And you conveniently left off one of your "mainstream" sources that's included there. That rag TIME that actually used to be decent read.

A couple of nuggets from their lead page on the crook:

Quote:Bashing Clinton while still in the primary season

Quote:If the thought of a Republican President in 2017 terrifies you...

Yea, they aren't planting words or framing the topic in a way to sway opinions on the entire issue.

Cankles the "victim" once again. And of course the TERRIFYING Republicans. lol. Mainstream.

I still find it quite interesting that the majority of the vinegar and blame for Benghazi goes toward the Secretary of State instead of the terrorists that actually killed them.

#partisanpolitics

(02-03-2016 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I still find it quite interesting that the majority of the vinegar and blame for Benghazi goes toward the Secretary of State instead of the terrorists that actually killed them.

#partisanpolitics

Are you suggesting we start a war?

(02-03-2016 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I still find it quite interesting that the majority of the vinegar and blame for Benghazi goes toward the Secretary of State instead of the terrorists that actually killed them.

#partisanpolitics

We already hate them. The Secretary of State was supposed to keep her employees safe. She was AWOL, kind of like Rubio in the Senate.

Congratulations fit! You have successfully derailed a thread into talking Benghazi. Hooray!

(02-03-2016 01:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I still find it quite interesting that the majority of the vinegar and blame for Benghazi goes toward the Secretary of State instead of the terrorists that actually killed them.

#partisanpolitics

We already hate them. The Secretary of State was supposed to keep her employees safe. She was AWOL, kind of like Rubio in the Senate.

C'mon man. You're asking for the impossible. And ignoring history.

Where was your outrage here?

Quote:Our ruling

Garamendi said that "during the George W. Bush period, there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world. Sixty people died." There are actually different ways to count the number of attacks, especially when considering attacks on ambassadors and embassy personnel who were traveling to or from embassy property. Overall, we found Garamendi slightly understated the number of deadly attacks and total fatalities, even using a strict definition. Garamendi’s claim is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.

Prior to Benghazi, were there 13 attacks on embassies and 60 deaths under President George W. Bush?

(02-03-2016 12:11 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 12:04 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:30 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-03-2016 11:04 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Please show me where I stated that I was the spokeman for the families, but good try at deflecting...

I'm not the one who brought up the families. Did you actually think I was talking about them? I guess I'm going to have to spell it out for you. I was talking about who in the general public cares about Benghazi. Your so silly.lol

Anyone with a heart that noticed that American died. Admittedly, that's a lower and lower figure in today's "me first" society.

Of course when it happened people were concerned and upset. I don't think anyone who doesn't follow politics still feels however that there are still unanswered questions.

New rule. If you're constantly accusing others of trolling, then you're just trolling.

(02-02-2016 10:01 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Only time I hear if it is when I come on here. It's getting no traction in the main stream press. It does have me honestly worried though.

Real question for you Mach. Does it not concern you that the "Main Stream" media has chosen to pretty much ignore this issue?

To me, it gives the impression that the "Main Stream" media is in the tank for Hillary.