House Benghazi Report Finds No New Evidence of Wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton

[IceSpear]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

[Dr. Arch]

Surprise! Not really...

[Landslide Lyndon]

I was waiting for henster to post that.

[IceSpear]

I was waiting for henster to post that.

No, henster is Charlie Brown. We're Lucy.

[Seriously?]

Oh please. The New York Times is a terribly biased DNC rag. There were plenty of new revelations about Hillary! that night, including that Obama more or less gave the green light about intervening, but the folks at State and DoD were too busy dickering over whether the military should be wearing fatigues or civilian clothing.

And that part where Hillary basically LIED about the film causing the incident when she knew it was RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS that were doing it all along.

Give me a break.

[Gass3268]

Yup, it was a huge was of resources and time.

[heatcharger]

Oh please. The New York Times is a terribly biased DNC rag. There were plenty of new revelations about Hillary! that night, including that Obama more or less gave the green light about intervening, but the folks at State and DoD were too busy dickering over whether the military should be wearing fatigues or civilian clothing.

And that part where Hillary basically LIED about the film causing the incident when she knew it was RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS that were doing it all along.

Give me a break.

Oh please. Trey Gowdy basically admitted you can't blame Hillary Clinton and that the deaths couldn't have been prevented.
The worst part about this is that the victim's families have said not to politicize it, yet Republicans continue their $7 million witch hunt to stop her from being president.

[SillyAmerican]

Oh please. The New York Times is a terribly biased DNC rag. There were plenty of new revelations about Hillary! that night, including that Obama more or less gave the green light about intervening, but the folks at State and DoD were too busy dickering over whether the military should be wearing fatigues or civilian clothing.

And that part where Hillary basically LIED about the film causing the incident when she knew it was RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS that were doing it all along.

Give me a break.

Oh please. Trey Gowdy basically admitted you can't blame Hillary Clinton and that the deaths couldn't have been prevented.

The worst part about this is that the victim's families have said not to politicize it, yet Republicans continue their $7 million witch hunt to stop her from being president.

Yes, we know now that the deaths couldn't be prevented. That's just 20/20 hindsight; it doesn't explain why no help was provided at the time, why people were busy changing into and out of uniform while help was needed, and why the orders of the President and Secretary of Defense appear to have been ignored. There seems to have been a serious breakdown in the chain of command, and we still have no idea why.

The worst part about this is that the victim's families have been lied to and treated very badly, and the one person most responsible for this fiasco will be the 2016 Democratic nominee for President of the United States. Nicely done...

[pbrower2a]

Chris Stevens did something heroic and risky and died for that. Hillary Clinton could not micromanage his movements, and few people saw post-Qaddafi Libya as a hotbed for terrorists. About everyone thought that that Libya had suddenly become the most pro-American country in the Middle East with the possible exception of Israel.

Few saw the political vacuum forming so quickly as it did, and few saw ISIS and al-Qaeda getting in so fast. Yes, I could understand the mass dissent about a low-quality movie insulting the prophet Muhammad. I saw the trailer, and I saw close to an equivalent of Jew-bashing cinema in the Devil's Reich.  I'd guess that the late Chris Stevens saw The Innocence of the Muslims much as I did and may have had some sympathy with the legitimate protest of the vile flick.

Terrorists exploited a legitimate protest to kill some Americans. That is the crime.  
  

[IceSpear]

Oh please. The New York Times is a terribly biased DNC rag. There were plenty of new revelations about Hillary! that night, including that Obama more or less gave the green light about intervening, but the folks at State and DoD were too busy dickering over whether the military should be wearing fatigues or civilian clothing.

And that part where Hillary basically LIED about the film causing the incident when she knew it was RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS that were doing it all along.

Give me a break.

The New York Times are the ones that created the email story you guys love so much. So how can you square that circle?

[Ljube]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

[IceSpear]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Good thing she's been dodging every bullet since the 90s then.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say she has some type of futuristic bullet deflector implanted in her body.

[Wells]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Ah Lube, but we, Trump haters need only be right once. You and your Grand Wizard, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Do you really think that Trump is going to be attacking Hillary but not the other way around? Trump's failed businesses, questionable comments, lack of experience, lies, and much more will be attacked. And unlike Trump, Clinton actually knows how to run a campaign. And while Clinton is running a campaign, Trump will continue with questionable comments, flip-flops, and lies until November when Hillary Clinton is coronated by the American people.

[Seriously?]

Oh please. The New York Times is a terribly biased DNC rag. There were plenty of new revelations about Hillary! that night, including that Obama more or less gave the green light about intervening, but the folks at State and DoD were too busy dickering over whether the military should be wearing fatigues or civilian clothing.

And that part where Hillary basically LIED about the film causing the incident when she knew it was RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS that were doing it all along.

Give me a break.

The New York Times are the ones that created the email story you guys love so much. So how can you square that circle?

Tipping off the messenger from a friendly paper as opposed to one that is not friendly and is going to skewer you first is NEVER something that happens on both sides of the aisle in politics (/sarcasm).

[IceSpear]

Oh please. The New York Times is a terribly biased DNC rag. There were plenty of new revelations about Hillary! that night, including that Obama more or less gave the green light about intervening, but the folks at State and DoD were too busy dickering over whether the military should be wearing fatigues or civilian clothing.

And that part where Hillary basically LIED about the film causing the incident when she knew it was RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS that were doing it all along.

Give me a break.

The New York Times are the ones that created the email story you guys love so much. So how can you square that circle?

Tipping off the messenger from a friendly paper as opposed to one that is not friendly and is going to skewer you first is NEVER something that happens on both sides of the aisle in politics (/sarcasm).

If the media was in the tank for Hillary as you claim, they would've just ignored or given scant coverage to the email story. Instead they spammed it relentlessly for a year.

[Ljube]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Ah Lube, but we, Trump haters need only be right once. You and your Grand Wizard, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Do you really think that Trump is going to be attacking Hillary but not the other way around? Trump's failed businesses, questionable comments, lack of experience, lies, and much more will be attacked. And unlike Trump, Clinton actually knows how to run a campaign. And while Clinton is running a campaign, Trump will continue with questionable comments, flip-flops, and lies until November when Hillary Clinton is coronated by the American people.

Trump is immune to attacks. It’s a proven fact.

The mere fact that you talk about coronation proves that you are against democracy and would easily accept an Emperor of the United States of America instead of a president. Or a Russian style Empress.

[Wells]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Ah Lube, but we, Trump haters need only be right once. You and your Grand Wizard, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Do you really think that Trump is going to be attacking Hillary but not the other way around? Trump's failed businesses, questionable comments, lack of experience, lies, and much more will be attacked. And unlike Trump, Clinton actually knows how to run a campaign. And while Clinton is running a campaign, Trump will continue with questionable comments, flip-flops, and lies until November when Hillary Clinton is coronated by the American people.

Trump is immune to attacks. It’s a proven fact.

The mere fact that you talk about coronation proves that you are against democracy and would easily accept an Emperor of the United States of America instead of a president. Or a Russian style Empress.

So only you can use hyperbole? (I said coronation because you were kind enough to call her a Queen. My only problem is that the Snow Queen in her story wasn't very nice. I believe you made an innocent mistake. Hillary is fabulous.)

As for Trump's supposed "immunity," I suggest you check his poll numbers. Is he beating Hillary? Are his favorables good? Are they better than Clinton's? If the answer to all three of these is no, then maybe he isn't quite so immune.

[SWE]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Thing is, even if you are right once, it's going to look exactly the same as all the fake scandals you made up and would be just as easy for Hillary to dodge.

[Ljube]

So only you can use hyperbole? (I said coronation because you were kind enough to call her a Queen. My only problem is that the Snow Queen in her story wasn't very nice. I believe you made an innocent mistake. Hillary is fabulous.)

As for Trump's supposed "immunity," I suggest you check his poll numbers. Is he beating Hillary? Are his favorables good? Are they better than Clinton's? If the answer to all three of these is no, then maybe he isn't quite so immune.

The election is not tomorrow.

[IceSpear]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another faux scandal goes up in smoke...how many times does this need to happen before the media and Hillary haters stop taking the bait?

Ah IceSper, but we, Hillary haters need only be right once. You and your Snow Queen, on the other hand, must dodge all bullets coming your way.

Thing is, even if you are right once, it's going to look exactly the same as all the fake scandals you made up and would be just as easy for Hillary to dodge.

Indeed. Hillary would've been hurt a lot more by the email story if it wasn't for the other 20+ faux scandals that preceded it making most people tune out. She could probably commit mass murder at this point and most people currently supporting her would write it off as a right wing conspiracy. The GOP has no concept of "overplaying your hand."

[Ljube]

She could probably commit mass murder at this point and most people currently supporting her would write it off as a right wing conspiracy.

I don't doubt that bit.

[Wells]

So only you can use hyperbole? (I said coronation because you were kind enough to call her a Queen. My only problem is that the Snow Queen in her story wasn't very nice. I believe you made an innocent mistake. Hillary is fabulous.)

As for Trump's supposed "immunity," I suggest you check his poll numbers. Is he beating Hillary? Are his favorables good? Are they better than Clinton's? If the answer to all three of these is no, then maybe he isn't quite so immune.

The election is not tomorrow.

But of course, I was just questioning Trump's immunity so far. It doesn't appear to exist among anyone other than Republican primary voters. Among everyone else, he appears to be severely infected.

[Hermit For Peace]

Nothing will change, though. We'll still be hearing about Benghazi and how Hillary LIED, blah blah blah and how she has blood on her hands....

Sigh.

I do agree the loads and loads of negative crap that has been spewed about Hillary over the years does make one tend to tune out all of it. If she was that evil and that bad of a person then something over the years would have stuck and she would have been brought down.

But that hasn't happened. I wonder why? Maybe because she is a good person that some people just want to destroy, and they'll do anything they can to see that it happens.