One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Kirsten Powers: Why Can't The Obama Administration Tell The Truth About Benghazi?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 next>>
Feb 5, 2014 21:27:30   #
bmac32
 
Last night on Special Report, Democrat and Fox News Political Analyst Kirsten Powers blasted the Obama administration over the ongoing cover-up of the 2012 9/11 Benghazi terror attack.

BAIER: Kirsten, a lot of people push back and say to use a phrase, what difference does it make now? What about that thinking and the reporting on this?

KIRSTEN POWERS: Well, I think the reporting is important. And I don't understand why the administration can't just tell the truth about this, and that they keep saying things, as George just pointed out, we know aren't true. And we know aren't true from sort of unbiased sources. I mean the Senate intelligence report is not Fox News. He wants to blame Fox News for everything. It's not Fox News.


The clip above gets cut off, but Powers went on to mention Bill O'Reilly's interview with the President when he asked Obama about the attack. In the interview Obama implied the only reason why he's still being hammered about what happened in Benghazi is because of Fox News when in reality, it's because he's refused to answer questions about what happened.

"You have reasonable people thinking that this is not what happened. I also thought it was interesting that he's talking about, why couldn't he just answer Bill's question? You know, Bill kept asking him, what were you told? And he never really would answer the question, and then he turns around and says, well, we were just focused on getting people safe," Powers continued. "Well, of course you were. But weren't you also a little curious if it was a terrorist attack? And so none of this really adds up. It's so frustrating every time we have to hear a rhetorical cotton candy, perfect way to describe it."

Last month the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan report showing Benghazi could have been prevented. The report also destroyed the administration's narrative that a YouTube video was the reason for the attack.

The report concluded that under former Secretary of State Clinton’s watch, the department failed to increase security in Benghazi despite intelligence reports that the situation there was deteriorating and warnings ahead of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that U.S. facilities were at risk.

It also faulted the Obama administration and the intelligence community for being slow to dispel false reports that the attack that killed Stevens and three other Americans stemmed from a peaceful protest gone awry.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/02/05/kirsten-powers-why-cant-the-obama-administration-tell-the-truth-about-benghazi-n1790089?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

| Reply
Feb 5, 2014 22:44:28   #
Unclet
 
bmac32 wrote:
Last night on Special Report, Democrat and Fox News Political Analyst Kirsten Powers blasted the Obama administration over the ongoing cover-up of the 2012 9/11 Benghazi terror attack.

BAIER: Kirsten, a lot of people push back and say to use a phrase, what difference does it make now? What about that thinking and the reporting on this?

KIRSTEN POWERS: Well, I think the reporting is important. And I don't understand why the administration can't just tell the truth about this, and that they keep saying things, as George just pointed out, we know aren't true. And we know aren't true from sort of unbiased sources. I mean the Senate intelligence report is not Fox News. He wants to blame Fox News for everything. It's not Fox News.


The clip above gets cut off, but Powers went on to mention Bill O'Reilly's interview with the President when he asked Obama about the attack. In the interview Obama implied the only reason why he's still being hammered about what happened in Benghazi is because of Fox News when in reality, it's because he's refused to answer questions about what happened.

"You have reasonable people thinking that this is not what happened. I also thought it was interesting that he's talking about, why couldn't he just answer Bill's question? You know, Bill kept asking him, what were you told? And he never really would answer the question, and then he turns around and says, well, we were just focused on getting people safe," Powers continued. "Well, of course you were. But weren't you also a little curious if it was a terrorist attack? And so none of this really adds up. It's so frustrating every time we have to hear a rhetorical cotton candy, perfect way to describe it."

Last month the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan report showing Benghazi could have been prevented. The report also destroyed the administration's narrative that a YouTube video was the reason for the attack.

The report concluded that under former Secretary of State Clinton’s watch, the department failed to increase security in Benghazi despite intelligence reports that the situation there was deteriorating and warnings ahead of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that U.S. facilities were at risk.

It also faulted the Obama administration and the intelligence community for being slow to dispel false reports that the attack that killed Stevens and three other Americans stemmed from a peaceful protest gone awry.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/02/05/kirsten-powers-why-cant-the-obama-administration-tell-the-truth-about-benghazi-n1790089?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm
Last night on Special Report, Democrat and Fox New... (show quote)


That is why he stammers so badly - the truth is trying to form on his lips, but his heart just ain't in it.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 01:58:44   #
BigMike (a regular here)
 
Unclet wrote:
That is why he stammers so badly - the truth is trying to form on his lips, but his heart just ain't in it.


Either that or he's trying to think of his next lie while telling one.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 08:13:32   #
Seromer
 
Why did repubs cut funding for foreign diplomats?

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 09:04:26   #
bmac32
 
No cut by republicans, cut was discretionary which means the White House and staff pick where what money goes where. It's like a home budget, you just got demoted at work so you decide those payments on the new car or do you eat?



Seromer wrote:
Why did repubs cut funding for foreign diplomats?

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 09:49:28   #
Seromer
 
Yes the house repubs voted to cut 300 million from foreign security. Go to ask.com

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 10:04:36   #
Kevyn (a regular here)
 
Seromer wrote:
Yes the house repubs voted to cut 300 million from foreign security. Go to ask.com


We need a list of all of those members of congress who cut the State Departments security budget. They have American blood on their hands and should be held accountable! All Fox news wants to do is sweep this under the table.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 10:46:44   #
Ricko
 
Kevyn wrote:
We need a list of all of those members of congress who cut the State Departments security budget. They have American blood on their hands and should be held accountable! All Fox news wants to do is sweep this under the table.


Kevyn-budgets are cut all the time. What we really need to find out is exactly what the Ambassador requested and what he was told in response by the State Department. If there is correspondence that indicates that the State Department told the ambassador that there was no funding for additional security that would go a long ways in explaining why security was lacking. If the requests were merely tabled without any action that is another story altogether. The key to Benghazi which separates it from other terrorist attacks is that is has been deemed to have been preventable. All the families of the four dead Americans want is closure . Tell them and the American people what was done and what was not done and why. To keep stonewalling merely fuels the flames. The president was quite evasive during his interview with Bill O'reilly when asked what he was told. Indications are that he was briefed by then Secretary of Defense Panetta so it would seem logical that the SEC of Def may have suggested holding off. If not him, who ? Why is it so difficult to merely tell the truth ? The longer they hide the facts the longer this will drag on. Good Luck America !!!

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 10:51:44   #
Grampy
 
Seromer wrote:
Why did repubs cut funding for foreign diplomats?


Every Year there is an automatic budget increase based on budget control act when Washington says budget cuts it reduces the amount of the increase which is still higher than previous year budget.

There was over 1 Billion dollars available to state dept to spend at time of bengazi .... unfortunately the corruption/pork abounds as there was funds spent on buildings/construction that were never used

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 10:57:22   #
Grampy
 
bmac32 wrote:
Last night on Special Report, Democrat and Fox News Political Analyst Kirsten Powers blasted the Obama administration over the ongoing cover-up of the 2012 9/11 Benghazi terror attack.

BAIER: Kirsten, a lot of people push back and say to use a phrase, what difference does it make now? What about that thinking and the reporting on this?

KIRSTEN POWERS: Well, I think the reporting is important. And I don't understand why the administration can't just tell the truth about this, and that they keep saying things, as George just pointed out, we know aren't true. And we know aren't true from sort of unbiased sources. I mean the Senate intelligence report is not Fox News. He wants to blame Fox News for everything. It's not Fox News.


The clip above gets cut off, but Powers went on to mention Bill O'Reilly's interview with the President when he asked Obama about the attack. In the interview Obama implied the only reason why he's still being hammered about what happened in Benghazi is because of Fox News when in reality, it's because he's refused to answer questions about what happened.

"You have reasonable people thinking that this is not what happened. I also thought it was interesting that he's talking about, why couldn't he just answer Bill's question? You know, Bill kept asking him, what were you told? And he never really would answer the question, and then he turns around and says, well, we were just focused on getting people safe," Powers continued. "Well, of course you were. But weren't you also a little curious if it was a terrorist attack? And so none of this really adds up. It's so frustrating every time we have to hear a rhetorical cotton candy, perfect way to describe it."

Last month the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan report showing Benghazi could have been prevented. The report also destroyed the administration's narrative that a YouTube video was the reason for the attack.

The report concluded that under former Secretary of State Clinton’s watch, the department failed to increase security in Benghazi despite intelligence reports that the situation there was deteriorating and warnings ahead of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that U.S. facilities were at risk.

It also faulted the Obama administration and the intelligence community for being slow to dispel false reports that the attack that killed Stevens and three other Americans stemmed from a peaceful protest gone awry.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/02/05/kirsten-powers-why-cant-the-obama-administration-tell-the-truth-about-benghazi-n1790089?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm
Last night on Special Report, Democrat and Fox New... (show quote)


This is a compelling story of leadership and of loyalty to military comrades.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/QvRcP4go-eg?feature=player_embedded

Sadly, this makes the U.S.'s lack of action at Benghazi look
even more pathetic. Apply what is said here to what should
have happened in Benghazi and to what would have happened under any other president.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 12:54:36   #
Seromer
 
The ambassador said he didn't want the security detail because he wanted to talk to the people without them.

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 15:15:03   #
Grampy
 
Seromer wrote:
The ambassador said he didn't want the security detail because he wanted to talk to the people without them.


There are multiple documented requests for security by the Ambassador testimonies at hearings/ emails etc. verify this fact Do you think any ambassador has their security present during private meetings no disrespect but your response does not make sense

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 17:13:18   #
PoppaGringo
 
Kevyn wrote:
We need a list of all of those members of congress who cut the State Departments security budget. They have American blood on their hands and should be held accountable! All Fox news wants to do is sweep this under the table.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 17:14:40   #
PoppaGringo
 
Seromer wrote:
The ambassador said he didn't want the security detail because he wanted to talk to the people without them.


Who's lie are you repeating, or did you make it up on your own?

| Reply
Feb 6, 2014 21:10:52   #
buddy42
 
Grampy wrote:
This is a compelling story of leadership and of loyalty to military comrades.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/QvRcP4go-eg?feature=player_embedded

Sadly, this makes the U.S.'s lack of action at Benghazi look
even more pathetic. Apply what is said here to what should
have happened in Benghazi and to what would have happened under any other president.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

| Reply
Page: 1 2 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.