HILLARY CLINTON CULABLE FOR BENGHAZI FROM BEGINNING TO END.........

[st_mike]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

And exactly what is wrong with holding public officials responsible for their actions?

Absolutely nothing as long as you do it for all of them instead of only the ones you don't like.

I am all for firing any politician who has lied. It would make parking in DC a heck of a lot easier.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by st_mike

Absolutely nothing as long as you do it for all of them instead of only the ones you don't like.

I am all for firing any politician who has lied. It would make parking in DC a heck of a lot easier.

Please cite where Susan Rice was fired for the fiasco in Benghazi or the lies afterwards!?! So far, no one at any level has been held accountable! Whereas Susan Rice not only still has a government job, she goes home every night to be with her family. Meanwhile, Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods are never again going home to see family.

[st_mike]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Please cite where Susan Rice was fired for the fiasco in Benghazi or the lies afterwards!?! So far, no one at any level has been held accountable! Whereas Susan Rice not only still has a government job, she goes home every night to be with her family. Meanwhile, Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods are never again going home to see family.

Again what is the logic of holding Susan Rice in any way accountable for what happened to those men? She was/is the US Ambassador to the UN, exactly what do you think she could have done had she known about the incident as it was happening?

Did she lie to the American people (at least the ones who watch Sunday morning political shows) yes. Does that in any way make her responsible what what happened? No.

Senator McCain went on national television and repeatedly told the American people that there were WMD's in Iraq and we had to go stop Saddam Hussein because he/them were a threat to national security. This was of course a lie but just like with Susan Rice what would be the point of holding him accountable for that? The decision was made above his pay grade and all he did was speak the party line.

But if that is the standard that Congress and the American people want to set I am all for it. As long as it is applied equally and across the board.

Ethics and morals are not just the thing you get to talk about other people not having. They are the thing you are required to have as well.

[Yssup Rider]

IBSyndrome is weeping for four but only as a bully pulpit for his continued attacks on POTUS and the rest of America.

What a hypocritical pice of shit!

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by st_mike

Again what is the logic of holding Susan Rice in any way accountable for what happened to those men? She was/is the US Ambassador to the UN, exactly what do you think she could have done had she known about the incident as it was happening?

Did she lie to the American people (at least the ones who watch Sunday morning political shows) yes. Does that in any way make her responsible what what happened? No.

Senator McCain went on national television and repeatedly told the American people that there were WMD's in Iraq and we had to go stop Saddam Hussein because he/them were a threat to national security. This was of course a lie but just like with Susan Rice what would be the point of holding him accountable for that? The decision was made above his pay grade and all he did was speak the party line.

But if that is the standard that Congress and the American people want to set I am all for it. As long as it is applied equally and across the board.

Ethics and morals are not just the thing you get to talk about other people not having. They are the thing you are required to have as well.

Ozombie ALERT! ^^^^.....

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by st_mike

Again what is the logic of holding Susan Rice in any way accountable for what happened to those men? She was/is the US Ambassador to the UN, exactly what do you think she could have done had she known about the incident as it was happening?

Did she lie to the American people (at least the ones who watch Sunday morning political shows) yes. Does that in any way make her responsible what what happened? No.

Senator McCain went on national television and repeatedly told the American people that there were WMD's in Iraq and we had to go stop Saddam Hussein because he/them were a threat to national security. This was of course a lie but just like with Susan Rice what would be the point of holding him accountable for that? The decision was made above his pay grade and all he did was speak the party line.

But if that is the standard that Congress and the American people want to set I am all for it. As long as it is applied equally and across the board.

Ethics and morals are not just the thing you get to talk about other people not having. They are the thing you are required to have as well.

You get to talk about other people's ethics and morals when those people are public employees. Public employee Susan Rice knowingly lied, and that lie cost her a promotion.

ABC's White House correspondent Jonathan Karl in yesterday's WH briefing with Jay Carney pointedly illustrated that the WH and the State Department politicized Benghazi when they consciously focused on creating a news brief that would deflect blame and mislead Congress as to what happened in Benghazi.

Regarding your other fallacious comments, Saddam Hussein's generals and soldiers believed Saddam had WMD. The governments of every country in that region of the world believed Saddam had WMD. Not a single U.N. inspector went on record and stated emphatically that s/he was 100% absolutely positive Saddam didn't have WMD.

Furthermore, Saddam Hussein was in violation of multiple UN Sanctions, and the WMD Commission and the Butler report both indicate that the intelligence community was correct in suggesting that Saddam was probably seeking to re-arm his military forces with WMD. That conclusion is, in part, based on these known facts: 1) Saddam had had WMD in the past. 2) Saddam had strong incentives to reconstitute his arsenal. 3) He had the money to refinance such a reconstitution. 4) He had trained, competent technicians who could reconstitute his stockpile of WMDs. 5) He had the necessary materiel on hand to proceed with such a reconstitution. 6) He repeatedly stalled and deceived the inspectors leading intelligence specialists to surmise he was re-arming with WMD.

The Commission also learned that, on the eve of war, the Intelligence Community failed to convey important information to policymakers. After the October 2002 NIE was published, but before Secretary of State Powell made his address about Iraq’s WMD programs to the United Nations, serious doubts became known within the Intelligence Community about Curveball, the aforementioned human intelligence source whose reporting was so critical to the Intelligence Community’s pre-war biological warfare assessments. These doubts never found their way to Secretary Powell, who was at that time attempting to strip questionable information from his speech. These are errors—serious errors. But these errors stem from poor tradecraft and poor management. The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community’s pre-war assessments of Iraq’s weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments.

SOURCE:http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/wmd_chapter1.pdf

Hence, it is your claim that someone lied about WMD in the run-up to the war in Iraq that is bogus.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

IBSyndrome is weeping for four but only as a bully pulpit for his continued attacks on POTUS and the rest of America.

What a hypocritical pice of shit!

You're a dumb golem fuck, Assup the jackass, and your non-substantive posts serve as proof that you lack the mental prowess to engage in intellectual pursuits -- as does your egoistic presumption that you in any way represent or speak for "the rest of America".

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by st_mike

So your standard is we should fire any politician who has gone on national television and lied? Yes.

Out of curiosity who exactly do you think will be left in Washington DC if we do this? Hopefully, no one.

And BTW do we fire the Press Secretaries for not telling the "whole truth" everyday? No, but we should.

And do we then fire their bosses for letting the "Press Secretaries" do this? No, but we should.

Blaming Susan Rice for this is just stupid. Did she know the whole story... perhaps, perhaps not, either way she was given an assignment and she carried it out. As she is expected to do. So she "vas yust followink orders." Hmmm . . . Where has that been an excuse to do the wrong thing?

I am not saying we couldn't use a lot more honesty out of our politicians I am saying I have a hard time listening to people say someone should be fired or held accountable for that when they themselves are guilty of it at least once a day. In theory, our leaders work for us. If my employee lies to me, they are fired. These people should all be fired.

The standard is not impossible but I am not buying the whole "their craps stinks but mine smells like roses" argument from any politician. They are Republicans and Democrats. They stink.

So we just have to expect our government to lie to us, and get used to it. And if we complain, we should expect to be told to stfu, and then do it.

Yeah, you'll fit in well with the libtards and Obamatons here. Welcome to our happy little band of merry men.

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Please cite where Susan Rice was fired for the fiasco in Benghazi or the lies afterwards!?! So far, no one at any level has been held accountable! Whereas Susan Rice not only still has a government job, she goes home every night to be with her family. Meanwhile, Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods are never again going home to see family.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...bama-behind-it



They play this game very well. Hillary took full responsibility for the entire fiasco, knowing quite well that the American Public would forget soon enough, because she is first, and foremost, Mrs. Bill Clinton.

This absolves everybody else.

End of story.

Keep in mind, Janet Reno took "full responsibility" for the Waco Fiasco. There were no political ramifications what so ever.

[Yssup Rider]

Actually, "the rest of America" is as sick and tired of the endless crying as I am.

You're a white elephant, Corpy, destined to wind up as a Muppet in the balcony!

That is, if you learn to quit playing with your own poop!

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by st_mike

Again what is the logic of holding Susan Rice in any way accountable for what happened to those men? She was/is the US Ambassador to the UN, exactly what do you think she could have done had she known about the incident as it was happening?

Did she lie to the American people (at least the ones who watch Sunday morning political shows) yes. Does that in any way make her responsible what what happened? No.

Senator McCain went on national television and repeatedly told the American people that there were WMD's in Iraq and we had to go stop Saddam Hussein because he/them were a threat to national security. This was of course a lie but just like with Susan Rice what would be the point of holding him accountable for that? The decision was made above his pay grade and all he did was speak the party line.

But if that is the standard that Congress and the American people want to set I am all for it. As long as it is applied equally and across the board.

Ethics and morals are not just the thing you get to talk about other people not having. They are the thing you are required to have as well.

You fucked up.

Your post has several good points and wants all political parties treated the same. The thoughts are clear and reasonable and should be easily understood by all.

But judging by flyingfuckwad's response, you spelling it out for a fifth grader went over his head.

Next time shoot for a second grader.

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Ozombie ALERT! ^^^^.....

Douche-bag alert is already permamently on for flyingfuckrollingdonut and his posse.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You get to talk about other people's ethics and morals when those people are public employees. Public employee Susan Rice knowingly lied, and that lie cost her a promotion.

ABC's White House correspondent Jonathan Karl in yesterday's WH briefing with Jay Carney pointedly illustrated that the WH and the State Department politicized Benghazi when they consciously focused on creating a news brief that would deflect blame and mislead Congress as to what happened in Benghazi.

Regarding your other fallacious comments, Saddam Hussein's generals and soldiers believed Saddam had WMD. The governments of every country in that region of the world believed Saddam had WMD. Not a single U.N. inspector went on record and stated emphatically that s/he was 100% absolutely positive Saddam didn't have WMD.

Furthermore, Saddam Hussein was in violation of multiple UN Sanctions, and the WMD Commission and the Butler report both indicate that the intelligence community was correct in suggesting that Saddam was probably seeking to re-arm his military forces with WMD. That conclusion is, in part, based on these known facts: 1) Saddam had had WMD in the past. 2) Saddam had strong incentives to reconstitute his arsenal. 3) He had the money to refinance such a reconstitution. 4) He had trained, competent technicians who could reconstitute his stockpile of WMDs. 5) He had the necessary materiel on hand to proceed with such a reconstitution. 6) He repeatedly stalled and deceived the inspectors leading intelligence specialists to surmise he was re-arming with WMD.

The Commission also learned that, on the eve of war, the Intelligence Community failed to convey important information to policymakers. After the October 2002 NIE was published, but before Secretary of State Powell made his address about Iraq’s WMD programs to the United Nations, serious doubts became known within the Intelligence Community about Curveball, the aforementioned human intelligence source whose reporting was so critical to the Intelligence Community’s pre-war biological warfare assessments. These doubts never found their way to Secretary Powell, who was at that time attempting to strip questionable information from his speech. These are errors—serious errors. But these errors stem from poor tradecraft and poor management. The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community’s pre-war assessments of Iraq’s weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments.

SOURCE:http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/wmd_chapter1.pdf

Hence, it is your claim that someone lied about WMD in the run-up to the war in Iraq that is bogus.

I noticed you made no mention of what is basically the main point of his post. The fact that both parties should be held accountable in the same ways.
Did you miss that point or are you ignoring it?
Moot point. You failed to mention or acknowledge it and focused on his example.

In "State of Denial", a good case is made for why your self-rationalization of the events before, during and after the invasion of Iraq is wrong.
So rather than rehash that, let's rehash Iran/Contras. The shining moment of the Reagan Presidency. Multiple criminal convictions and high level resignations.

By using the standards you want the Obama administration held to, Reagan should have been the second Nixon, resigning and needing a pardon from his former vice president.

It's true no matter what you say or whether you will admit it.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by st_mike

Absolutely nothing as long as you do it for all of them instead of only the ones you don't like.

I am all for firing any politician who has lied. It would make parking in DC a heck of a lot easier.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

I noticed you made no mention of what is basically the main point of his post. The fact that both parties should be held accountable in the same ways.

The Idiototrons who now want to hold Obama & Clinton accountable for anything and everything seem to forget that they conveniently looked the other way during the 20 Reagan and Bush years .

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by st_mike

Absolutely nothing as long as you do it for all of them instead of only the ones you don't like.

I am all for firing any politician who has lied. It would make parking in DC a heck of a lot easier.

You will not get anywhere with Ida Bell and Hanoi Jane using logic. you need to post cartoons it is on their level of comprehension...

[JCM800]

Originally Posted by st_mike

I am all for firing any politician who has lied

who would be left then?

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Ozombie ALERT! ^^^^.....

Idiot ALERT!^^^^.....