cnn screws up again..
Oct 30, 2015 17:52:21 #
picturesofdogs wrote:
List one tough policy based question asked of the dems. List the number of questions asked of Hillary about Benghazi security requests.
Your bias is showing.
Your bias is showing.
She did not handle security requests .... read !3 Hours in Benghazi ...it was written by someone who was there ... not Sean Hannity ...
Oct 30, 2015 17:55:08 #
bull drink water wrote:
CNBC provided the venue, moderators, questions, etc. If CNN did rebroadcast it live, that was a convenience for those who get CNN free. When the RNC took out their ire today, it was against NBC, the parent company of CNBC.since CNBC and CNN broadcasted the debate at the same time,who is blameless ???
when all's said and done, I can't get past the fact that I had to pay to view it.
when all's said and done, I can't get past the fact that I had to pay to view it.
Did you have to pay to view either of the other two debates? Each of them was also originated by a source which is cable-only in my area (Fox News and CNN)
Oct 30, 2015 18:01:15 #
DEBJENROB wrote:
She did not handle security requests .... read !3 Hours in Benghazi ...it was written by someone who was there ... not Sean Hannity ...
Um, wrong again. The office of secretary of state is responsible for approving, obtaining security for all embassies. Sec state has final authority. I did read the book. Maybe you should re-read it.
That's why the ambassador was sending emails to state begging for more security.
Oct 30, 2015 18:11:24 #
DEBJENROB wrote:
She did not handle security requests .... read !3 Hours in Benghazi ...it was written by someone who was there ... not Sean Hannity ...
In one sense you are right. SHE definitely in no way handled the request for more security; now did she?
Oct 30, 2015 18:13:03 #
SHUTERED wrote:
In one sense you are right. SHE definitely in no way handled the request for more security; now did she?
:thumbup:
Oct 30, 2015 18:37:15 #
Apparently, during Hillary's time at state there Were over 600 requests to increase security in Benghazi.
Oct 30, 2015 19:48:47 #
bull drink water wrote:
on directv it's CNN [cable news network] .
On our DirecTV it was on CNBC. The 3rd republican debate that is. The Democratic debate was on DirecTV - CNN
Oct 30, 2015 20:08:45 #
picturesofdogs wrote:
Um, wrong again. The office of secretary of state is responsible for approving, obtaining security for all embassies. Sec state has final authority. I did read the book. Maybe you should re-read it.
That's why the ambassador was sending emails to state begging for more security.
That's why the ambassador was sending emails to state begging for more security.
Re read the book .... he was not sending e-mails directly to her ... in fact if you watched the hearings ... her did not have her direct e-mail address ...
Oct 30, 2015 20:10:14 #
picturesofdogs wrote:
Um, wrong again. The office of secretary of state is responsible for approving, obtaining security for all embassies. Sec state has final authority. I did read the book. Maybe you should re-read it.
That's why the ambassador was sending emails to state begging for more security.
That's why the ambassador was sending emails to state begging for more security.
Yes ... including the staff that cleans the restrooms .... so no soap ... her fault ... get real ..
Oct 30, 2015 20:20:41 #
DEBJENROB wrote:
Yes ... including the staff that cleans the restrooms .... so no soap ... her fault ... get real ..
Actually the budget office for state. She is in charge of approving security. See post about 600 emails. The people in Tripoly that night were on the phone to washington, but no one knows who in washington. That fact was in the book.
Funny how she was such friends with the dead guy and he was so worried about security, but she never took his calls.
Emails released today prove she lied about her level of involvement with embassy details.
Read the book again, especially the first couple of chapters that lead up to that night. Get someone to help you with the big words. Just buying a book and reading parts of a couple chapters isn't really reading it.
Oct 30, 2015 20:29:35 #
picturesofdogs wrote:
Actually the budget office for state. She is in ch... (show quote)
if you read the book then you know that Stevens had no business being in Bengazi ... in fact the State Department did not know he was going .... re-read and don't cherry pick only the paragraphs , when taken out of context, support you position ....
Oct 30, 2015 20:44:35 #
DEBJENROB wrote:
if you read the book then you know that Stevens had no business being in Bengazi ... in fact the State Department did not know he was going .... re-read and don't cherry pick only the paragraphs , when taken out of context, support you position ....
The whole book supports my position. They were running a covert arms operation out of Benghazi. He was advised not to go because security was so bad, because Hillary had even cut the money for security. Recent email released has her laughing about the british security firm they were using.
And if you read the book, they talk about concerns with security they were using, their lack of trust, AND ALL THE REQUESTS FOR EITHER SECURITY TEAMS OR MONEY TO HIRE MORE ON THEIR OWN. Also that when they first wanted to go from Tripoly they were told to stand down.
Really starting to sound like you didn't read it.
She had final state authority on security, this guy she was so fond of could never get her to call him or reach her when he called. The last three weeks they were even ignoring emails from the embassy to washington.
Do YOUR homework. At the very least she's incompetent. At worst a liar and crook.
Oct 30, 2015 21:02:17 #
picturesofdogs wrote:
The whole book supports my position. They were run... (show quote)
now I know you either did not understand what you read or you selectively remember parts of the book that support your pre-conceived opinions .... it was the CIA station cheif that told the private security contractors who worked for the State Department to stand down .... The CIA station chief worked independent of State ..... as the book suggests .... the diplomatic compound was never in a position to provide security for the Ambassador given the fluidity of the intelligence ... and the uncertainty of local loyalties ... also ... why would you suggest that I do not understand complex sentence structures .... but ...its ok if that results in a boost to your self esteem ... I don't have a self image problem ...
Oct 30, 2015 21:21:02 #
DEBJENROB wrote:
now I know you either did not understand what you ... (show quote)
And he was on the phone to washington. The cia would have had to get approval from state or the white house. The station chief told them to wait because that is what someone was telling his boss. Hillary or Obama, take your pick. The men in tripoly were volunteering to go.
You seem to be ignoring the parts of the book where they talk about requests for more security that were refused or just ignored by Washington. Something that has been proven by emails released since that night.
Ignore that part all you want. Emails released show there were 600 requests for more security. If you believe Hillary, she saw almost none of them, but almost all would have ended up on her desk if she was doing her job.
People died, she lied. Incompetent or indifferent doesn't matter.
The fact you're willing to defend and support her after this and everything else she's done tells me all I need to know.
Good evening and have a safe Halloween.
Oct 30, 2015 22:54:28 #
DEBJENROB,It is obvious that you support Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's lying, scheming wife.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.