Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims - Page 3 - TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
FT
LSU Fan
Aston Villa Supporter
Member since Oct 2003
11744 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


Nah. It's not.

Besides, I think the Democrats that walked out committed a horrendous and totally uncaring act.

So did the Republicans in the past. The point of my posts here is the hypocrisy of the board.






Back to top
ChineseBandit58
LSU Fan
west of the pines
Member since Aug 2005
9533 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


quote:

The point of my posts here is the hypocrisy of the board.

There is a bit of hypocrisy in every human endeavor. For instance, your hypocrisy could be pointed out if you did not raise similar attacks on Dems who said anything about past GOP actions.

But that would be unproductive in a message board situation.

You are trying way too hard here to make a hypocrisy case attacking the board unless you can actually point out a similar situation, presumably involving conservative legislators acting callously towards a victim of a government fiasco.

Sandy Hook is not at all similar. Obama used the parent of children as campaign fodder, trying to build up an emotional reaction to get gun control legislation passed or to at least defeat 2nd amendment advocates in congress.

Nothing about Sandy Hook pointed to governmental misconduct. Nothing about Sandy Hook pointed to a coverup that prevented the parents from obtaining all the information they desired in relation to the deaths of their children. Nothing about Sandy Hook raised the hackles of conservatives except the DEM response to the tragedy - in the sense of 'never let a tragedy go to waste.'

Benghazi on the other hand is - from the conservative point of view - an instance where governmental incompetence or fecklessness led to the murder of four government officials and then the government flat out lied about the situation - and continues to do so - for a full year. The government is protecting some incompetent fool who was in the decision chain and they don't give a shite about what the parent's of these men deserve.

Unless you can point out a conservative coverup of such an instance, your cries of 'hypocrisy' make you out to be a hypocritical a-hole.






Back to top
SquirrelyBama
Alabama Fan
Member since Nov 2011
1720 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


Shameful if they did this on purpose, but bad behavior coming from Washington doesn't shocks me anymore. Most from both these parties could care less about the regular joe. But I must say, I've lost what respect I had left for Dems. With all the stuff they've pulled lately.





Back to top
Decatur
New Orleans Saints Fan
Member since Mar 2007
17547 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


How many Republicans left?





Back to top
moneyg
LSU Fan
Member since Jun 2006
18772 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


quote:

Clever. Can you explain the difference in these two cases, instead of bringing up comments from a third party I've never defended?



Seriously?






Back to top
NHTIGER
LSU Fan
Central New Hampshire
Member since Nov 2003
9086 posts
 Online 

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


quote:

Shameful the way the right is using these two as puppets.



And the Obama administration has used the other two families as puppets for its point of view.

The four families have been split 2-2 from the very beginning. I could have told you 10 months ago who would have shown up for this hearing and would not.

It's always been Stevens-Doherty on one side and Smith-Woods on the other side.

That's what happens when you have an administration that stresses polarization rather than unification.






Back to top
CajunAngele
LSU Fan
Member since Oct 2012
11168 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


quote:

“The ARB was not fully independent,” said Chairman Issa on releasing the report. “The panel did not exhaustively examine failures and it has led to an unacceptable lack of accountability. While Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen have honorably served their country, the families of victims and the American people continue to wait for more conclusive answers about how our government left our own personnel so vulnerable and alone the night of the attack.”

Key Findings:

The ARB was not comprehensive: Obama Administration officials held out the ARB Report as the product of a full and complete investigation. Even the ARB co-chairs, however, acknowledged that the report was limited by the Board’s statutory mandate. [16-18]

The ARB did not conduct thorough interviews: One of the two bureaus the ARB criticized was the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA). Elizabeth Dibble, NEA’s second-in-command, appeared before the ARB only once – in a 90-minute group interview. The Committee obtained documents that showed Dibble was involved in numerous discussions about the U.S. presence in Benghazi and security resources deployed in Libya. It is unclear that a 90-minute group interview was sufficient for the ARB to determine the extent of her role. [20]

The State Department obstructed the congressional investigation: The State Department’s refusal to turn over ARB documents has made an independent evaluation of the ARB’s review difficult. The ARB did not record or transcribe the interviews it conducted. The State Department is withholding interview summaries created by ARB staff. [21-22]

The ARB may have been affected by conflicts of interest: The independence of the ARB is tainted by actual and perceived conflicts of interest. Witnesses testified that Senior State Department officials who were involved in discussions about Benghazi security were responsible for the process of selecting Board members and staff. The ARB staff consisted of State Department employees who subsequently returned to their posts. Witnesses also testified that in many instances, Board members and staff had prior connections to the officials they evaluated. [23-29]

The ARB downplayed the decision to run the Benghazi facility as a temporary mission: The ARB failed to adequately examine or explain the State Department’s decision to run the Benghazi mission on a temporary basis. None of the four individuals the ARB singled out for “accountability” made this decision. [30-44] Witnesses testified that this decision was largely responsible for the inadequate security posture at the Benghazi mission.

Decisions at more senior State Department levels influenced diplomatic security actions: Diplomatic Security Bureau officials testified that the decision by Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy to approve a continued U.S. presence that exempted the mission site from security requirements restricted their ability to assign security agents. Officials testified that because Benghazi was not designated as a permanent mission, they had to rely mainly on temporary assignments to address security needs instead of assigning dedicated agents through the normal process. [34] Diplomatic Security officials testified that they did raise concerns about the problems this process created to more senior State Department officials in the months prior to the attack. [35]

Secretary Clinton also wanted to extend the mission in Benghazi. Several NEA officials recalled the Secretary’s desire to continue operating the Benghazi mission in September 2011, when the Department was discussing what to do with the Benghazi special mission compound in the wake of the reopening of the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli. [66-67]

Chairman Issa also announced that today, consistent with committee rules, the Committee will post the full transcripts of the interviews with ARB co-chairs Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Michael Mullen.

LINK

Full Report Here






Back to top
Decatur
New Orleans Saints Fan
Member since Mar 2007
17547 posts

re: Democrats Leave Benghazi Hearing Before Testimony From Families of Victims


quote:

It's always been Stevens-Doherty on one side and Smith-Woods on the other side.

That's what happens when you have an administration that stresses polarization rather than unification.


so wait, are saying it's the Admin that's been politicizing this?






Back to top


Back to top




//