Maybe it could be called a Narrative of Dismissal.
Is this supposed to be worse than Bush’s dismissal of the facts leading up to the invasion of Iraq? Or the Bush administration’s dismissal of basic human rights laws in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and numerous CIA black sites? Is there a statute of limitation on mass murder and torture? More Americans died in Iraq over Bush’s lies than died in Benghazi over Obama’s lies.
If we prosecute one, we have to prosecute the other.
So, in other words, according to you, you feel that Obama is as bad as Bush. What course of action were you recommending to be taken against the administration in 2006?
The Bush Administration is in the past. Why do you want to divert a thread about the current administration and its current actions off-topic, JT78? If you want to discuss the iniquities of the Bush Administration, start a new thread on that topic rather than attempting threadjackery.
Honestly…I think Benghazi is simply looking too partisan, it’s going to be something Democrats and Republicans argue about for a very long time but it’s no Watergate.
IRS thing probably isn’t a Watergate type event either but it is less partisan, both sides more or less think what the IRS did to the Tea Party groups was negligence at best and malicious at worst…it was in many ways worse than a crime; it was a blunder.
Yeah, people didn’t die in Watergate.
Gee, four Americans, including the Ambassador get killed by terrorists, in part because the State Department ignored pleas for help and couldn’t see its way clear to shift security resources from safer countries to Libya, but it’s just partisanship?
The Obama Administration blamed a YouTube video for the incident for two weeks, despite knowing that claim was false from the beginning of the attack, but it’s just partisanship?
The Obama Administration called the incident a protest that got out of control for two weeks, despite knowing that claim was false from the beginning of the attack, but it’s just partisanship?
The Obama Administration knew from beginning of the attack that it was terrorists but claimed otherwise for those two weeks, but it’s just partisanship?
The Obama Administration has stonewalled access to survivors and other relevant people and intimidated them into silence, for months, but it’s just partisanship?
Calling it partisanship is just absurd. It was incompetence, indecisiveness, abandonment, and now is a cover-up.
Let’s face it, the entire reign of BO has been nothing but lies, accusations thrown at conservatives and the republicans, and a clear marxist, anti-American agenda. He is a disgrace and should be tried for high treason. Anything less than that is complicity.
Your attempt at downplaying the avoidable deaths of 4 Americans on American soil is very offensive. The deaths were not avoided by members of 0bama’s admin due to their incompetence and/or willingness to let them die.
All presidents have made bad decisions that have led to the deaths of people not all have been as public, incompetent and humiliating as Benghazi; also most other presidents have stepped up and taken responsibility for their failures. Watergate was on a whole different level in the respect that a president premeditated, helped commit and illegally covered up a crime. What Obama has done is irresponsible, heinous, and downright unethical but I dont think has has crossed the legal line.
How could the deaths have been avoided? 150 terrorists attacked the Benghazi compound. I question if you think the Iranian hostage crisis was also avoidable.
Could there have been extra security? Sure, and the State Department F-ed up there. But a lack of adequate security does not indicate a “willingness to let them die.”
No, using the deaths of 4 Americans to gain a political advantage is offensive. There could be meaningful investigation but everyone is too obsessed by political maneuvering.
Obama had plenty of information in plenty of time to save the Ambassador, He chose not to.
Obama had absolutely no reason to suspect a stupid Youtube video was the cause of this attack, His embrace of this invented excuse is proof that He knew His judgment was the cause of these deaths and everything that followed was intended to cover up this truth.
Watergate was a bunch of nothing, campaigns have been spying on their opponents and trying to glean inside dope before debates for as long as campaigns have been happening. The attempt to cover up the Watergate break-in was what doomed Nixon, the break-in itself a petty event. Obama has both the cover up and the event itself to answer for and in this case the “event” was the tragic public sodomizing and killing of a U.S. Ambassador and 3 other Americans.
Comparing Watergate to Benghazi is like comparing the downloading of an illegal mp3 with a rapist murderer.
Obama would have to try very hard to be as bad as Bush. The course of action against the Bush administration in 2006 should be the same course of action as it is now. Every member of the Bush administration should be arrested and imprisoned for crimes against humanity, their war profits should be stripped from their families and be paid as restitution to their victims, and their names should be slandered in our history books forever as greedy monsters who lied to the American people and the United Nations about the reason to invade Iraq, and tortured and murdered POWs and civilians in an illegal, unjustified invasion of Iraq. There were no WMD to pose any kind of threat to America, Hussein was not involved in 9/11, and Iraq did not have ties to al-Qaeda. Every official reason given for the invasion/occupation was a lie and they have all admitted this. George Tenet, Colin Powell, etc. have all confessed that they knew the information presented at the UN was false, so there was no reason for the invasion. Four Americans died in Benghazi for no reason. 4,000 Americans died in Iraq for no reason. Which crime is worse?
In 2006, the Bush administration covered up the Ishaqi massacre, where US Marines handcuffed and executed four children, ages 5 and under, along with their entire family.
WikiLeaks: Iraqi children in U.S. raid shot in head, U.N. says | McClatchy
“Bush is in the past”? So there is a statute of limitation on mass murder and torture? George W. Bush is still not in prison, so that lying, torturing mass murderer has still not been brought to justice. If you want to prosecute Obama for covering up four deaths in Benghazi, then you have to prosecute Bush for covering up those four deaths in Ishaqi. That’s fair and balanced.
I’m not concerned with the politics of it other than the 0bama administration’s willful cover up of the truth as well as the incompetence that let up to these deaths THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED! He then sent underlings out to spread total and complete lies about the incident. Is that political enough for you to be offended?
It is offensive when people act like it’s no big deal as you have demonstrated.
[quote=“Conservative_Libertarian, post:16, topic:39525”]
It is offensive when people act like it’s no big deal as you have demonstrated.
[/quote]Bingo,This effort to blame Bush is laughable
It worked for 4 years. They may as well squeeze it for all that it’s worth, huh? Of course, the Lamestream Media lapdogs of 0bama will do their best to make it work. It seems to be working well on some of our RO participants.
And that’s why Watergate is a trifle compared to Benghazi.
The forces necessary were ready to roll and could have gotten there in a timely matter. They were witheld, and they were angry that they had been witheld.
Watergate was a coverup for, if I recall correctly, the actions of those who were outside of the Nixon administration. Benghazi was a coverup FOR the administration. And like I noted, no one died in Watergate.
JT78, speaking as a Moderator, please refrain from trying to take this thread far off-topic. If you really want to discuss what Bush did, resuscitate one of the threads from that time period - I assume there are such - or if there are none, start a new thread on that topic.