US House approves new Benghazi inquiry

[webfact]

US House approves new Benghazi inquiry

WASHINGTON: -- The US House of Representatives has voted to create a panel to investigate the White House response to the 2012 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Republicans have said the Democratic Obama administration misled the public on the nature of the attack.

Four Americans including US Ambassador Chris Stevens were killed.

Democrats say the inquiry is a political ploy to raise campaign cash and motivate voters.

On Thursday, House Speaker John Boehner was asked questions regarding a fundraising pitch sent from the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-27330977


-- BBC 2014-05-09

[Ulysses G.]

It is very obvious that the Obama administration misled the public on the nature of the attack, but they - and their sycophants - will continue to do everything they can to mislead the public. This only happened because a private organization forced the Obama administration to provide unredacted documents via a court order, that shed light on the false taking points provided to Susan Rice. Congress had already asked for these documents, but everything had been blacked out by the White House, so that they were virtually worthless.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Asiantravel]

I am in constant amazement at the way the Democrats seem to want to brush this whole affair aside and keep repeating that it's been covered enough. Since when does the accused, decide that?

The way they went after Richard Nixon with such vengeance over a far less serious matter compared to this issue which involved the loss of lives is repulsive. And it's not like it's the only scandal going on at the moment.

[Guitar God]

There's no way this is comparable to Watergate. Nixon personally approved the break in and burglary of the Democratic campaign office for the purpose of stealing documents about their campaign strategy to manipulate the election so he could be reelected.

This was the administration's opinion of why an attack on en embassy occured, after the fact. Other embassies were attacked in the past, other people died and the reason was that sometimes crazy people attack U.S. assets in retaliation for for what the U.S. has done to their (usually muslim) countries. The U.S. recently killed Bin Laden and I'm sure that peeved a few people off.

This is nothing but hyper-partisanship and a lame excuse to get rid of a black president who wants to make life better for the majority of the citizens, not just the rich 1% the republicans are beholding to.

[Pinot]

The Faux News chorus chimes in with Benghazi bullshit. The Republicans have nothing here with Benghazi, absolutely nothing. And when you got nothing, you got nothing to lose, so you just make stuff up (the Faux News formula).

The Republicans will never convene a real hearing in which military officers and service men are brought in to testify, because their testimony under oath would move to exonerate the President. No official proceeding will ever occur in which CIA operatives and State Department officials give testimony, because there is NO EVIDENCE to support the Benghazi bullshit Republican talking points, because...they made them up!

But by all means continue with the charade of ANOTHER fishing expedition into Benghazi. The American people can't get enough of this crap.

Republicans will talk real tough about how mad they are and let Faux News run with lies, smears, innuendos, falsehoods in an effort to somehow, impeach President Obama (he's black you know), in the fevered minds of the alternate Conservative reality.

Font edited

[kamahele]

This is called "whipping a dead horse". A complete waste of the taxpayers' money. They will open yet again, another investigation into talking points. It's called "election year politics". Hillary Clinton has already stated in front of the world that she takes full blame for the deaths of her employees. The fact that the talking points which were taken from the intelligence agencies were wrong, doesn't matter a hoot.

[Guitar God]

It's right up there in importance with trying to figure out if Clinton lied about getting a blow job.

[rucus7]

All this hoopla over Benghazi does not make me proud to be an American. The Republican party has only straws to grasp. They are a dying party comprised of intolerant racists. Hate and fear is their mantra.

Edited May 9, 2014 by rucus7

[Chicog]

There is nothing new to learn about what happened in Benghazi.

The GOP were going to try and batter the Dems with Obamacare, but now they're screwed on that.

They were probably going to shift to the economy, but they're screwed on that as well.

So now they are dragging up the dregs.

The idiot redneck in charge of it doesn't even understand the politics and dynamics of the region.

Still, if you can raise a few quid off the backs of dead Americans, why bother with little thinks like scruples?

http://www.nrcc.org/2014/05/06/heres-need-know-trey-gowdy-house-gops-select-committee-benghazi/

"Help Fight Liberals by Donating Today".

Worthless scum.

[NeverSure]

There's no way this is comparable to Watergate. Nixon personally approved the break in and burglary of the Democratic campaign office for the purpose of stealing documents about their campaign strategy to manipulate the election so he could be reelected.

This was the administration's opinion of why an attack on en embassy occured, after the fact. Other embassies were attacked in the past, other people died and the reason was that sometimes crazy people attack U.S. assets in retaliation for for what the U.S. has done to their (usually muslim) countries. The U.S. recently killed Bin Laden and I'm sure that peeved a few people off.

This is nothing but hyper-partisanship and a lame excuse to get rid of a black president who wants to make life better for the majority of the citizens, not just the rich 1% the republicans are beholding to.

Oh you are so wrong. Nixon wasn't impeached for the Watergate break in. He was impeached for the cover-up. The after the fact cover-up including impeding the investigation. LINK

Sound familiar side by side with Benghazi?

Edited May 9, 2014 by NeverSure

[Asiantravel]

There's no way this is comparable to Watergate. Nixon personally approved the break in and burglary of the Democratic campaign office for the purpose of stealing documents about their campaign strategy to manipulate the election so he could be reelected.

This was the administration's opinion of why an attack on en embassy occured, after the fact. Other embassies were attacked in the past, other people died and the reason was that sometimes crazy people attack U.S. assets in retaliation for for what the U.S. has done to their (usually muslim) countries. The U.S. recently killed Bin Laden and I'm sure that peeved a few people off.

This is nothing but hyper-partisanship and a lame excuse to get rid of a black president who wants to make life better for the majority of the citizens, not just the rich 1% the republicans are beholding to.

" There's no way this is comparable to Watergate " yes spot on !!

How can abyone possibly compare a break-in to this situation where the administration persistently ignored the requests of its own US Ambassador for more security and then to make things worse failed to lift a finger when he came under attack?

[Asiantravel]

All this hoopla over Benghazi does not make me proud to be an American. The Republican party has only straws to grasp. They are a dying party comprised of intolerant racists. Hate and fear is their mantra.

I can't possibly see how you can be a proud American either if you are supporting a party that is encouraging sponging off the system. Eventually the real money makers (

who in yet another scandal have been deliberately targeted by the IRS )

are going to simply say enough is enough .............and then where will the money come from?

Edited May 9, 2014 by Asiantravel

[Guitar God]

From the NRC site:

"The American people deserve to know why the security situation in Benghazi was so inadequate..."

Didn't the American people deserve to know why not a single fighter plane was scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes during 9-11, or why they were coincidentally having a drill about intercepting hijacked planes on the same day it happened?

Where was the outrage from the GOP when it was proven that the WMD excuse for invading a country and killing 100,000+ people was a lie?

Was anyone impeached over that ?

This is just more politically motivated bs and a waste of time.

[Jingthing]

Partisan tripe.

What difference does it make?

was taken out of context and used by Fox News as a mantra.

Bring on President Hillary!

[rotary]

Obama and most of his staff are incompetent and lack any real experience of any type.

"A" grade people hire "A" grade people.

"B" grade people hire "C" grade people so their staff thinks they are smart.

Let the investigation begin and see how he worms out of this.

[Chicog]

All this hoopla over Benghazi does not make me proud to be an American. The Republican party has only straws to grasp. They are a dying party comprised of intolerant racists. Hate and fear is their mantra.

Eventually the real money makers (who in yet another scandal have been deliberately targeted by the IRS )

The real money makers are Republican PACs?

But you're right, they are good at making money - for themselves and their corporate paymasters.

You've only got to look what the idiots in Kansas have done, cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations, which has resulted in being downgraded and costing the state half a billion dollars in revenue just this year.

These beneficiaries are not growing the economy, they are parasites, allowed by the Republicans to bleed it dry.

[lomatopo]

I doubt that the average American cares about Benghazi, unless it's Ben Gazzi and he's a finalist on American Idol.

But the timing of this meant to potentially influence the mid-term elections, and ultimately provide challenges to several potential Democratic presidential candidates, be it Ms. Clinton, or Mr. Biden. Maybe best to be a Governor where it is challenging to have a "Benghazi moment", unless you're Chris Christie, of course.

http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm

[rotary]

All this hoopla over Benghazi does not make me proud to be an American. The Republican party has only straws to grasp. They are a dying party comprised of intolerant racists. Hate and fear is their mantra.

Eventually the real money makers (who in yet another scandal have been deliberately targeted by the IRS )

The real money makers are Republican PACs?

But you're right, they are good at making money - for themselves and their corporate paymasters.

You've only got to look what the idiots in Kansas have done, cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations, which has resulted in being downgraded and costing the state half a billion dollars in revenue just this year.

These beneficiaries are not growing the economy, they are parasites, allowed by the Republicans to bleed it dry.

It will never happen but there should be a flat tax rate for all no matter what the income level is and an end to all these tax breaks. Then fire 90% of the IRS because they are no longer needed.

[Jingthing]

Yeah, it's all about Hillary. It won't work.

[rotary]

Yeah, it's all about Hillary. It won't work.

Nothing is about Hillary except bad dreams

[Jingthing]

Yeah, it's all about Hillary. It won't work.

Nothing is about Hillary except bad dreams

She only needs to win the electoral college by one vote. She doesn't need you.

[chuckd]

There is nothing new to learn about what happened in Benghazi.

The GOP were going to try and batter the Dems with Obamacare, but now they're screwed on that.

They were probably going to shift to the economy, but they're screwed on that as well.

So now they are dragging up the dregs.

The idiot redneck in charge of it doesn't even understand the politics and dynamics of the region.

Still, if you can raise a few quid off the backs of dead Americans, why bother with little thinks like scruples?

http://www.nrcc.org/2014/05/06/heres-need-know-trey-gowdy-house-gops-select-committee-benghazi/

"Help Fight Liberals by Donating Today".

Worthless scum.

There are a number of questions that need answering but, since you claim everything is already out there, perhaps you can tell us the answer to these quick questions...

Where was Obama from the time he was briefed by SecDef Panetta and JCS Chairman Gen. Dempsey at approximately 1730 hours until the following morning when he reappeared for his fund raising trip to Las Vegas?

What was he doing and with whom?

What action did he propose in order to help those under attack for over eight hours in Benghazi?

A top aide recently said Obama was in the White House but not in the Situation Room and he had no idea what Obama was doing.

Dempsey and Panetta both said in sworn Congressional testimony they had no further contact with Obama after the briefing.

Since you claim there is nothing to learn from a Congressional investigation, please provide a link to the answers of these questions. The world is waiting.

For that matter...Where was Hillary and what was she doing?

PS: For the badly informed critic of Nixon, member NeverSure is correct. Nixon came under fire for the cover-up, not the break in. Never hurts to throw another racism log on the fire though.

[TPI]

There is nothing new to learn about what happened in Benghazi.

The GOP were going to try and batter the Dems with Obamacare, but now they're screwed on that.

They were probably going to shift to the economy, but they're screwed on that as well.

So now they are dragging up the dregs.

The idiot redneck in charge of it doesn't even understand the politics and dynamics of the region.

Still, if you can raise a few quid off the backs of dead Americans, why bother with little thinks like scruples?

http://www.nrcc.org/2014/05/06/heres-need-know-trey-gowdy-house-gops-select-committee-benghazi/

"Help Fight Liberals by Donating Today".

Worthless scum.

There are a number of questions that need answering but, since you claim everything is already out there, perhaps you can tell us the answer to these quick questions...

Where was Obama from the time he was briefed by SecDef Panetta and JCS Chairman Gen. Dempsey at approximately 1730 hours until the following morning when he reappeared for his fund raising trip to Las Vegas?

What was he doing and with whom?

What action did he propose in order to help those under attack for over eight hours in Benghazi?

A top aide recently said Obama was in the White House but not in the Situation Room and he had no idea what Obama was doing.

Dempsey and Panetta both said in sworn Congressional testimony they had no further contact with Obama after the briefing.

Since you claim there is nothing to learn from a Congressional investigation, please provide a link to the answers of these questions. The world is waiting.

For that matter...Where was Hillary and what was she doing?

PS: For the badly informed critic of Nixon, member NeverSure is correct. Nixon came under fire for the cover-up, not the break in. Never hurts to throw another racism log on the fire though.

More to the point...why do you want to know where the POTUS was that night? Do you think he might've been in a "bath house"? Or maybe at the weekly gay black pedophile meeting??

I know, it was a secret meeting of African Imams!

Gasp! An Aide said that he didn't know what the POTUS was doing in his so called "free" time!!

Wasn't it up to Dempsey and Panetta to come up with a workable solution? Wasn't that their job???

Goose!

[Ulysses G.]

What difference does it make?

She will find out soon. The select committee should be able to get around all the stonewalling with their extra powers.

[Ulysses G.]

More to the point...why do you want to know where the POTUS was that night?

Reportedly, according to the White House visitor logs, he was busy preparing for a debate, instead of in the Situation Room where he belonged.

[chuckd]

Since Obama is the Commander in Chief of all US military assets, it would seem prudent for him to have been in attendance, just in case some out of the ordinary attack on a consulate was taking place.

There have been seven US Ambassadors killed in the line of duty with Ambassador Stevens being the last. The prior Ambassador killed in the line of duty was the US Ambassador to Afghanistan in 1979...under the Carter administration I might add.

Dereliction of Duty by the CIC would seem to be a very viable issue in the Benghazi case.

[Jingthing]

Politically this is a wash. People who "care" about Benghazi are basically Fox News groupies and would never vote for a democrat anyway. Others ... don't care because they see it is a Fox News orchestrated show. It's too bad about the casualties ... but it was a dangerous posting taken on voluntarily ... and there are so many much more important priorities now than playing the political blame game. You want to play the political blame game for real? Send Bush and Cheney to trial for war crimes! How do you like them apples?

Edited May 9, 2014 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

Politically this is a wash. People who "care" about Benghazi are basically Fox News groupies and would never vote for a democrat anyway. Others ... don't care because they see it is a Fox News orchestrated show. It's too bad about the casualties ... but it was a dangerous posting taken on voluntarily ... and there are so many much more important priorities now than playing the political blame game. You want to play the political blame game for real? Send Bush and Cheney to trial for war crimes! How do you like them apples?

Sounds fine to me to send Bush and Cheney up for war crimes...as long as you send all those Democratic Senators who voted for the action up at the same time.

Democrats like John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Dianne Feinstein, Ted Kennedy and...(Ta Da) Hillary Clinton, to name only a few.

Send 'em all to the War Crimes Tribunal since the Iraq War Resolution was approved by the House and Senate Republicans and 29 Democratic Senators.

There would have been no Iraq war without the consent of the Senate Democrats.

[lomatopo]

Dereliction of Duty by the CIC would seem to be a very viable issue in the Benghazi case.

Well that's certainly a stretch. "Dereliction of Duty" applies to members of the military.

U.S. Code › Title 10 › Subtitle A › Part II › Chapter 47 › Subchapter X › § 892

10 U.S. Code § 892 - Art. 92. Failure to obey order or regulation

Any person subject to this chapter who—

(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;

(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or

(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties;

shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I'm not getting why the right has their panties in such a bunch re: the President's activities during the Benghazi raid, or for his playing of cards while waiting for the bin Laden operation to be completed.

It's bit like laying into President Bush for continuing to read "My Pet Goat" to second-graders while 3,000 people were perishing during the attacks on Sep. 11.

[Ulysses G.]

The Republicans will never convene a real hearing in which military officers and service men are brought in to testify

You might be right. Reportedly, career officials at the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have been threatened against doing so. Hopefully, the select committee will find a way around the cover up.