Benghazi Hearing

Jump to Last Post 1-12 of 12 discussions (55 posts)
  1. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    A couple of notes from the hearing so far.

    Several key witnesses who were actually in Libya at the time Benghazi was attacked were ordered by lawyers from the Secretary of State not to testify to Congress.

    Lt. Col. Gibson's special forces team in Tripoli was ordered not to go to Benghazi.

    The special response team FEST, which exists specifically to respond to situations like this, was ordered not to go to Benghazi.

    The consulate in Benghazi was not up to any standards for security for a high-threat location. The highest ranking diplomatic official in Libya testified that only the Secretary of State herself, according to statutes, could deny additional requests for security for such a facility.

    1. profile image49
      Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      And the democrat obstructionists of truth are doing their job poorly.

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        The D representatives are going off-topic, wasting time, and trying to use off the record statements and hearsay to counter the testimony of the witnesses, rather than interviewing the witnesses. Twice they have been interrupted by the chairman for, essentially, being hostile to these witnesses. Disgusting.

        1. profile image49
          Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Wait until MSNBC edits the testimony to fit their agenda.

  2. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    Every single person in Libya reported this 100%, from the beginning, as a terrorist attack. Not a single primary source said anything about a protest or a video.

    Any 'intelligence' about this being a protest came from Washington, contrary to every official, every witness, and every member of the military that actually went through it.

  3. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    Mark Thompson is the head of the FEST team, which exists to support ambassadors at times like these. He has personally led them on several missions in the past.

    In Benghazi, he wasn't allowed to use FEST. He was never interviewed about Benghazi, and his reports to the State were contradicted and ignored.

    1. profile image49
      Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      My favorite part was when Cardenas (D) asks Nordstrom if he ever told the Ambassador not to go to Benghazi, Nordstrom looked confused and said that he had left 6 weeks before and didn't know Stevens was going to Benghazi.

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        ... and nobody cares sad

        I'm afraid we'll hear nothing but crickets on all this.

        1. PrettyPanther profile image86
          PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Why do you think only a certain segment of the population is still concerned about Benghazi?  I'm curious as to why you think this has not become a big deal to most people.

          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Because they don't understand our politicians' jobs.

            And people tend to not care about things that don't impact them directly.

            And people have become accustomed to deceit and corruption.

            And people have no pride in the ideal that America stands for.

  4. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    4.5 months after Benghazi, Hillary testified to Congress that it wasn't her fault security was lax, and that those decisions were up to the RSO.

    The RSO had half a dozen requests for additional security rejected by Hillary's office, and the SST was also removed, which requires Hillary's actual signature. She perjured herself.

  5. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    For Ambassador Stevens to be in Benghazi, which was a location that didn't meet safety specs, Hillary Clinton had to personally sign any orders related to it and personally reject any requests.

  6. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    One final note from the end of the hearing. Cummings read part of an email that came directly from Obama, telling the commander at AFRICOM to take his rapid response team off of ready-status, 12 hours before the attack at Benghazi.

  7. Mighty Mom profile image82
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    I agree with what PP said.
    And parts of what you said, too, Jaxson.

    I do not believe I know anyone who does not believe in the ideal that America stands for.
    On either side of the political divide.
    MM

    1. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      So, you wouldn't care if Obama came out and admitted that he purposefully broke protocol and ordered two of our special forces teams to *not* rescue our guys in Benghazi?

      And you don't care that Obama, Clinton, and Rice all knowingly lied about the videos?

      And you don't care that the man who was directing everyone on the ground in Libya, who was personally called by Clinton and Obama, congratulated, and honored for his bravery, was demoted and ridiculed after asking why those people had lied?

      And you don't care that Clinton lied to Congress about her knowledge of the security situation and requests in Benghazi?

      Sorry, I expect more from my politicians.

    2. PrettyPanther profile image86
      PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with what Jon Stewart said.

      http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/09/j … i-hearing/

      The Daily Show host Jon Stewart on Wednesday mocked Fox News for over-hyping yet another congressional hearing on the attack in Benghazi.

      Fox News pundits and Republicans alike had promised Wednesday’s hearing would be a bombshell. But like the hearings before it, the Oversight Committee hearing failed to turn up any definite proof that the Obama administration purposefully covered up the incident, despite testimony from three whistle-blowers.

      “You may be wondering why for Benghazi, Congress has held nine full hearings, including one closed hearing, why Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen issued a full accountability report chastising the State Department for their systemic failures, and why Benghazi has generally emerged as a rallying cry for the President’s opponents when during the Bush administration there were 54 attacks on diplomatic targets that killed 13 Americans yet garnered only three hearings on embassy security total and zero outrage on Fox,” Stewart remarked. “So why is this attack so different for Republicans?”

      “I think I see the problem here. You can’t understand why everyone else isn’t as outraged as you, when it is because the rest of us aren’t sure if what you’re saying is true. And to be quite frank, you do have somewhat of a history of hysteria,” Stewart said. “You may be right, but the denizens of Bullshit Mountain have cried wolf before and after 18 months of intensive investigations you should be able to better state your case.”

      1. Josak profile image60
        Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Pretty much sums it up. Anyone who expected anything other than possible incompetence to be revealed is/was a moron, no politician/president gets troops or ambassadorial staff killed on purpose and indeed that is what the inquest has turned up thus far, security should have been better in hindsight perhaps some other teams should have been deployed even though they almost certainly could never have got there in time. Troops and an ambassador in a very dangerous and unstable country were killed because they were attacked by a huge group of well armed militia, it happens.

        1. profile image49
          Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Morons huh, the level of incompetence thus far displayed by the children in charge is amazing. The only thing that isn't amazing is the lefts continued callousness towards the lives of military and diplomatic personnel.

          The only reason anybody thinks Fox news is hyping a non-story is because the rest of the media is involved in covering for a bad president.

          1. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I have served as a soldier and it really sucks when soldiers die, you know like if a president were to send troops to a country on the basis of finding weapons of mass destruction were there were none and then almost 5000 of our soldiers would die. Wait that happened and I don;t remember any conservative outrage.

            But if 4 people die because maybe they had insufficient security that probably would not have saved them anyway then obviously it's now time to get angry!

  8. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    Yeah, they didn't cover anything up. Except for the fact that there was no intelligence given, at all, from anyone, about the attack being a protest... and all intelligence, from everyone, from the very beginning, was that it was a planned terrorist attack with ties to AQ.

    And except for the fact that our officials knew this, and we have copies of their drafts of talking points that start out talking about the terrorist attack, then edit by edit change it to being about a protest.

    And except for the fact that Hillary lied before Congress.

    And who cares if our CiC leaves Americans to die without sending any help, but instead actually orders the assets that exist solely to instantly hit the ground running in these situations to stand down?

    And who cares if some state employee, with 26 years of experience working for our nation, 26 years of commended service, who personally got a phone call from both Clinton and Obama thanking him for how well he handled the situation in Libya, was demoted to a desk job for asking why Rice contradicted his reports?

    And who cares, really, that our representatives pander to radical islamists by apologizing to them for our first amendment?

    And who cares, really, that Clinton sent Stevens to Benghazi, knowing that the location didn't meet a single security standard, and personally signed every denial for additional security while knowing that they had been attacked half a dozen times already that year?

    Really, who cares? We have much more important things to think about. American Idol is about to start.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image86
      PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      See, I find this to be melodramatic.  Just because you don't think enough people are as outraged as you are does not mean that those people don't care about the deaths.  I could list a bunch of tragic events involving many more deaths and then claim you don't care because you're not equally outraged about them.

      I read your post, then I went and read a detailed article about Benghazi, including information from the recent hearings.  Your assertions are not necessarily accurate, as there are plenty of credible people with contradictory statements about what occurred.  Just because you believe some of them and not others does not make you right, and I find your moral outrage that others aren't jumping on your bandwagon to be a bit silly.

      1. profile image49
        Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        The ones espousing contradictory statements, were they there? Oh you must be talking about the people who are lying to protect a President and hopefully a future President.

      2. profile image0
        Brenda Durhamposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        It's not just that people aren't siding with the investigation,  it's also that commentators like John Stewart are actually making jokes about it,  mocking the whole thing and in effect mocking those who were killed AND their families.
        If a family member of mine had died in Benghazi,   I'd personally be petitioning to have Obama and Hillary both impeached, because they failed to do their jobs, showing no caring for the team in Benghazi, and secondly because they've used the deaths purely for political purposes from day 1.
        The coldness of the Obama political machine is evident.
        Except when it steams with stench,  as JaxsonRaine referred to.
        That's the only warmth that comes out of the Administration-----the heat of carp.

        There are a lot of Americans who do care about what happened in this situation.   But we're all being mocked or shut up by the liberals who holler way louder than we do.

    2. Josak profile image60
      Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Perfect example is this:

      "And who cares if some state employee, with 26 years of experience working for our nation, 26 years of commended service, who personally got a phone call from both Clinton and Obama thanking him for how well he handled the situation in Libya, was demoted to a desk job for asking why Rice contradicted his reports?"

      Yup the guy was demoted, he says because he asked questions but that is exactly that every demoted person in the world would say yet you take his word for it absolutely, it couldn't be that once the crisis was over and they analysed his performance they found serious issues and demoted him, no OBVIOUSLY IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!!!

      Yay tin hats all around. You buy it hook line and sinker if it suit what you want to hear.

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Yeah, 26 years of commendations, including a recent thankful call from Hillary and Obama, but he just got demoted for no reason right after that.

        Not to mention you completely ignoring everything else.

        You don't go from head of operations in Libya to a demoted desk job for no reason... especially not right after being commended for doing such a good job as head of operations in Libya.

        1. Josak profile image60
          Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah because initially it might have looked like he did great before there was time to investigate, then his performance was investigated and actually he did badly and was demoted, angry about being demoted he decided to claim it's because he "asked too many questions".

          But nooooo obviously it's a conspiracy tongue

          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            ...

            whatever, you'll never look at the other side of the story. There is so much stench you don't even have to look hard for it.

  9. Reality Bytes profile image82
    Reality Bytesposted 5 years ago

    I think the video was blamed for one reason.  To take advantage of a crisis.  If they were not caught in a blatant lie, we would have been discussing hate speech legislation!

    1. profile image49
      Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I don't even know what that means, the video was blamed because elsewhere possibly a video was to blame for demonstrations at another embassy. Obama and his minions seized that idea and hoped to blame our free speech for a terrorist attack, a terrorist attack that would be hard to explain given that the minions had been running around telling us we had nothing to fear because Bin Laden was dead.

      In other words, Barrack Obama had his clowns lie to us in hopes it wouldn't upset his reelection bid.

      1. Reality Bytes profile image82
        Reality Bytesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        What I mean is that if society fell for the lie that a video was responsible.  The tyrannical herds would have introduced legislation to diminish free speech rights.

        The video had nothing to do with the attack at Benghazi!

  10. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    It's no use Brenda, they just don't care.

    They don't care that the man in charge of FEST was told not to do his job and go in to save lives like they have in the past. They don't care that the man in charge of FEST was never told why he wasn't allowed to do his job. They don't care that the man in charge of FEST was never even interviewed by the Accountability Review Board, even though he petitioned them several times.

    They don't care that our special forces teams, which exist solely to deploy in situations like Benghazi, were ordered to stand down. They don't care about dereliction of duty, which is an impeachable offense.

    1. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I'm hoping that the next step is a call for impeachment.

      You're right that they don't care.
      I hope that doesn't stop justice from eventually being done.

    2. Josak profile image60
      Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Ah more rubbish. Let's analyze this Tripoli (where the FEST team was located) and Benghazi are 650 kilometers apart which means takeoff and landing is two hours for a Hercules or any military transport plane assuming half an hour to scramble and leave and half an hour to arrive at the scene is three hours (that is being incredibly generous, the truth is it takes far longer) The ambassadorial staff were all killed within an hour of the attack on the embassy then two more troops are killed in anther attack on a different facility (where the team would have had no reason to be) indeed a ix man team was sent from Tripoli and it never fired a single shot.

      So after all that none of what you mention would have changed a single thing except to possibly expose more Americans to attack. Attempting to use death for political points shows the very opposite of caring about the people who died, it demonstrates the very transparent attempt to use them.

      Just a with the demoted official all of these claims are rubbish when investigated. 

      I have researched two and both have been completely invalid.

  11. PrettyPanther profile image86
    PrettyPantherposted 5 years ago

    Yes, we care.

    Yes, mistakes were made.

    Yes, both the Obama and Romney camps tried to put the best spin on it for their team.

    Yes, yes, yes.

    Happy now, Jaxson & Brenda?  I'm not sure what you want.  Well, let me take that back.  Brenda wants desperately to find something impeachable on Obama.  Jaxson is a little more subtle, but not much.

    Here's the thing.  I'm upset that our good people died in an attack that might have been preventable.  The GOP has had ample time to make their case.  They haven't made it very well.  Each time they hype one of these hearings as exposing the truth that will bring down Clinton and Obama, and then introduce nothing new.  They are looking more and more foolish.

    By the way, Brenda, Stewart was not making fun of the victims or the attack.  Watch it again and see if you can figure out who he was making fun of.

    1. profile image49
      Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "Each time they hype one of these hearings as exposing the truth that will bring down Clinton and Obama, and then introduce nothing new."

      Nobody has hyped anything of the sort, you made that up. Everything in Wednesdays hearing was new. Just because we already knew Obama and Clinton were liars doesn't negate that. The information is starting to trickle out and the rest of the media is finally paying attention.

      1. Josak profile image60
        Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Yeah and even the Republicans at the hearings said absolutely nothing new was discovered.

        1. profile image49
          Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          They may have said that, but eyewitness testimony from people who were involved where there was none before is new. Everything said by those witnesses was new to you and I.

          1. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            But nothing new was revealed of political importance.

            1. profile image49
              Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Political importance? Who cares?

              1. Josak profile image60
                Josakposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Everyone who is trying to make it a political issue, conservatives in other words.

                1. profile image49
                  Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  It became political only when the president was caught lying, there is more to come.

                  1. profile image0
                    Brenda Durhamposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    Other media outlets have now started following the story.    They had to, finally, unless they wanna look like total Obama-puppets.    And just maybe some of them actually will want to know the truth....finally.

            2. profile image0
              Brenda Durhamposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Uh....in the context of what happened,  there didn't have to be anything "new".     The issue was already there.   Ya know, the one that hasn't even been resolved yet.    Whatever you mean by "new" is simply a way of distraction, correct?  lol

              And indeed there is something "new",  and that is that people who've been lied to and manipulated by Obama and others in the Administration are finally speaking out.    Those men who gave their testimonies at the hearing are brave men who should be listened to,  an example of how to stand up for the truth no matter what crap ya get from the greedy powermongers who now run this Nation with a twisted fistful of lies and bully tactics.

      2. PrettyPanther profile image86
        PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this
        1. profile image49
          Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Sen Inhofe has some say in the House of Representatives holding the hearings? Huckabee too? How about Glenn Beck?

          You are correct, some people have been saying things. I was actually referring to the Congressman holding hearings.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image86
            PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Well, you said "nobody" so I thought that's what you meant.  I tuned into Fox News and CNN the day before the latest hearing and it was a Republican talking point that these hearings would expose damning new information that would seriously damage Obama and Clinton.

  12. movingout profile image59
    movingoutposted 5 years ago

    So worried about Hillary Clinton becoming our next President? Seems to me that's whats going on here by the Republicans. Trying to damage her reputation? It could backfire! We have more important issues to deal with than this. Say jobs? Economy? just to mention a few.

    1. profile image49
      Lie Detectorposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Hillary will be torn apart by Biden and whatever else democrat runs for president in 2016.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)