Hillary Benghazi Hearing

Steven Metz ‏@steven_metz 21m21 minutes ago
@speechboy71 You'd think they'd at least take a break to vote on repealing Obamacare.
 
They raise some very valid points and concerns, but the motive here is clearly to try to damage her campaign. They may very well have done the opposite and made people more sympathetic toward her. It's unbelievable how stupid some of these people can be.
 
The Iron Lady 2.0 seems a fair moniker. Not many people could have weathered an entire day of that song and dance routine.

Give that woman 60 seconds and a damn lozenge!
 
It's funny how everyone sees and hears what they want. I haven't watched any of it, but just reading comments from libs and conservative friends on Facebook, you'd think their team just won. We are a predictable lot.
 
I didn't follow the hearings that closely, but reading the re-caps, I think the committee has "Secretary of State" and "high school principal" mixed up. "You mean you didn't sign off on the new band uniforms? Bueller!!!!!!!!"
 
Hawk said:
The Iron Lady 2.0 seems a fair moniker. Not many people could have weathered an entire day of that song and dance routine.

Give that woman 60 seconds and a damn lozenge!
Click to expand...

It's kinda sad the republicans on this committee are so incompetent. She has been caught in lie after lie but she in the end will escape anything bad happening to her.
 
Garmel said:
It's kinda sad the republicans on this committee are so incompetent. She has been caught in lie after lie but she in the end will escape anything bad happening to her.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it's a prime example of how a cadre of well paid lawyers can help you dance your way out of a potentially grievous/treasonous offense.

If the FBI does find anything Clinton should be forced to reimburse the state for all of its expenses. And I'm okay if that axe swings the other way if the Clintons feel they need/want it.
 
CR9zWPkVEAAZEH4.png
 
What's there to find that hasn't already been found? Are we going to be here again a year from now with another hearing?
 
The bizarre parts of the hearing were the congressmen asking specific times Hillary was here and there what time she slept who she was texting etc.

It was 3 years ago. Asking her who was present in the room name by name was a bit over the top.
 
Hawk said:
Unfortunately it's a prime example of how a cadre of well paid lawyers can help you dance your way out of a potentially grievous/treasonous offense.

If the FBI does find anything Clinton should be forced to reimburse the state for all of its expenses. And I'm okay if that axe swings the other way if the Clintons feel they need/want it.
Click to expand...

Looks like you win today's hyperbole award.
 
50PoundHead said:
Looks like you win today's hyperbole award.
Click to expand...

If gross incompetence resulting in the death of a diplomat isn't treason then we need to rewrite the definition.

I mean, the truth of the matter is that Clinton should have never been handed the job to begin with. It was pure politics; an agreement to avoid squabbling over super-delegates.
 
Hawk said:
If gross incompetence resulting in the death of a diplomat isn't treason then we need to rewrite the definition.

I mean, the truth of the matter is that Clinton should have never been handed the job to begin with. It was pure politics; an agreement to avoid squabbling over super-delegates.
Click to expand...

If she had armed the rebels, that would be treason. If she is guilty--and she may well be--it would be, as you say, of incompetence, which is tragic and may border on the criminal, but the bar for treason is much higher. No one played the treason card on Oliver North or John Poindexter, who actually gave comfort to the enemy in the Iran-Contra affair.
 
Hawk said:
If gross incompetence resulting in the death of a diplomat isn't treason then we need to rewrite the definition.

I mean, the truth of the matter is that Clinton should have never been handed the job to begin with. It was pure politics; an agreement to avoid squabbling over super-delegates.
Click to expand...

Hey, I say let's get all of our elected leaders who have committed these sorts of acts, omission and commission. Are you guys really up for that? I doubt it, not if it means really looking for whole truths and not those cleared by "my party" whichever one that happens to be, depending on the person in question.
 
50PoundHead said:
If she had armed the rebels, that would be treason. If she is guilty--and she may well be--it would be, as you say, of incompetence, which is tragic and may border on the criminal, but the bar for treason is much higher. No one played the treason card on Oliver North or John Poindexter, who actually gave comfort to the enemy in the Iran-Contra affair.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, this Congress is not remotely comparable to the one sitting in 1986.

I'm not advocating trying Hillary for treason, just honing in on the 'disloyal' notions of the word.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Hey, I say let's get all of our elected leaders who have committed these sorts of acts, omission and commission. Are you guys really up for that? I doubt it, not if it means really looking for whole truths and not those cleared by "my party" whichever one that happens to be, depending on the person in question.
Click to expand...

I'd be curious to learn the names (and not a protracted conspiracy/social manipulation theory) of the individuals you believe were directly part and parcel to the death of a diplomat.

Or is this just a creative way of pointing at Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld etc.?
 
Only thing Hillary was guilty of is INCOMPETENCE and lives were lost.

In that vein, she is not competent enough to be president, especially when it happens when she had that job title.

That circus yesterday had an undercurrent theme, incompetence, and it showed she has that. Dems are hoping their idiot base does not see that and more importantly because they are idiots will not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top