Benghazi Committee Gets Nothing New From Talk Radio Caller ‘John From Iowa’

[beefheart]

How do you get evidence when the WH is part of the cover up? The stonewalling makes their guilt more than obvious to anyone who can think for themselves.

I see the problem you have with this.

I have a problem with you just making crap up because you have no argument.

Anyone can make the lame argument you made, one without an ounce of proof or any citations.

Here is an example of your absurd logic:

How do I know you didn't kill Prince? I mean, you know, the coverup, the stonewalling, its obvious, your lack of a defense is showing your guilt. And of course, you or someone else must have destroyed or hidden all the evidence....

 

[iguanaman]

Did Clinton lie?

Did Rice lie?

Did POSOTUS lie?

The answer to all of those "stupid" questions is YES.

If there was nothing there, why did they lie? C'mon Einstein, tell us why they ALL lied?

They did not lie they were following CIA protocol. It was the CIA who blamed the video and testified as such on Capital hill. I guess you missed that. If you want to say the CIA lied to Rice and Clinton and they repeated it that is what happened.

T

he most famous of these reports formed the basis of talking points provided to members of Congress by the CIA Sept. 15, 2012. They began, “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US diplomatic post and subsequently its annex.”

A Benghazi Scandal That Has Already Been Revealed: The Media’s Role

 

[Quazimodo]

Today, yes today, POSOTUS was stonewalling. Why won't he come forward? Why did he have to lie? If nothing happened, why did he LIE? Why did he stand over the bodies of four DEAD AMERICAN HEROES and lie like an Islamic Radical? Stop running long enough to answer a simple question.

If there was nothing there, why did he have to lie?

 

[beefheart]

Today, yes today, POSOTUS was stonewalling. Why won't he come forward? Why did he have to lie? If nothing happened, why did he LIE? Why did he stand over the bodies of four DEAD AMERICAN HEROES and lie like an Islamic Radical? Stop running long enough to answer a simple question.

If there was nothing there, why did he have to lie?

You wore out your new word-toy several posts ago.

There have been an outrageous amount of hearings, run by republicans...and they didn't find anything. Yell and scream all you want, but thems the facts.

 

[coldjoint]

I have a problem with you just making crap up because you have no argument.

Anyone can make the lame argument you made, one without an ounce of proof or any citations.

Here is an example of your absurd logic:

How do I know you didn't kill Prince? I mean, you know, the coverup, the stonewalling, its obvious, your lack of a defense is showing your guilt. And of course, you or someone else must have destroyed or hidden all the evidence....

Did the video cause the attack? Did they lie on Sunday morning shows? Did Obama and Clinton apologize for the video?

How dumb are you? The least that happened was a lie to win the election. The disregard for the Americans lives and for their families will never be forgotten.

 

[Quazimodo]

And no matter how you try to spin it , your POSOTUS still LIED. Tell my why?

 

[eohrnberger]

Did the video cause the attack? Did they lie on Sunday morning shows? Did Obama and Clinton apologize for the video?

How dumb are you? The least that happened was a lie to win the election. The disregard for the Americans lives and their families will never be forgotten.

I still remember the Sunday morning when Rice came on each of the Sunday talkies and blamed it on the Internet video, that stank already then.

Hillary said the same thing without saying it, as did Obama. It was a masterful word play by both of them at the same time as it was a lie by both of them.

And sure enough, what are the families asserting now? That in private meetings Hillary directly lied to them and also claimed it was the Internet video?

Hillary and Obama: Without morals. Without ethics. Without a conscious. Without any respect for anyone other than themselves. Little more than an ideological imperative, and an 'the ends justify means' rationalization so they can manage to sleep at night, somehow.

 

[coldjoint]

I still remember the Sunday morning when Rice came on each of the Sunday talkies and blamed it on the Internet video, that stank already then.

Hillary said the same thing without saying it, as did Obama. It was a masterful word play by both of them at the same time as it was a lie by both of them.

And sure enough, what are the families asserting now? That in private meetings Hillary directly lied to them and also claimed it was the Internet video?

Hillary and Obama: Without morals. Without ethics. Without a conscious. Without any respect for anyone other than themselves. Little more than an ideological imperative, and an 'the ends justify means' rationalization so they can manage to sleep at night, somehow.

What does that say about people who support them? I get the impression they pretty much care about nothing but telling people how to think. Do you think it is because it has already happened to them?

 

[beefheart]

Did the video cause the attack? Did they lie on Sunday morning shows? Did Obama and Clinton apologize for the video?

How dumb are you? The least that happened was a lie to win the election. The disregard for the Americans lives and for their families will never be forgotten.

Don't call me dumb.

I'm not the one making up baloney because I don't have an argument. You made a silly claim that data was destroyed or hidden and things are being covered up.

Present your evidence, show your proof.

Or don't make such inane arguments.

 

[eohrnberger]

What does that say about people who support them? I get the impression they pretty much care about nothing but telling people how to think. Do you think it is because it has already happened to them?

Small correction. Not 'how' to think, but 'what' to think.

There's a list that someone posted in which he categorized all the different Hillary supporters. I'd refer you to search and find that list. The poster did such a fine job, I wouldn't want to post a mere imitation of it, nor take credit for it.

The two sided sword of Trumps bombast is that he's turned many against him that he may not have.

A pundit asserted tonight that the real Hillary and her vastly powerful political machine, her slush fund foundation and her standard method of operation are pretty much antithetical to the majority of liberals who believe in accountable and transparent government. So why is it that they are supporting her?

 

[coldjoint]

Don't call me dumb.

I'm not the one making up baloney because I don't have an argument. You made a silly claim that data was destroyed or hidden and things are being covered up.

Present your evidence, show your proof.

Or don't make such inane arguments.

Too dumb to answer any of those questions you just quoted.

 

[beefheart]

Too dumb to answer any of those questions you just quoted.

You are so busted. You claimed that data was destroyed or hidden and that things are being covered up.

YOU made the accusation. YOU are the one that can't back it up.

 

[coldjoint]

Small correction. Not 'how' to think, but 'what' to think.

There's a list that someone posted in which he categorized all the different Hillary supporters. I'd refer you to search and find that list. The poster did such a fine job, I wouldn't want to post a mere imitation of it, nor take credit for it.

The two sided sword of Trumps bombast is that he's turned many against him that he may not have.

A pundit asserted tonight that the real Hillary and her vastly powerful political machine, her slush fund foundation and her standard method of operation are pretty much antithetical to the majority of liberals who believe in accountable and transparent government. So why is it that they are supporting her?

I wish I would have used "what" also.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

I still remember the Sunday morning when Rice came on each of the Sunday talkies and blamed it on the Internet video, that stank already then.

Hillary said the same thing without saying it, as did Obama. It was a masterful word play by both of them at the same time as it was a lie by both of them.

But you conveniently overlook the fact that the mastermind of the Benghazi attack stated after he was arrested that it was the video that set him off.

Whoopsie.

NYT: Captured Suspect Said Benghazi Attack Was Revenge For Anti-Islam Video

 

[coldjoint]

You are so busted. You claimed that data was destroyed or hidden and that things are being covered up.

YOU made the accusation. YOU are the one that can't back it up.

I said it could have been, and I think it most likely happened. Did I quote a source? Calm down it will stay covered up for quite a while.

Now, turn that frown upside down.:lamo

 

[coldjoint]

But you conveniently overlook the fact that the mastermind of the Benghazi attack stated after he was arrested that it was the video that set him off.

Whoopsie.

Source?

 

[Quazimodo]

Right! If you get a liberal just a little bit outside of "The Playbook" they're irretrievably lost. You can't fix stupid. The term "useful idiots" is SO perfect.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

NYT: Captured Suspect Said Benghazi Attack Was Revenge For Anti-Islam Video

 

[beefheart]

I said it could have been, and I think it most likely happened. Did I quote a source? Calm down it will stay covered up for quite a while.

Now, turn that frown upside down.:lamo

Here is what you actually said:

You mean the data that has not been destroyed or hidden. Or the intimidation of witnesses we have not heard about?

Funny, I don't see "could have been" or "most likely happened"

If you make a statement, back it up.

And don't try to back out of what you actually said.

Face it...you got owned.

 

[coldjoint]

Here is what you actually said:

You mean the data that has not been destroyed or hidden. Or the intimidation of witnesses we have not heard about?

Funny, I don't see "could have been" or "most likely happened"

If you make a statement, back it up.

And don't try to back out of what you actually said.

Face it...you got owned.

I would rather be owned than support people, who work for us ,lying to us and the idiots who think it is alright if they don't get caught.

I do not believe them. You do. What group does that put you in?

 

[ttwtt78640]

NYT: Captured Suspect Said Benghazi Attack Was Revenge For Anti-Islam Video

Wow! Based on solid hearsay evidence from "other Libyans" alleged by a single NYT reporter.

 

[beefheart]

I would rather be owned than support people, who work for us ,lying to us and the idiots who think it is alright if they don't get caught.

I do not believe them. You do. What group does that put you in?

So, now you are backtracking and trying to twist to something new?

Nice try.

Here is a tip: If you make a claim, back it up, show your work, provide proof.

Otherwise, no one will think you are a serious poster.

 

[Quazimodo]

Dude, now you're quoting the NEW YORK TIMES???????? What the heck are you, the Thread Comedian? Man, you owe me a keyboard....and some tissue and a fresh Coca-Cola.

 

[coldjoint]

So, now you are backtracking and trying to twist to something new?

Nice try.

Here is a tip: If you make a claim, back it up, show your work, provide proof.

Otherwise, no one will think you are a serious poster.

Here is a tip for you. Don't play the horses.:lamo

 

[Quazimodo]

And Beefheart, if you think anybody in the entire galaxy takes you seriously on ANY topic, then I need for you to start sharing some of that stuff you've been smokin' and I want it NOW!