http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...ploded-rage-benghazi-testimony-165326232.html Sometime a picture is worth ......
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Clinton ‘exploded with rage’
- Thread starter Jedi Knight
- Start date
Her and Obama are peas in a pod. They both cannot stand to be questioned. They are above such things. Bill, as much as I disliked his policies, he's mainly about having a good time. I read somewhere that the Whitehouse in the Clinton years was one of extremes. When Hillary was there it was on lock down. When she was gone it was Animal House. LOL
poncho
Well-Known Member
Clinton Testimony on Benghazi Leaves Real Questions Unanswered
Instead of telling Congress why the administration lied about the terror attack for days, falsely claiming that it was a “protest” gone awry, for example, Clinton claimed it did not matter anymore, urging everyone to just move on. Analysts and officials have also suggested the administration was running guns and heavy weapons to Islamic terrorists in Syria out of Benghazi, too, but despite the opportunity to get answers during the House and Senate committee hearings, it remains unclear what was going on at the U.S. mission there.
While accepting responsibility for the deadly attacks that claimed the lives of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Clinton was continually trying to deflect attention from the real scandals — the days of official lies after the assault, the allegations of Obama gun-running to Islamist “rebels” in Syria, support for al-Qaeda forces during the Libyan “revolution,” and more. Even with the establishment press running cover for Clinton and the administration, however, criticism about her testimony and Benghazigate more broadly continues to boil.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was among the few who sought serious answers from Clinton, but he made little progress. “Is the U.S. involved in any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, any how transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?" the liberty-minded senator asked her, echoing well-founded suspicions that have been raised by top American military officials, analysts, journalists, Middle Eastern security officials, and others.
Clinton acted surprised — almost as if she did not realize Sen. Paul was referring to the administration’s well-known and well-documented scheme to arm Islamist “rebels” in Syria via the Islamist Turkish government, similar to Obama’s lawless schemes in Libya. “To Turkey?” asked Clinton incredulously, face contorted. “I will have to take that question for the record; nobody’s ever raised that with me.” She later backtracked slightly, saying the question would have to be raised with “the agency” that ran the annex in Benghazi — presumably she was referring to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
CONTINUE . . .
These are the REAL questions that need to be answered.
Instead of telling Congress why the administration lied about the terror attack for days, falsely claiming that it was a “protest” gone awry, for example, Clinton claimed it did not matter anymore, urging everyone to just move on. Analysts and officials have also suggested the administration was running guns and heavy weapons to Islamic terrorists in Syria out of Benghazi, too, but despite the opportunity to get answers during the House and Senate committee hearings, it remains unclear what was going on at the U.S. mission there.
While accepting responsibility for the deadly attacks that claimed the lives of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Clinton was continually trying to deflect attention from the real scandals — the days of official lies after the assault, the allegations of Obama gun-running to Islamist “rebels” in Syria, support for al-Qaeda forces during the Libyan “revolution,” and more. Even with the establishment press running cover for Clinton and the administration, however, criticism about her testimony and Benghazigate more broadly continues to boil.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was among the few who sought serious answers from Clinton, but he made little progress. “Is the U.S. involved in any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, any how transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?" the liberty-minded senator asked her, echoing well-founded suspicions that have been raised by top American military officials, analysts, journalists, Middle Eastern security officials, and others.
Clinton acted surprised — almost as if she did not realize Sen. Paul was referring to the administration’s well-known and well-documented scheme to arm Islamist “rebels” in Syria via the Islamist Turkish government, similar to Obama’s lawless schemes in Libya. “To Turkey?” asked Clinton incredulously, face contorted. “I will have to take that question for the record; nobody’s ever raised that with me.” She later backtracked slightly, saying the question would have to be raised with “the agency” that ran the annex in Benghazi — presumably she was referring to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
CONTINUE . . .
These are the REAL questions that need to be answered.
Magnetic Poles
New Member
Paul is grandstanding for his fans. He wants so badly to become the next Mitt Romney.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Clinton was continually trying to deflect attention from the real scandals — the days of official lies after the assault, the allegations of Obama gun-running to Islamist “rebels” in Syria, support for al-Qaeda forces during the Libyan “revolution,” and more.
Or it could be Rand Paul wants some real answers about the real scandals here. I suspect this is much closer to the truth.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
She at least deserves a mention at the Emmy award ceremony. She couldn't manage tears like Bill could. He could cry out of one eye.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
poncho, poncho! There is no such thing as a lie to the radical leftist! In fact I am not sure there is any such thing as a lie to most lifelong politicians. They lie and obfuscate so often they lose track of what constitutes truth.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Yep because they know no matter how many lies they tell or how many crimes they commit or how badly they treat us we'll vote for them again next time around.
And we think they're the stupid ones?
Last edited by a moderator:
Magnetic Poles
New Member
It will be fun to watch Hillary kick Rand Paul's behind in the 2016 Presidential Elections.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Maybe but for now it's fun to watch reality kick your behind. :laugh:
Last edited by a moderator:
Magnetic Poles
New Member
Glad you find me entertaining, even though I have no idea what you are talking about. :wavey:
poncho
Well-Known Member
They say denial ain't just a river in Egypt. :laugh:
Personally I find you more entertaining than any of those police state propaganda shows on tv where the good guys wear black face masks, carry German submachine guns, never use warrants and find the constitution way to constraining to suit them. If you've seen one you've seen em all.
Last edited by a moderator:
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Same with the movies and the hollywood left make millions selling that stuff to a gullible public. Meanwhile laughing all the way to the bank or an Obama fund raiser!
Last movie I saw in a theater was Hunt for Red October. Don't know how many years ago that was.
poncho
Well-Known Member
I can't even remember the last time I was in a theater. My son in law and I get together and watch the tv shows sometimes just to pick them apart to see what new methods of indoctrination they are using to condition the masses.
One thing we've noticed is the amount of occult symbolism being used is outrageous these days and it's not just the movies and tv shows it's the music industry. That's the absolute worst.
I thought that Hillary looked unwell. She must be sick and tired of taking the blame for this tragedy in Libya when it probably was the fault of the White House. Do you remember in Mogadishu when Les Aspin was called upon to take the blame for failing to deliver the supplies asked for by Powell when everyone thought but no one could prove that Bill Clinton was the one who issued the denial of supplies?
Poor Les Aspin was called up to Congress, forced to resign as Secretary of Defense, and died shortly thereafter with his name muddied. Of course, the Clinton name is muddied also.
Poor Les Aspin was called up to Congress, forced to resign as Secretary of Defense, and died shortly thereafter with his name muddied. Of course, the Clinton name is muddied also.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
The questioning of Hillary was a perfect example of the good old boy/girl attitude of the Senate. The only tough questions asked were by Senators Johnson of Wisconsin, Rubio of Florida, and Paul of Kentucky who arrived after Clinton left. I was very disappointed by Senator Corker of Tennessee. Of course the democrat Senators just blew smoke, so much that Hillary had to wave her arms like a windmill!