Given the Republican obsession with Benghazi talking points, it’s time for a very specific flashback. In 2008, two non partisan groups released a study that determined that President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001.
I liked the idea the Bushies had about handing over control of our ports to some outfit in the Middle East; if I remember right, they actually let a contract to that foreign company that was later rescinded. This situation wasn't a false statement, but just another monumentally stupid idea from "the decider" and his cohorts.
And then there were the 13 attacks on U.S. embassies during Dumbya's term. I think
the death toll was eighty something. If Issa holds another Benghazi hearing and I
were the Democrats, I'd make up one of those big posters listing them, just for
comparison's sake.
The man who was vice president during the Sept. 11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in 2001 says that last year’s attack in Benghazi was “one of the worst incidences, frankly, that I can recall in my career.”
In an interview on Fox News on Monday, former Vice President Dick Cheney accused President Barack Obama and his administration of lying about the attack in Benghazi and then staging a cover up to hide the lies.
“They lied,” Cheney said. “They claimed it was because of a demonstration video so that they wouldn’t have to admit it was really all about their incompetence.”
“I think it’s one of the worst incidents, frankly, that I can recall in my career,” he insisted. “If they told the truth about Benghazi, that it was a terrorist attack by an Al-Qaeda-led group, it would destroy the confidence that was the basis of his campaign for reelection.”
“They were trying to perpetuate this fiction that there was no terrorist threat because they got bin Laden and that’s a lie.”
The biggest, most hypocritical lying sack of shit conveniently forgets about the PDB's the Bush got on bin Laden /Al Qaeda, forgets about September 11th, 2001, and forgets (and completely dishonors) the 4,400 Americans killed in Iraq because of his fraudulent machinations ... in order to jump on the "Get Hillary" bandwagon. Lowlife POS.
Clinton getting a BJ was declared to be of vital national importance by the Republicans. They did everything but demand that he get re-blown on the Senate floor. ("We must know exactly what happened!!!) Everything had to be done in public and under oath, and every word published.
Not so with 9/11, when they investigated what warnings the President received.
The White House wanted to limit any appearance by the president to just one hour spent with two of the commissioners. Bush II did eventually meet with the Commission, but only under stringent conditions: Bush had to have Dick Cheney at his side, testifying at the same time; testimony was given in private and NOT UNDER OATH; no press coverage was allowed; and no recordings or transcripts were made of what they said.
But nothing covered up. No sir, why would you think that?
"Bin Ladin Public Profile May Presage Attack" (5/3/01)
"Bin Ladin's Networks' Plans Advancing" (5/26/01)
"Bin Ladin Attacks May Be Imminent" (6/23/01)
"Bin Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats" (6/25/01)
"Planning for Bin Ladin Attacks Continues, Despite Delays" (7/02/01)
- subject lines of Richard Clarke emails to Bush Administration prior to 9/11/01
"You know, Dick Clarke. Dick Clarke, who was the head of the counterterrorism program in the run-up to 9/11. He obviously missed it."
- Dick Cheney, on Richard Clarke
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."
- Presidential Daily Brief, August 6, 2001
"All right, you've covered your ass now."
- George W. Bush, to the CIA briefer who warned him about an imminent bin Laden strike, August 6, 2001
oops, or opps, it won't be my last time, but I do try.
I'm not complaining, there's no reason that anyone should read every thread. In fact, this shows that you and I independently have similar interests. I was just giving you and others the info.
