Congress to Investigate Benghazi 'Talking Points

[Bungalow Bill]

A very appropriate site name, Before It's News, it's wingnut delusion. Changes were
made in order to protect intelligence. I'm sure the Republicans will waste time trying
to prove otherwise, but it's their time.

[Stinger]

A very appropriate site name, Before It's News, it's wingnut delusion. Changes were
made in order to protect intelligence. I'm sure the Republicans will waste time trying
to prove otherwise, but it's their time.

It's good that they read their delusion Before It's News because it will never actually make it to "News."

Except maybe on Faux News.

At least Stupy Sales has shown us why he is so far removed from reality.

Now, is it their fault for peddling such nonsense or his fault for falling for delusion after delusion after delusion ... ad infinitum?

[Bungalow Bill]

Yeah, maybe the nutjobs' motto should be Fool me once shame on you, fool me five
hundred times shame on me. As goes Fast and Furious, so goes the Benghazi
"cover up."

[Supsalemgr]

A very appropriate site name, Before It's News, it's wingnut delusion. Changes were
made in order to protect intelligence. I'm sure the Republicans will waste time trying
to prove otherwise, but it's their time.

It's good that they read their delusion Before It's News because it will never actually make it to "News."

Except maybe on Faux News.

At least Stupy Sales has shown us why he is so far removed from reality.

Now, is it their fault for peddling such nonsense or his fault for falling for delusion after delusion after delusion ... ad infinitum?

Even Stingers comrade Bunghy admits changes were made. Of course, he put a spin on it. Fine with me.

[Supsalemgr]

Now that is a new spin for lying to the American people.

[neoplacebo]

Now that is a new spin for lying to the American people.

No, it isn't. One of the things the American intelligence community does not do, and never has done, is broadcast its intentions, suspicions, findings, or failures during an ongoing operation or investigation. And most of the time, these subjects aren't ever broadcast except when a former agent writes a book or when the sitting vice president blows the cover of a current CIA operative.

[Stinger]

A very appropriate site name, Before It's News, it's wingnut delusion. Changes were
made in order to protect intelligence. I'm sure the Republicans will waste time trying
to prove otherwise, but it's their time.

It's good that they read their delusion Before It's News because it will never actually make it to "News."

Except maybe on Faux News.

At least Stupy Sales has shown us why he is so far removed from reality.

Now, is it their fault for peddling such nonsense or his fault for falling for delusion after delusion after delusion ... ad infinitum?

Even Stingers comrade Bunghy admits changes were made. Of course, he put a spin on it. Fine with me.

You were talking about Clapper changing his story. Bungalow Bill said nothing about Clapper changing his story.

I know it's difficult, but try to keep up.

Still waiting on your proof that Clapper changed his story.

[Stinger]

Now that is a new spin for lying to the American people.

No, it isn't. One of the things the American intelligence community does not do, and never has done, is broadcast its intentions, suspicions, findings, or failures during an ongoing operation or investigation. And most of the time, these subjects aren't ever broadcast except when a former agent writes a book or when the sitting vice president blows the cover of a current CIA operative.

Stupy doesn't know real stuff like that. Just the Kool Aid stuff.

[Supsalemgr]

Haven't you libs figured out i do not participate in tail chasing contests?

[rstrong]

Haven't you libs figured out i do not participate in tail chasing contests?

You post an all-accusation-no-evidence claim. It gets disproven. You repeat the claim anyway, refusing to provide evidence or reasoning with "I do not participate in tail chasing contests." More evidence disproving the claim gets posted. You either repeat your "tail chasing" cop-out, or run away.

People here do indeed have you figured out.

[O Really]

Super-S can defend himself if he chooses, but if it were me and I had made a simple statement, "Clapper changed his story," and inferred from that that one or the other versions must be a 'lie," I think I'd avoid "tail chasing" by saying something like this:

"On (enter date), according to (credible source) Clapper said, "(direct quote, in context")
"Subsequent to that, on (enter later date), according to (credible source) Clapper said, "(direct quote, in context")
"The difference in these statements is substantially different in facts presented and cannot be reconciled by a difference in knowledge of events at the time or normal national security protocol. Therefore, a reasonable conclusion is that Clapper was intentionally attempting to mislead the public for (enter reason)"

Of course, that's just me. Not everybody likes to deal with actual evidence.

[billy.pilgrim]

Haven't you libs figured out i do not participate in tail chasing contests?

You post an all-accusation-no-evidence claim. It gets disproven. You repeat the claim anyway, refusing to provide evidence or reasoning with "I do not participate in tail chasing contests." More evidence disproving the claim gets posted. You either repeat your "tail chasing" cop-out, or run away.

People here do indeed have you figured out.

tag is still repeating the acorn story about voter fraud and recruiting under age prostitutes - what's it been now - 3 years since it was proven to not involve voter fraud and a complete lie about the prostitutes, but them fact thingies don't deter the super tag from tagging right along

tag ain't nothing but a tool

[Supsalemgr]

Fish Head, care to post where I have referenced ACORN recently?

[Stinger]

Haven't you libs figured out i do not participate in tail chasing contests?

No, but we've figured out that you can't hold up your end of an intelligent, adult discussion where you have to back up whatever you say.

A long, long time ago, we figured that one out. You just keep proving it again and again.

[Supsalemgr]

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/1 ... community/

This is from CNN. Keep making fools of yourselves by claiming the talking points were not changed.

[Stinger]

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/1 ... community/

This is from CNN. Keep making fools of yourselves by claiming the talking points were not changed.

Look. Chickenshit is running again. Are you the one with amnesia?

Let me take you back to what you posted just two days ago:

It just begs more questions. The first question is why did Clapper change his story from last week? It is still a coverup.

http://blueridgedebate.com/phpBB3/viewt ... 3&start=25

No one said that the talking points didn't change as they were reviewed by various agencies. What I challenged you on was "Clapper changing his story from last week" and your "coverup".

That was your statement that I questioned. You were so sure you were right that you followed up with:

Damn, Stinger is so dumb or in denial with his head is so far up his a-- he can't see a thing. Clapper testified the week before he was not responsible for changing the talking points. Point one answered.

More:

Stinger, he changed his story. If you don't accept that, then go back in your hole.

Now Stinger can go back in his hole. This is where you posted from "Before It's News." Do you follow their bigfoot section?

Sorry, but I have no cure for chronic denial syndrome.

Up until noon yesterday, it was "Clapper changed his story." I guess that, after you ate the turkey, you got amnesia and started talking about "changes were made."

Even Stingers comrade Bunghy admits changes were made. Of course, he put a spin on it. Fine with me.

From "Clapper changed his story" to "changes were made," and still no proof of a coverup.

Apparently, I'm "so dumb or in denial with [my] head is so far up [my] a-- " that you can't prove your point, and now you don't even know what you're talking about.

Like I said, you've proved that you can't hold up your end of an intelligent, adult conversation. Hell, you can't even remember what you were arguing less than a day ago.

Still waiting on your proof that Clapper changed his story.

And please don't quote from "Before It's News."

[Supsalemgr]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162- ... igned-off/

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorial ... zigate.htm

[Stinger]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162- ... igned-off/

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorial ... zigate.htm

Are we back on topic yet?

You posted what House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers said, . . . sort of.

You said Clapper changed his story, so I've been asking you for two days what Clapper said.

So far, nothing. No Clapper quotes. No evidence of a coverup.

Looks like you're batting 0.000.

[Supsalemgr]

Enjoying picking the flys--t out of the pepper?

[Stinger]

Enjoying picking the flys--t out of the pepper?

Enjoy running from your own words . . . again.



You're the asshat who said that I was "so dumb or in denial with [my] head is so far up [my] a-- can't see a thing."

Now we find out that you once again can't back up anything you say.

I guess that makes you dumb or in denial with your head so far up your ass you can't see a thing.