BridgeGate

[Ms Tree]

Does being placed in potential danger count for anything?

Besides, till Congress and Bush get into trouble for getting us into Iraq I really do not see Clinton getting in trouble for Libya.

 

[eolesen]

Nobody is suggesting Clinton "get in trouble" for her apparent malfeasance, but if she couldn't handle the responsibility she previously had, that's certainly an issue that should be explored before electing her to a higher office.

 

[cltrat]

Does being placed in potential danger count for anything?

Besides, till Congress and Bush get into trouble for getting us into Iraq I really do not see Clinton getting in trouble for Libya.

ahh the standard liberal mantra when in doubt whip the blame Bush card out

 

[700UW]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/40811/13-benghazis-happened-under-president-bush-and-fox-news-said-nothing
 
Where was your outrage over this?
 

 
The Daily Banter's Bob Cesca produced this astounding timeline of 13 separate incidents where U.S. consulates were attacked during President Bush's, and then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's, tenure.
 

 

[Ms Tree]

 

ahh the standard liberal mantra when in doubt whip the blame Bush card out

 

Ahh, the standard conservative mantra. When in doubt just ignore history and hold others to a different standard.

Also, perhaps you missed the part about Congress being to blame as well. I guess that does not fit your POV either.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

Maybe I just missed it but did anyone get killed during this say like Benghazi and Clintons lack of action?

 
Benghazi was a joke. Congratulations to you for allowing yourself to be duped into a frothy rage over a manufactured issue.

 

[cltrat]

Benghazi was a joke. Congratulations to you for allowing yourself to be duped into a frothy rage over a manufactured issue.

really? I doubt the families of the dead thought it was.

Are you normally this stupid or are you having a really good day?
Of course I know you bow down ,kiss Obama's ass and believe anything he says and you call people fools....lol

 

[cltrat]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/40811/13-benghazis-happened-under-president-bush-and-fox-news-said-nothing
 
Where was your outrage over this?

where is yours over Benghazi or the President lying his ass off about healthcare at every stop?

 

[700UW]

Nice deflection, its ok for people to get hurt and die when Bush 2 was President in your mind right?
 
And the hits keep coming for Christie:
 
http://guardianlv.com/2014/01/chris-christie-gets-slammed-by-new-mayoral-charges/

 

[cltrat]

Nice deflection, its ok for people to get hurt and die when Bush 2 was President in your mind right?
 
And the hits keep coming for Christie:
 
http://guardianlv.com/2014/01/chris-christie-gets-slammed-by-new-mayoral-charges/

apparently it's ok for people to get hurt and die under Obama in your mind so what's your point?

 

[700UW]

Did I say that?
 
I posted that  incidents happened under Bush part 2, yet none of you made an issue over it, and instead of answering it, you ignore it and blame Obama.
 
Now an educated person would give their opinion on it and not be a hypocrite.
 
More people died and got injured at embassies around the world under George Bush part 2, than Obama.

Cant change that fact.

 

[eolesen]

Statistically correct, yet many of the attacks in the Bush years were suicide attacks, and none of them occurred at a facility where security had been reduced despite the warning signs now made known to the public.

The point about Benghazi isn't about who the president is. It's how the situation was allowed to happen in the first place, but more importantly, about the lies which were made to cover up the tracks of what State knew was going to point back to their negligence.

And that's a reasonable parallel to Bridgegate. The level of media investigation focused on two lanes of traffic cones has already far exceeded the level of attention on the deaths of four Americans. Hypocrisy at its best.

 

[Force Majeure]

I think it is more of not wanting people to know what that outpost was and what they were doing. That was probably a CIA outpost, not a diplomatic mission. That would make sense with not having any visible security surge.

Of course, I have no way of knowing that is correct. Just my thought.

 

[Ms Tree]

Dupe

 

[Ms Tree]

I do not remember where I read it but I seem to recall that the ambassador did not want more security as e thought it would interfere with their mission there.

Would a SoS over ride the decision of someone on the ground with out cause?