Skip to comments.
Bombshell: Clinton Ordered More Security, Obama Denied Request
News Ninja ^
| 10/25/12
| staff
Posted on 10/25/2012 9:58:14 AM PDT by Nachum
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-130 next last
To: Opinionated Blowhard
If you throw in Jarrett and Axelrod, I vote for “too arrogant”.
21
posted on
10/25/2012 10:21:56 AM PDT
by
rod1
(CTLY)
To: Nachum
Unless it were a direct order from POTUS to cut security, why would the SoS need POTUS authorization for diplomatic security?
That would be like a local Bank of America branch needing approval from the corporate CEO to hire an additional security guard.
==
If POTUS is making decisions on that level, he doesn’t need a SoS.
22
posted on
10/25/2012 10:24:21 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Nachum
BOOM - this is big! Tweet it Facebook it Send it to Drudge!
23
posted on
10/25/2012 10:27:53 AM PDT
by
blueyon
(The U. S. Constitution - read it and weep)
To: skeeter
The Clintons have decided to cut their losses. I was wondering how long it would take.
Hillary wants to be viable for 2016. Period.
24
posted on
10/25/2012 10:28:12 AM PDT
by
Tennessean4Bush
(An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist fears this is true.)
To: Nachum
Potentially hugh and series!
25
posted on
10/25/2012 10:30:06 AM PDT
by
vanilla swirl
(searching for something meaningful to say)
To: Nachum
26
posted on
10/25/2012 10:31:59 AM PDT
by
McGruff
(Obama lied. Heroes died.)
Comment #27 Removed by Moderator
To: Chuckster
Hillarys October surprise. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
28
posted on
10/25/2012 10:33:54 AM PDT
by
Windflier
(To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
To: Nachum
Reported anywhere else? Haven’t seen this at other sites.
29
posted on
10/25/2012 10:34:15 AM PDT
by
blueunicorn6
("A crack shot and a good dancer")
To: Nachum
30
posted on
10/25/2012 10:34:18 AM PDT
by
timestax
(Why not drug tests for the President AND all White Hut staff ? ? ?)
To: luvbach1
>> One must remember that the typical Obama supporter doesn’t care whether Obama denied security to the consulate or not. <<
Actually, the typical Obama supporter doesn’t even know that there’s an issue with Benghazi, much less any of the details discussed in forums like this. They are truly clueless, which is why the MSM still has so much power.
When this is all over, IF Romney wins, some serious thought has to be given to raising the bar in grade schools and high schools so that kids reaching the age of 18 have some understanding of the basic principles upon which our country was founded. Otherwise it’s just a matter of time....assuming it’s not already too late.
31
posted on
10/25/2012 10:35:10 AM PDT
by
Norseman
(Defund the Left-Completely!)
To: Norseman
I should add, in fairness, that far too many Romney voters are also clueless about Benghazi, again due to the complicity of the MSM.
32
posted on
10/25/2012 10:37:13 AM PDT
by
Norseman
(Defund the Left-Completely!)
To: All
33
posted on
10/25/2012 10:38:29 AM PDT
by
musicman
(Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
To: TomGuy
Diplomad posted that he thought Stevens only nominally reported to Clinton. Makes sense.
Intelligence.
I have said from the beginning that Benghazi had the hallmarks of CIA but people didn’t think so. They thought he was an ordinary Ambassador.
Not so.
He got his orders from someone other than Clinton.
Drudge has up that Clinton might stay in her position a big longer- whatever that means.
And I don’t buy that B&C are having fights about releasing info.
That is just to make her look good.
To: Norseman
Actually, the typical Obama supporter doesnt even know that theres an issue with Benghazi, much less any of the details discussed in forums like this. That's why it's been nigh impossible to erode the Bamster's base. They are behind a firewall of ignorance.
35
posted on
10/25/2012 10:40:35 AM PDT
by
luvbach1
(Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
To: Mobties
Wrong Party.............to see that happen.
36
posted on
10/25/2012 10:40:51 AM PDT
by
Osage Orange
( Liberalism, ideas so good they have to be mandatory.)
To: Nachum
No more spiking of the football by the dems with the death of Bin Laden w/out invoking the death of Amb. Stevens and 3 other Americans.
37
posted on
10/25/2012 10:41:52 AM PDT
by
Hotlanta Mike
(Resurrect the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC)...before there is no America!)
To: Mr Ramsbotham
I called for additional security ... but somehow it didnt make it to the President ... someone screwed up somewhere, and were going to get to the bottom of it
Come on people Hillary is covering her Butt and Obama's
Some underling is going to get blamed
All this conjecture about the Clinton's getting even etc etc is just dreaming
38
posted on
10/25/2012 10:42:43 AM PDT
by
uncbob
To: blueunicorn6
“Havent seen this at other sites.”
And you won’t. This won’t be covered at all. The media is counting on the fact that only political wonks like us will be aware of it. And, even if Obama supporters become aware, they won’t care. They’ll be weighing four dead Americans compliments of Obama against free ‘Bamaphones. The ‘Bamaphones will win.
To: Tennessean4Bush
Hillary wants to be viable for 2016. Er... Hillary's 'viability' left the toothpaste tube a long time ago.
40
posted on
10/25/2012 10:43:58 AM PDT
by
Windflier
(To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-130 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson