Posted on 10/28/2012 11:39:49 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Chris Wallace this morning pressed Virginia Senator Mark Warner, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on whether the American drones monitoring the Benghazi attack were armed. Wallace challenged Warners assertion that disclosing this information would give up valuable intelligence:
I can understand how it would be politically embarrassing for the administration if it turns out those drones were armed and the weapons were not fired when those men, the Americans, were under attack for 7 hours. I cant understand how it would give up valuable intelligence. Can you tell me directly, were the drones armed or not that were flying over Benghazi and were recording it in real time?
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Thx. I’ve got the station set up and ready to go at 8:00.
The democratic party in the United States is a criminal party. They have moved away from any sense of loyalty to the people of this country. The press will not say this, nor will the republican party.....to do so would cause a crisis as large as the civil war. So we limp along acting as if things are still normal. Things are not normal.
Mark Warner isn’t going to be the one who spills the beans, but they already know, this is just trying to look innocent and respond only with, “What 900-pound gorilla in the room?”
There was once a political party known as the “Know -Nothings”, which has long since disappeared into history. The Democrats are trying very hard to emulate the actions of that “Know-Nothing” doctrine.
“I know NOSSING!”
Get the maintenance officers that care for those drones, get the records, were those drones armed, yes or no .
Marco Rubio and Saxby Chambliss are on the Senate Intelligence Committee...why doesn’t Wallace just ask them?
Trying to get there tonight, after family dinner.
If it’s significant how about posting a thread, if You don’t see one from me. I’ll put KFI in the title.
Warner living proof that, ‘You can get by on your good looks!’
Will do.
This is a huge story but our own people have sometimes been making things up:
1. “we KNOW there was an AC-130 above bengazi”
2. “we KNOW the drones were armed”
In fact the first only appeared likely and now the second appears likely. And we don’t yet know.
It's about all he's really qualified for...
The proper question is.. WHY weren’t they armed..
Two drones and neither was armed?.. WHY?
Who said not to arm them? and WHY?..
WE ARE THE NEW NEWS MEDIA..GET USED TO IT !
Word of Mouth Media
Need to ask one of those “Did you stop beating your wife questions.” Why was an armed drone not allowed to defend the consulate? Why was a stand down order given?
Using “sources and methods” to justify withhold this info is first-magnitude Bravo Sierra.
I think it’s known that there were two 130’s within striking distance.
I think the couple of hellfires are default.
In that part of the world I cannot imagine why they would ever be unarmed. I also saw that the first drone was running out of fuel a few hours into the attack so they sent a replacement. By that time they knew the place was under attack so they should surely have sent an armed drone. Only makes sense.
On the other hand, it's the anniversary of 9/11 and this wasn't the only attack that day, so why wouldn't you be loaded up for whatever?
WTF was obama really doing there?
Screwing up, for one!
He could have been an American hero coming to the Ambassador's rescue, especially when he "leaked" the war tapes and recordings for beat Romney election propaganda.
It would have been better than getting Osama and given him an easy win.
Instead, this is worse than Carter's failure in the desert and the coverup is worse than Nixon's Watergate.
Impeach!
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.