Supplemental: Candidate Fiorina drops L-bomb!

SATURDAY, AUGUST 8, 2015

Chris Matthews quickly collapses:
It has been a potent, never-ending theme over the past 23 years, especially during the Clinton/Gore/Clinton years.

For whatever reason, the liberal world has shown little skill in dealing with this potent theme—or perhaps, little appetite for the fight.

The potent theme arose again in Thursday’s undercard debate. On her way to an undercard win, Candidate Fiorina offered dropped these L-bombs during her closing statement:
HEMMER (8/6/15): Carly Fiorina, closing statement.

FIORINA: Hillary Clinton lies about Benghazi, she lies about e-mails. She is still defending Planned Parenthood, and she is still her party’s frontrunner. 2016 is going to be a fight between conservatism and a Democrat party that is undermining the very character of this nation. We need a nominee who is going to throw every punch, not pull punches, and someone who cannot stumble before he even gets into the ring.

I am not a member of the political class. I am a conservative; I can win this job, I can do this job, I need your help, I need your support. I will, with your help and support, lead the resurgence of this great nation.
By wide agreement, Fiorina emerged as the winner of the undercard debate, partly because of the feisty way she pounded Candidate Clinton.

Later that evening, Chris Matthews challenged Fiorina about her use of the L-bomb. As usual, he was irate and highly incensed but hapless and underprepared.

After a challenge, Matthews collapsed. Here’s the way that went:
MATTHEWS (8/6/15): Do you really think that’s a way to engage in a debate? To call your opponent a liar? I’m astounded by that judgment of yours.

FIORINA First, I was very specific about the subjects about which I think she has lied. I didn’t say she lied about everything. I was very specific. Very fact-based, actually. You are the one who has made a generalized comment now about her. Not me. Secondly, I will debate her. Excuse me. Secondly, I will debate her—

MATTHEWS: Go through your list. Go through your list of where she’s lied.

FIORINA: Benghazi, e-mails and server.

[...]

MATTHEWS: Let me put a fine point on that. Why did she lie, or how did she lie, as you put it, about Benghazi? Where was her lie?

FIORINA: Okay. It is very clear from all the data, it is very clear from the data, it is very clear from the e-mails that she, that the president of the United States, that the Secretary of State, and that the military understood this was a purposeful terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11, and they understood it while it was going on.

So tell me then, why would you talk about, the next day, from the State Department, why would you talk about a video? Why would you explain that this is not America?
Why would you stand over the bodies of the fallen and say it again? Why not come out and say, “This was a purposeful terrorist attack on our embassy. Four brave Americans were killed, and we are going to seek retribution.”

MATTHEWS: Thank you, Carly Fiorina. I see why you stood out tonight. Thank you for coming on the program tonight.

There you have it. Joe [Scarborough], what do you think of that?
We’d call that vintage Matthews. That said:

In that exchange, we see the return of a dominant, 23-year theme—the theme that, among other services, decided the outcome of Campaign 2000.

We also see Candidate Fiorina defining one of the alleged “lies” with great precision.

In that exchange, Fiorina says that Secretary Clinton lied on September 12, 2001 about the Benghazi attack. She says Clinton knew the attack was “a purposeful terrorist attack” designed to coincide with “the anniversary of 9/11.”

She says that Clinton lied the next day when she spoke about a video—the insulting YouTube video which was creating turmoil at that time all over the Muslim world.

As usual, Matthews aggressively challenged Fiorina, then had nothing to say in rebuttal. We decided to take a look at the statement Clinton made on the day in question.

As far as we know, it’s false to say that Clinton and Obama believed the attack was a preplanned effort specifically designed for September 11. As far as we know, no such judgment about the attack has been reached, even today, by our intelligence services.

At any rate, Matthews’ collapse captures the way the liberal world has reacted to such L-bombs over the past 23 years. Matthews puffed himself up in a state of rage, then collapsed in a useless heap.

That’s the way the career liberal world had played this game all these years, except to the extent that the liberal world has delivered these L-bombs themselves.

(Right through 2008, Matthews was one of the most aggressive attack dogs against both Clintons and Gore. Accuracy was rarely required.)

Fiorina’s L-bomb will be repeated again and again. Because such claims have been made so many times over so many years, this is a theme which gains easy purchase with a great many voters.

Today, we’re putting you on notice. How well will our fiery liberal heroes respond to Fiorina’s claim?

Below, you see what Secretary Clinton said at the State Department on the day in question. Your challenge, should you agree to take it:

Can you find a lie? Beyond that, will you ever see the day when your liberal heroes take the trouble, and display the skill required, to respond to such attacks?

On Thursday night, Matthews collapsed in a heap, with nothing to say, in the face of Fiorina’s attack. That’s the way our multimillionaire, career liberal heroes have behaved for 23 years:
CLINTON (9/12/12): Yesterday, our U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya was attacked. Heavily armed militants assaulted the compound and set fire to our buildings. American and Libyan security personnel battled the attackers together. Four Americans were killed. They included Sean Smith, a Foreign Service information management officer, and our Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. We are still making next of kin notifications for the other two individuals.

This is an attack that should shock the conscience of people of all faiths around the world. We condemn in the strongest terms this senseless act of violence, and we send our prayers to the families, friends, and colleagues of those we’ve lost.

All over the world, every day, America’s diplomats and development experts risk their lives in the service of our country and our values because they believe that the United States must be a force for peace and progress in the world, that these aspirations are worth striving and sacrificing for. Alongside our men and women in uniform, they represent the best traditions of a bold and generous nation.

In the lobby of this building, the State Department, the names of those who have fallen in the line of duty are inscribed in marble. Our hearts break over each one. And now, because of this tragedy, we have new heroes to honor and more friends to mourn.

Chris Stevens fell in love with the Middle East as a young Peace Corps volunteer teaching English in Morocco. He joined the Foreign Service, learned languages, won friends for America in distant places and made other people’s hopes his own.

In the early days of the Libyan revolution, I asked Chris to be our envoy to the rebel opposition. He arrived on a cargo ship in the port of Benghazi and began building our relationships with Libya’s revolutionaries.

He risked his life to stop a tyrant then gave his life trying to help build a better Libya. The world needs more Chris Stevens. I spoke with his sister, Ann, this morning and told her that he will be remembered as a hero by many nations.

Shawn Smith was an Air Force veteran. He spent ten years as an information management officer in the State Department. He was posted at The Hague and was in Libya on a brief temporary assignment.

He was a husband to his wife, Heather, with whom I spoke this morning. He was a father to two young children, Samantha and Nathan. They will grow up being proud of the service their father gave to our country, service that took him to Baghdad and finally to Benghazi.

The mission that drew Chris and Shawn and their colleagues to Libya is both noble and necessary. And we and the people of Libya honor their memory by carrying it forward. This is not easy. Today, many Americans are asking, indeed, I asked myself, how could this happen?

How could this happen in a country we helped liberate in a city we helped save from destruction? This question reflects just how complicated and at times how confounding the world can be. But we must be clear eyed even in our grief.

This was an attack by a small and savage group, not the government or people of Libya. Everywhere Chris and his team went in Libya, in a country scarred by war and tyranny, they were hailed as friends and partners.

And when the attack came yesterday, Libyans stood and fought to defend our post. Some were wounded. Libyans carried Chris's body to the hospital and they helped rescue and lead other Americans to safety. And last night when I spoke with the president of Libya, he strongly condemned the violence and pledged every effort to protect our people and pursue those responsible. The friendship between our countries born out of shared struggle will not be another casualty of this attack.

A free and stable Libya is still in America's interest and security. And we will not turn our back on that. Nor will we rest until those responsible for these attacks are found and brought to justice.

We are working closely with the Libyan authorities to move swiftly and surely. We are also working with partners around the world to safeguard other American embassies, consulates and citizens.

There will be more time later to reflect, but today we have work to do. There is no higher priority than protecting our men and women wherever they serve. We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault.

Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.

America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation, but let me be clear. There is no justification for this, none. Violence like this is no way to honor religion or faith.

And as long as there are those who would take innocent life in the name of God, the world will never know a true and lasting peace. It is especially difficult that this happened on September 11th. It's an anniversary that means a great deal to all Americans. Every year on that day, we are reminded that our work is not yet finished.

That the job of putting an end to violent extremism and building a safe and stable world continues. But September 11th means even more than that.

It is a day on which we remember thousands of American heroes, the bonds that connect all Americans wherever we are on this earth and the values that see us through every storm. And now it is a day on which we will remember Sean, Chris and their colleagues.

May God bless them and may God bless the thousands of Americans working in every corner of the world who make this country the greatest force for peace, prosperity and progress. And a force that has always stood for human dignity, the greatest force the world has ever known. And may God continue to bless the United States of America.

Thank you.
Fiorina said Clinton lied that day. Can you find a lie in that statement?

As usual, Matthews—our multimillionaire corporate defender—collapsed in a heap when the L-bomb was dropped. This theme has been potent for 23 years because of behavior like that.

He was once a virulent, aggressive attack dog. Having been reinvented—you might say “fixed”—he’s now a useless defender.

62 comments:

  1. These are "Clinton Rules"

    You can say any fucking thing you want about the Clintons and the media will applaud you and never challenge you. I'm surprised Matthews even attempted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @mm

      HRC first mentioned the specific YouTube video on September 13, 2012, not September 12. HRC did mention an internet video on September 12. No wonder Matthews chose not to quibble with Fiorina. Why is B.S. quibbling? It's not as if Fiorina said the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 8, 1941.

      Can you find the error in B.S.'s own passage:

      "In that exchange, Fiorina says that Secretary Clinton lied on September 12, 2001 about the Benghazi attack."

      Hint: Fiorina did not say 2001.

      Delete
    2. cicero, you traitorous treasonous bastard.
      you and your republican friends inflicted the dumbest motherfucker to ever inhabit the WH on the American people and he promptly proceeded to preside over the worst sneak attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, and the country came together to support that dumb sonabitch for the Nations sake. And you fucking traitorous treasonous bastards have the nerve to investigate Benghazi till the end of time for your own political benefit. You care not one bit for what this does to the country, you intend to flog this attack on an American diplomatic facility in Libya for the rest of your pitiful empty pathetic lives.

      Delete
  2. I'm not sure why you think Mathhews would be prepared to rebut Fiorina's misstatements. He's never been fully briefed on any subject that he's reported/debated prior to this summer.
    Why would anything change now?
    You've noted,countless times how useless Mathews has been as a journalist. It's time to acknowledge that Mathews's show is infotainment. It always has been. He wouldn't be sitting in that chair if was clear that he was a threat to MSNBC's bottom line.
    The establishment media's current obsession is othering and dumping as much toxic waste as they can on Trump and propping up noted empty suit Jeb!. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of any of those clowns who were flopping around on Fox's stage Thursday night, but there's rarely been a clearer example of the press spinning scripts than what went on during and after that debate.
    MSNBCs days as the "Voice of Liberalism" are numbered. They couldn't make money running that line. Andy Lack has fired the afternoon crew, Chris Hayes's days are numbered and Rachel will only survive if she can transform her show into the MSNBC version of The Daily Show (don't count on it, news writers can't do comedy., see Chris Cilliza and Dana Millbank back in the day.)
    Bob, it's not 2000 anymore. There's a whole left internet that distrust the establishment media as much as Drudge Drones do. Presidential elections are no longer decided by persuasion, but by turn-out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The media is not trashing The Donald.
    What they are doing is poking a stick at a caged dog.
    That's all Megyn Kelly did.
    The media pokes, the dog snarls, the rubes gawk gleefully, and it will end when the rubes get bored and move on to ogle the 7 dwarfs that were too stupid to open the trapdoor under the clown car.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @gravy

      According to The Donald, FNC is indeed trashing him. Only 3 million "rubes" gawked at Jon Stewart's fair well show while 24 million watched the GOP debate.

      Fiorina deflated Trump and HRC is one stroke. Not bad for a Lilliputian.

      Delete
    2. Fiorina deflated Trump and HRC is one stroke.

      Christie cries out, "Me next!"

      Delete
  4. HRC was too lazy, so she said, to go on the five Sunday morning talks shows. That left Susan Rice to blame the pre planned terrorists attacks on the YouTube video. The idea of blaming a YouTube video came from Max Blumenthal, son of Sydney, HRC's go to source for her foreign policy insights.

    The "Some" in this passage:


    "Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."

    is in fact HRC herself as she continued to promote this narrative for the terrorist attack long after the intel from those on the ground told Foggy Bottom the YouTube video had zero to do with the mortar attack on the compound.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. cicero, you lying traitorous treasonous partisan jackass,

      When the fuck do you wingnut lying bastards give up?

      ***********
      Some of the harshest charges have been leveled at Rice, now Obama’s national security adviser, who represented the Obama administration on Sunday talk shows the weekend after the attack. Rice repeated talking points that wrongly described a protest over a video deemed offensive to Muslims.

      But Rice’s comments were based on faulty intelligence from multiple agencies, according to the report. Analysts received 21 reports that a protest occurred in Benghazi, the report said —14 from the Open Source Center, which reviews news reports; one from the CIA; two from the Defense Department; and four from the National Security Agency.

      In the years since, some participants in the attack have said they were motivated by the video. The attackers were a mix of extremists and hangers on, the investigation found.

      “To this day,” the report said, “significant intelligence gaps regarding the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers remain.”
      **************
      http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/house-intelligence-committee-investigation-debunks-many-benghazi-theories/

      Delete
    2. Cicero, Fiorino repeated the big lie that the GOP has shamelessly pushed for years with this disgraceful manufactured Bengazi "scandal". If you cared even a tiny bit about the truth, which you plainly don't, you'd be embarassed by this farce

      Delete
    3. @ AC/MA & mm

      What did Fiorina lie about? She was dead bang on the facts that HRC initiated the scapegoat YouTube video before even the White House used it. Fiorina was not even referencing the four dead Americans in Benghazi and who was responsible rather she was correctly reminding Matthews that HRC is still lying that she didn't invent the YouTube charade as the reason for the terrorist attack. This was an important deception for the Obama Administration which was running on the slogan "“Osama Bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive!” A planned terrorist attack by Radical Islam on the Benghazi compound was definitely at odds with the Obama 2nd term election campaign.

      "At 2:11 p.m. on Sept. 12, Hillary Clinton personally forwarded a link to an article about “Innocence of Muslims” to a colleague. That article was posted on MaxBlumenthal.com, and was written by Sidney Blumenthal’s son Max, who is now the senior writer for the far-left website AlterNet.

      Max Blumenthal’s article was entitled “Meet the Right-Wing Extremist Behind Anti-Muslim Film That Sparked Deadly Riots.” In the piece, he implicated anti-Muslim activist Steve Klein as a consultant on the Hollywood-produced film."

      “Pls print,” Hillary Clinton wrote to her colleague, referring to Max Blumenthal’s article.

      Where did Hillary get the link from originally? That part is redacted."


      Delete
    4. cicero is right. And a few days before the attack on 9/11 Clinton received a briefing entitled "Al Qaeda determined to attack in Benghazi" and she ignored it.

      Delete
    5. @ cicero

      There were many incidents across the Middle East on 9-11-12 killing a number of individuals. They were all blamed there and throughout the world on the uproar and outrage over a video insulting the prophet. In the US however, Republicans pretended immediately, before knowing anything about the attack, that Benghazi could not have been over the video and had to be a long planned terrorist attack, only because the US 2012 elections were 8 weeks ahead. Note how cicero lies to claim it was Blumenthal who started the "video" story when it was the world wide story immediately What a perverse and disgusting liar you are cicero!

      Delete
    6. @Unknown

      Repeating White House talking points is only persuasive to the HRC camp followers. Try reading the emails that have been released since the 2014 Congressional Intelligence investigation into Benghazi.

      "In Memo, Blumenthal Initially Blames Demonstrators for Attacks"

      "The day after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on American outposts in Benghazi that killed Mr. Stevens and three other Americans, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a memo with his intelligence about what had occurred. The memo said the attacks were by “demonstrators” who “were inspired by what many devout Libyan viewed as a sacrilegious internet video on the prophet Mohammed originating in America.” Mrs. Clinton forwarded the memo to Mr. Sullivan, saying “More info.” (Pages 193-195)"

      http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/us/politics/a-closer-look-at-hillary-clintons-emails-on-benghazi.html?_r=0

      Delete
    7. Explicitly warned a month prior, and Dubya didn't as much as lift a finger. Preznit buzzed off the envoy at the time, something about "you covered your ass", now scram.

      Delete
    8. cicero, if you want people to "try reading" then don't slectively end the quote with something that fits your meme. You've been reading too much Somerby.

      "The next day, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a more thorough account of what had occurred. Citing “sensitive sources” in Libya, the memo provided extensive detail about the episode, saying that the siege had been set off by members of Ansar al-Shariah, the Libyan terrorist group. Those militants had ties to Al Qaeda, had planned the attacks for a month and had used a nearby protest as cover for the siege, the memo said. “We should get this around asap” Mrs. Clinton said in an email to Mr. Sullivan. “Will do,” he responded. That information contradicted the Obama administration’s narrative at the time about what had spawned the attacks. Republicans have said the administration misled the country about the attacks because it did not want to undermine the notion that President Obama, who was up for re-election, was winning the war on terrorism. (Pages 200-203)"

      Delete
    9. Cicero isn't interested in intellectual honesty. He is the perfect representative of the modern republican party.

      "nattering nabobs of negativism"

      Their leading candidate for nomination campaign slogan is,
      "My fellow Americans, you all suck"

      The House Intelligence Committee already released a report on their investigation almost a year ago.
      In the report they state very plainly,

      "But Rice’s comments were based on faulty intelligence from multiple agencies, according to the report. Analysts received 21 reports that a protest occurred in Benghazi, the report said —14 from the Open Source Center, which reviews news reports; one from the CIA; two from the Defense Department; and four from the National Security Agency."

      21 different sources at the time reported that the video played a part in the attack. Including DoD, Secret Service and CIA,

      But cicero doesn't give a shit about facts, he's a fucking troll and has a job to do.

      Delete
    10. Deputy CIA Chief Mike Morrell has stated that the YouTube video talking points The Obama Administration, Susan Rice and HRC manufactured did not come from the CIA.

      "Asked for his reaction to Amb. Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Morell said “My reaction was two-fold. One was that what she said about the attacks evolving spontaneously from a protest was exactly what the talking points said, and it was exactly what the intelligence community analysts believed. When she talked about the video, my reaction was, that’s not something that the analysts had attributed this attack to.”

      Delete
    11. @ 9:05

      That 2nd Blumenthal email to HRC only further demonstrates HRC ignored the truth about a planned terrorist attack in favor of Blumenthal's first email about using the manufactured story about a YouTube video being the scapegoat

      Delete
    12. @ Unknown

      The only Middle East deaths connected to the anniversary terrorist attack on the Twin Towers was on September 11, 2012 by Radical Islamists were the three Benghazi embassy officials and two former marines. This had zero to do with the YouTube trailer.

      It was not until Thursday September 13 that the Yemen US embassy was attacked. Those clashes between police and demonstrators leave four people dead. More than 200 are injured when protesters stone the US mission in Cairo.
      Demonstrations also take place in Iraq, Iran and the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. These conflicts were in response to the YouTube video. So explain how HRC blamed the video on the attack on the Benghazi compound when the video hadn't spawned the actual protests that occurred until days later?

      Delete
  5. "Today, we’re putting you on notice. How well will our fiery liberal heroes respond to Fiorina’s claim?"

    mm, and cicero, having been put on notice, respond. As do a few spellcasters one post back.

    The rest of the world responds to Menstruatin' Megyngate." Even gravymeister.

    It's a tough room, Bob.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In other late news, former CBS news anchor Dan Rather is still alive.

      Delete
    2. Who died and made Chris Matthews a "fiery liberal hero" other than some brain cells in a blogger's head in Baltimore?

      Delete
  6. I wonder what cicero would say about Susan Rice saying that day that the attack could have been inspired by al qaeda or could have been al qaeda itself. Just deny it ever happened, I guess, or pretend it never happened as the Republicans to a person have dishonestly done. The same people who arranged for a birth certificate showing Obama's birth in Hawaii must have arranged for a falsified transcript, too. Imagine all the people who have to bought off to pull off these hoaxes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is not about Susan Rice. Bob covered that already. This is about Chris Matthews and failed liberal heroes. Castrated dogs.

      Delete
  7. Fiorina also pointed out that Clinton repeatedly lied about her email server. In this she is perfectly correct. Addressing Fiorina's observations doesn't serve Bob's purposes so into the shredder it goes...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, once again that's not true. Clinton didn't "lie". This is Clinton Rules. Just say any damn thing you want and you will never be held accountable.

      Delete
    2. @mm

      According to you, these are not specific HRC lies, she is merely making conversation:.

      1) "Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters last month that the memos about Libya she received while secretary of state from Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime adviser whom the Obama administration had barred her from hiring, had been “unsolicited.”

      But email records that Mrs. Clinton, according to officials briefed on the matter, apparently failed to turn over to the State Department last fall show that she repeatedly encouraged Mr. Blumenthal to “keep ’em coming,” as she said in an August 2012 reply to a memo from him, which she called “another keeper.”

      http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/30/us/politics/benghazi-emails-put-focus-on-hillary-clintons-encouragement-of-adviser.html?_r=0

      2) Chelsea Clinton was jogging around the World Trade Center on 9/11. HRC later admitted that Chelsea was actually safely in her Union Square apartment at the time of the attack.

      3) HRC landed under sniper fire in Bosnia.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc

      3. HRC was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, one of the first two men to climb Mt. Everest. Sir Hillary didn’t actually climb Mt. Everest until Hillary Clinton was 6 years old.

      4) . HRC was emphatic that she had only one device while Secretary of State

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqITWnIKbl8

      5) HRC claims to have been instrumental in the Northern Ireland peace process.

      "Hillary Clinton had no direct role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and is a "wee bit silly" for exaggerating the part she played, according to Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former First Minister of the province."

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1581150/Nobel-winner-Hillary-Clintons-silly-Irish-peace-claims.html

      6) “All my grandparents, you know, came over here, and you know my grandfather went to work in a lace mill in Scranton, Pennsylvania.”

      Clinton has only one immigrant grandparent — her father’s father, Hugh Rodham Sr., who was born in the United Kingdom. The rest of Clinton’s grandparents were born in the United States.

      7) "After dabbling in both sugar and cattle futures for just over a year, she parlayed a mere $1000 investment into nearly $100,000. In explaining her success, she first claimed to have "educated herself" and "watched the market closely." As any cattle futures trader knows, it would take years to understand cattle farming and how and when cattle are brought to market in order to be that successful

      Delete
    3. Sugar is easy.

      Delete
    4. So, TDH writes a post with the entire transcript of what HRC said immediately about the attacks on the consulate in Benghazi. Carly Golden Parachute Fiorina claims HRC lied. You will notice not a single wingnut would even attempt to answer Bob's question - "where's the lie"?

      So we wind up with cicero talking about cattle futures, Northern Ireland and HRC's ancestors.

      Is cicero actually on one of the multiple full time republican Hillary Clinton op research teams, or is he/she/it just a paid troll?

      Delete
    5. @mm

      You now acknowledge HRC's penchant for lying about a host of things, but you are still skeptical she knowingly lied (as did POTUS Obama) on September, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, about the cause of the Benghazi attack being the YouTube video.

      On September, 14, 2012, HRC spoke at ceremony for the arrival of the dead killed in Libya. She is still repeating the lie to the families that she first used on September12.

      "This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We've seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We've seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with."

      How many posts about HRC's lie regarding her pushing the YouTube video as the catalyst for the terrorist attack on the Benghazi compound do you require? Why the Clintonistas refuse to read her own emails regarding this subject is baffling. Even HRC is not refuting what Fiorina has said. Could it be HRC has read her own emails and knows the jig is up?

      Delete
    6. cicero you addle-brained buffoon. Nobody denies the video sparked the attack on the embassy in Cairo earlier in the day, news coverage of which was available in Benghazi. There was indeed "rage and violence directed at American embassies" in Cairo and elsewhere due to the video. There is nothing inaccurate whatsoever in what you quoted Clinton as saying.

      Delete
    7. @ 5:34

      Egypt is not Libya and nobody at the Cairo embassy was killed. HRC, at the advise of Blumenthal, decided all by her self to lump both incidents together in order to sell the YouTube video as the motivation for the terrorist attack on the Benghazi compound. She had zero evidence to support her lie that the YouTube video had any relevance to Benghazi attack. She continued to do this long after Benghazi authorities on the ground told her that was not the case. Libs still don't think Willie lied about "having sex with that women."

      Delete
    8. She did not say the You Tube video had any relevance to the attack on the facility in Benghazi. She uses one sentence to describes the "heavy assault on our post in Benghazi." She then uses another sentence to say "We've seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with."

      The post in Benghazi was not an "embassy." Just as you are not "intelligent."

      Delete
    9. @ 10:13

      Try reading her entire propaganda statement. The key phrase is this:

      "Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."

      HRC is clearly including the "post" in Benghazi with attacks on the Cairo embassy with the YouTube video. At least you are saving energy with your dim bulb.

      Delete
    10. Some have sought to portray cicero as a pathological liar because of his misuse of a quote, along with his conservative trolling. I think he is just stupid.

      Now cicero, did I just call you a pathological liar, or did I call you stupid.

      Delete
  8. Fiorina is fantastic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Purina is dog food.

      Delete
    2. Valerie Jarret is feeding HRC to the wolves. No wonder the press has gastritis.

      http://nypost.com/2015/03/14/obama-adviser-behind-leak-of-hillary-clintons-e-mail-scandal/

      Delete
    3. It is not just the Obama team. The Kennedys aare in on it.

      http://nypost.com/2014/08/03/kennedys-pushing-warren-to-run-against-hillary-in-2016/

      Delete
    4. @ 1:54

      Next there will be a push to recall Caroline from Japan to enter the primary. You know, she is royalty, you know.

      Caroline Kennedy says "You Know" 138 Times

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT8G6Qf7Ngo

      Delete
    5. Fiorina is paid to pimp by Cruz PAC.

      Delete
    6. @ 3:23

      HRC is pimping for George Soros, Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg Super PAC and David Brock founded Super PAC American Bridge 21st Century.

      Delete
    7. Dogpeewon'tstophillary.comAugust 10, 2015 at 5:24 PM

      cicero, you foolish defender of American corporate and political malfeasance. You allowed 3:03's improper use of a Somerby metaphor to foolishly trick you into a response in-kind.

      The metaphor for this post is dogs. Chris Matthews was an attack dog who has been neutered now that he is on the "liberal side." In that vein, here is what 3:03 was trying to say:

      Your little snarling bitch Firorina is being paid to bite Hillary Clinton by the PAC of another candidate, Ted Cruz. The boys on the GOP bus would rather a female do their dirty work for them.

      Carly barks out lies for Ted's table scraps.

      And, as far as her charges related to Clinton's statements on September 12, and September 13, 2012 are concerned, Fiorina is lying when she charges Clinton with doing the same.

      Delete
    8. @ 5:24

      Matthews an attack dog? He was rendered neutered and toothless long before he ever set eyes on Fiorina. Still haven't see a Howler lib demonstrate with facts that HRC did not lie about her server, her emails and her continued promulgation of the YouTube video inciting the attack on Benghazi.

      Libs would prefer to see GOP males attack HRC's perfidy rather than Fiorina? Really? Trump attacked HRC and he ordered her to attend one of his weddings. When will "Black Lives Matter" confiscate the podium at an HRC event?

      Delete
    9. I have not seen you demonstrate with facts that any post you have written is not a lie. You are a sorry excuse for conservatism and if the tribe had any discipline they would keep you under wraps. You guys do have wraps under those rocks, don't you?

      Delete
    10. cicero, you jackass. You still have things backwards. You have to prove Clinton did lie, we don't have to prove the negative, fool. Unfortunately, you've been poorly trained through affirmative action for conservative nutballs, and don't understand how it works in real life. TDH asked a simple question. He posted a transcript of her statement. Where is the lie? You still have not answered that question.

      Delete
    11. @mm,

      The proof is her lie conflating the video with the attack on Benghazi. How is that clear to the benighted Chris Matthews but not Howler libs?

      How easily libs forget their drum beat Bush 43 lied about WOMDs in Iraq. Did B.S. challenge libs to prove that Bush intentionally lied?

      Delete
    12. You can't do it? You've had enough time now.

      And once again, you demonstrate you have no reading comprehension or critical thinking skills. Now you're lying about Chris Matthews? You're saying he agreed with Carly "Golden Parachute" Fiorina? You really are an idiot. He challenged her to back up her disgusting charge that Clinton lied. She was totally incapable of doing that. Instead she answered Matthews' question with a question. If she wants to know the answer to her question she should read the reports from the seven prior Benghazi investigations that explain it. That's not a lie. That's not even close to a lie you fucking idiotic cartoon character.

      The problem with you demented republicans is you think everyone thinks and behaves the same way you would. So you assume some nefarious plot to minimize the attack on the consulate. And all because they were afraid of losing to Mr. G.I. Luvmoney? Too funny! That may be what republicans would do but it isn't what was done here.

      There's HRC's statement above. Show us the "lie".

      Delete
    13. @mm

      Carly has really gotten under the skin of Clintonistas. HRC doesn't want to debate her anymore than the Howler libs want to debate her.

      Here again and again is the HRC lie from her statement.

      "Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet."

      The attack on Benghazi compound was not in response to the 'material on the internet." HRC knew it wasn't on September 12, 2012 when she released her statement. If you say something you know to be false that's called a lie. Unless you live in the Clinton world where "is" has numerous definitions.

      Delete
    14. That is a perfectly factual statement you asshole.

      Delete
    15. Calling people liars is fighting words where I come from.

      That's why TDH referred to Carly (fuck the 30000 workers, I'm getting my golden parachute) Fiorina dropping the "L-Bomb". It just isn't done in politics, but Fiorina feels perfectly safe doing it here because it's only the Clintons and you can say any damn thing you want about them without fear of having to face an accounting from the media.

      What cicero is accusing the administration of doing is what republican presidents from Nixon to Reagan (selling missiles to Iran) to Bush have done as naturally as they breath, so he just assumes everyone is that treasonous and dishonest. Repubs always put party above country - that's how they roll.


      **************************
      Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administration's initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate. There was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks. The Committee found intelligence to support CIA's initial assessment that the attacks had evolved out of a protest in Benghazi; .........The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke),........

      "To this day, significant intelligence gaps regarding the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers remain."


      from the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Executive Summary dated November 21, 2014.
      *************************

      Delete
    16. @mm

      What? Where does HRC cite proof that the terrorists who attacked the Benghazi compound were protesting against the video? There was no proof then or later. For what possible reason did HRC invoke the video when she knew for certain from on the ground reports in Benghazi that the Cairo protests had nothing to do with the Benghazi mortar attack.

      Delete
    17. @ mm

      Apparently, HRC is not provoked into action against Carly calling her out as a liar. HRC is too busy hiring more security to isolate her from "Black Lives Matter" women.

      Delete
    18. you really are a dumb fuck, cicero.

      nobody claimed they knew for certain, you're just making that shit up. Susan Rice didn't say she knew for certain, nor did Clinton. They spoke based on the intelligence reports they were getting at the time.

      That's not a fucking lie you asshole. If you and Carly "deadbeat" Fiorina don't like it, go complain to the CIA.

      "contradictory and conflicting intelligence" was coming in as explained in the report, you cretinous little worm.

      "The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke),........"

      Delete
    19. @mm

      Bull. You are not addressing what Fiorina is addressing. In no intel report, including the 2014 Intel Committee findings on Benghazi, was there any mention of the YouTube video instigating the attack on Benghazi compound. One more time, here is Deputy CIA Chief Mike Morrell emphatic reply to Congress that the YouTube video talking points The Obama Administration, Susan Rice and HRC manufactured did not come from the CIA.

      "Asked for his reaction to Amb. Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Morell said “My reaction was two-fold. One was that what she said about the attacks evolving spontaneously from a protest was exactly what the talking points said, and it was exactly what the intelligence community analysts believed. When she talked about the video, my reaction was, that’s not something that the analysts had attributed this attack to.”

      Delete
    20. "...the attacks evolving spontaneously from a protest was exactly what the talking points said,..."

      What were they protesting? dumb fuck

      "The fact that they [the talking points] were not more robust, however, was in no way due to White House political influence, State Department concerns about how the Department might be portrayed publicly, or any interagency bureaucratic battles. The fact that they were not more robust was a reflection of how little we knew at the time, a reflection of what officers inside and outside CIA thought needed to be protected, and a reflection of what I thought would be fair to say..."Acting CIA Director Michael Morell (from Executive Summary)

      Still no "lie", jackass.

      Delete
    21. This is how Fiorina answered Matthews question.


      FIORINA: Okay. It is very clear from all the data, it is very clear from the data, it is very clear from the e-mails that she, that the president of the United States, that the Secretary of State, and that the military understood this was a purposeful terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11, and they understood it while it was going on.

      That statement by Fiorina is total balderdash. Read the fucking report. Nothing was "clear" to the Administration, or the CIA or the DoD about the attacks "while it was going on".

      Even now, 3 years later there are still questions.

      “To this day,” the report said, “significant intelligence gaps regarding the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers remain.”

      Yet, Fiorina claims that the WH knew immediately in real time what was happening and by whom?

      I'm not going to call her a liar, as it is obvious she doesn't have a clue what she's talking about and couldn't care less.

      Delete
    22. @mm

      "What were they protesting? dumb fuck" mm

      Dip wad, if you could afford to pay attention, Al-Qaeda explained the Benghazi attack (not protest) was in revenge for a U.S. drone strike which killed Libyan Abu Yahya al-Libi, an al-Qaeda leader. It wasn't a YouTube video made by an American, rather it was POTUS Obama's actions that proved to be the insult.

      Delete
    23. @mm

      "Yet, Fiorina claims that the WH knew immediately in real time what was happening and by whom?" mm


      "Legislators saw a "real-time film (showing) exactly what happened" on September 11 in Benghazi, starting before the attack began up "through the incident and the exodus," said Feinstein. A source familiar with the House committee hearing said the video included shots of Stevens being dragged out of the building. Sen. Dan Coats, an Indiana Republican, described the footage as "a combination of video from a surveillance camera and a drone."



      http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/15/politics/benghazi-hearings/

      Delete
    24. cicero,

      You are a clown. I'm done with you on this topic.

      FALSE: Administration officials watched the attacks unfold in real time but did nothing to intervene.

      Origins: The claim that top Obama administration officials were gathered in the Oval Office watching a real-time video feed of the September 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, but did nothing to intervene appears to have originated with a 24 October 2012 Forbes op-ed piece ("White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn't Respond"), the opening paragraph of which is quoted in the example block above.

      However, that description is a rather distorted version of what the news sources it references (CBS News and ABC News) actually reported. A CBS News story from that same day ("U.S. military poised for rescue in Benghazi") stated the following:
      Meanwhile, CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan reports that the FBI and State Department have reviewed video from security cameras that captured the attack on the consulate.

      The audio feed of the attack was being monitored in real time in Washington by diplomatic security official Charlene Lamb. CBS News has learned that video of the assault was recovered 20 days later from the more than 10 security cameras at the compound.

      The government security camera footage of the attack was in the possession of local Libyans until the week of Oct. 1. The video will be among the evidence that the State Department's review board will analyze to determine who carried out the assault.
      According to that report, it was not the case that President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary of Defense Panetta, and a national security team were "watching real-time video of developments from a drone circling over the site"; rather, a single diplomatic security official was listening to an audio feed of events in Benghazi. Security cameras in the U.S. consulate compound did record video of the events as they unfolded, and a U.S. surveillance drone camera did capture the last hour of the attack, but neither of those sources was watched real-time by officials in Washington, as the consulate video recordings were not recovered until weeks after the attack:
      Video footage from the United States consulate in Benghazi, Libya, taken the night of the Sept. 11 anniversary attacks, shows an organized group of armed men attacking the compound, according to two U.S. intelligence officials who have seen the footage and are involved in the ongoing investigation. The footage, which was recovered from the site [during the first week of October] by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, offers some of the most tangible evidence yet that a military-style assault took place, according to these officials.

      The Obama administration has been studying the videos, taken from closed-circuit cameras throughout the Benghazi consulate’s four-building compound, for clues about who was responsible for the attack and how it played out. The two officials [said] that analysts are hoping to decipher the faces of the attackers and match them up with known jihadists.

      In addition to the footage from the consulate cameras, the U.S. government is also poring over video taken from an overhead U.S. surveillance drone that arrived for the final hour of the night battle at the consulate compound and nearby annex.

      Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/benghazi.asp#Fo13zCgUy2ke7WSQ.99

      Delete
    25. Sorry mm. I was with you until you tried to discredit Forbes.

      Bob Somerby has vouched for the accuracy of Forbes.

      You want us to believe some website over a mainstream media source like Forbes when Bob Somerby has used them to refute the New York Times?

      Delete