Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Confirmed: FOX News lied about Benghazi to hurt Hillary.

+7
Floridatexan
dumpcare
Vikingwoman
Wordslinger
EmeraldGhost
boards of FL
TEOTWAWKI
11 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

Are the facts as put forth in the article true or false?

Proof positive.  The Progressives make a feeble to deflect from the subject and instead, post things irrelevant to the subject at hand.

Once again for the Progressives, are the facts in the article put forth...TRUE OR FALSE.

Semi-demented poster Markle does what I highlighted on a weekly basis, at least.  He likes to knock other people's sources, but then the ones he uses are always truthful and full of 'facts'.

Confirmed:  FOX News lied about Benghazi to hurt Hillary. - Page 2 Laughi12

Once again for the s-l-o-w. And I'll even type slowly for you.

You, Wordslinger, 2seaoat and the rest of the far left Progressives here go out of their way to post OPINION pieces from their demented far left sites.

While some of the sites I post from are Conservative, that are posts about verifiable FACTS. FACTS which may be found at other locations. As you know, that is the difference.

Just bugs the stew out of you does it not?

Guest


Guest

I'm interested in why the dos redacted parts of the email... then when it's politically favorable they unredact it.

They are not complying in good faith... obviously.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:False.

Good start.

Now share with us what is false about this post.

The newly released email reads:

From: Bash, Jeremy CIV SD [REDACTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 7:19 PM
To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Sherman, Wendy R; Nides, Thomas R
Cc: Miller, James HON OSD POLICY; Wienefeld, James A ADM JSC VCJCS; Kelly, John LtGen SD; martin, dempsey [REDACTED]
Subject: Libya

State colleagues:

I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton].

After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak. They include a [REDACTED].

Assuming Principals agree to deploy these elements, we will ask State to procure the approval from host nation. Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us [REDACTED].

Jeremy

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-benghazi-email-shows-dod-offered-state-department-forces-that-could-move-to-benghazi-immediately-specifics-blacked-out-in-new-document/

Sal

Sal

Salinsky wrote:Punked again by Judicial Watch.

The forces described in the email WERE DEPLOYED, but arrived too late to help.

This was pointed out by Leon Panetta at the very hearing JW chose to cherry pick ...



"In consultation with General Dempsey and AFRICOM commander General Ham, I directed several specific actions. First, we ordered a Marine fleet anti-terrorism secure team, a FAST team, stationed in Spain to prepare to deploy to Benghazi. A second FAST platoon was ordered to prepare to deploy to the embassy in Tripoli. A special operations force, which was training in Central Europe, was ordered to prepare to deploy to an intermediate staging base in Southern Europe, Sigonella, and a special operations force based in the United States was ordered to deploy to an intermediate staging base in Southern Europe as well at Sigonella."

"The quickest response option available was a Tripoli-based security team that was located at the embassy in Tripoli. And to their credit, within hours, this six-man team, including two U.S. military personnel, chartered a private airplane, deployed to Benghazi. Within 15 minutes of arriving at the annex facility, they came under attack by mortar and rocket-propelled grenades."

"Members of this team, along with others at the annex facility, provided emergency medical assistance and supported the evacuation of all personnel. Only 12 hours after the attacks had begun, all remaining U.S. government personnel had been safely evacuated from Benghazi." - Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, 02/07/2013

Doh!

Punked again!

2seaoat



It is usually just funny that the stupidity can find no limits, but the use of these deaths through lies and innuendo, is really despicable behavior.  If only we could give Mr. Markle a few extra strokes so he could play in the sandbox and not appear severely challenged.....but sadly you cannot handicap stupidity.  He will not respond to Sal....he will run away and post another lie and falsehood.  They think this type of propaganda will reward them at the polls.....the same way they thought they would beat President Obama on the same issue.....again, there is no way to handicap stupidity.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:It is usually just funny that the stupidity can find no limits, but the use of these deaths through lies and innuendo, is really despicable behavior.  If only we could give Mr. Markle a few extra strokes so he could play in the sandbox and not appear severely challenged.....but sadly you cannot handicap stupidity.  He will not respond to Sal....he will run away and post another lie and falsehood.  They think this type of propaganda will reward them at the polls.....the same way they thought they would beat President Obama on the same issue.....again, there is no way to handicap stupidity.

You do the same thing with your repeating leftist talkingpoint that our military killed 100k civilians in iraq.

Propaganda is propaganda. You don't have an exclusive right to it comrade.

Sal

Sal

Ol' Man Markle's posts (not to mention the thread you started regarding the same matter) are predicated entirely on material produced by Judicial Watch.

And, you want to quibble about what is and is not propaganda??

C'mon, man.



Last edited by Salinsky on 12/14/2015, 2:33 pm; edited 1 time in total

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:
2seaoat wrote:It is usually just funny that the stupidity can find no limits, but the use of these deaths through lies and innuendo, is really despicable behavior.  If only we could give Mr. Markle a few extra strokes so he could play in the sandbox and not appear severely challenged.....but sadly you cannot handicap stupidity.  He will not respond to Sal....he will run away and post another lie and falsehood.  They think this type of propaganda will reward them at the polls.....the same way they thought they would beat President Obama on the same issue.....again, there is no way to handicap stupidity.

You do the same thing with your repeating leftist talkingpoint that our military killed 100k civilians in iraq.

Propaganda is propaganda. You don't have an exclusive right to it comrade.



PkrBum, you created this thread (below) which suggests that the DOD offered support on the Benghazi attack, and that offer of support was denied or perhaps ignored and - thus - Clinton lied and people died.  Right?  I mean, that was your intent when you created that thread, wasn't it?

Oddly enough, before you even created that thread, I had already shown you (in this current thread that we are in now) that the very support forces mentioned in the underacted email had in fact been deployed; hence, your entire narrative is complete bullshit.

PkrBum, now that someone has held your hand and dumbed this down for you, you agree that you were wrong, correct?  You agree now that the forces mentioned in the underacted email were in fact deployed, don't you?  And by extension, you agree that you were entirely full of shit when you created this thread (below), don't you?

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t22980-dod-offered-dos-forces-for-benghazi#266793


I realize PkrBum is going to run away as usual,  so do any other republicans want to take this one on or are we done here?  Do any of our forum republicans still not understand what these new series of Benghazi articles are telling us?  Do any other forum republicans need the articles read to them in a dumbed down fashion that is republican-voter-accessible?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

That was all the dos had provided to comply with the foia suit. Why was it redacted? Why was it unredacted?

Just a bunch of political bs imo. Y'all ignore the 1000+ classified emails... and want to play gotcha with one.

Not impressed.

Guest


Guest

Salinsky wrote:Ol' Man Markle's posts (not to mention the thread you started regarding the same matter) are predicated entirely on material produced by Judicial Watch.

And, you want to quibble about what is and is not propaganda??

C'mon, man.

Judicial watch sued for public records that belong to WE THE PEOPLE and publish them verbatim.

You apparently lament that... although why is clearly partisan. Why don't you want accountability/transparency in govt?

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:That was all the dos had provided to comply with the foia suit. Why was it redacted? Why was it unredacted?

Just a bunch of political bs imo. Y'all ignore the 1000+ classified emails... and want to play gotcha with one.

Not impressed.



I'm not an expert on who redacts what and why. The point is that you created a thread suggesting that Clinton either ignored or declined an offer of support from the DOD on the night of the Benghazi attack. You agree that that narrative that you were pushing is entirely full of shit, right?


_________________
I approve this message.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:

Judicial watch sued for public records that belong to WE THE PEOPLE and publish them verbatim.


Is that what they do?

Then maybe you should read the entire record, instead of the cherry-picked propaganda with which they titillate the rubes.

Like they did you, here ...


https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t22980-dod-offered-dos-forces-for-benghazi

Rube ...

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

True or false? That's all, TRUE OR FALSE.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

True or false?  That's all, TRUE OR FALSE.



Is what true or false?


_________________
I approve this message.

Sal

Sal

Looks like it's time for reality denial again for Ol' Man Markle.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

True or false?  That's all, TRUE OR FALSE.

Obviously false. No one was "targeting" True the Vote (one of the worst oxymorons I've seen lately). That organization is engaged in voter suppression through whatever means is available. They're THUGS.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/10/29/the-voter-fraud-myth

"...True the Vote, which was founded in 2009 and is based in Houston, describes itself as a nonprofit organization, created “by citizens for citizens,” that aims to protect “the rights of legitimate voters, regardless of their political party.” Although the group has a spontaneous grassroots aura, it was founded by a local Tea Party activist, Catherine Engelbrecht, and from the start it has received guidance from intensely partisan election lawyers and political operatives, who have spent years stoking fear about election fraud. This cohort—which Roll Call has called the “voter fraud brain trust”—has filed lawsuits, released studies, testified before Congress, and written op-ed columns and books. Since 2011, the effort has spurred legislative initiatives in thirty-seven states to require photo identification to vote.

Engelbrecht has received especially valuable counsel from one member of the group: Hans von Spakovsky. A Republican lawyer who served in the Bush Administration, he is now a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank. “Hans is very, very helpful,” Engelbrecht said. “He’s one of the senior advisers on our advisory council.” Von Spakovsky, who frequently appears on Fox News, is the co-author, with the columnist John Fund, of the recent book “Who’s Counting?,” which argues that America is facing an electoral-security crisis. “Election fraud, whether it’s phony voter registrations, illegal absentee ballots, vote-buying, shady recounts, or old-fashioned ballot-box stuffing, can be found in every part of the United States,” they write. The book connects these modern threats with sordid episodes from the American past: crooked inner-city machines, corrupt black bosses in the Deep South. Von Spakovsky and Fund conclude that electoral fraud is a “spreading” danger, and declare that True the Vote serves “an obvious need.”

Mainstream election experts say that Spakovsky has had an improbably large impact. Richard L. Hasen, a law professor at the University of California at Irvine, and the author of a recent book, “The Voting Wars,” says, “Before 2000, there were some rumblings about Democratic voter fraud, but it really wasn’t part of the main discourse. But thanks to von Spakovsky and the flame-fanning of a few others, the myth that Democratic voter fraud is common, and that it helps Democrats win elections, has become part of the Republican orthodoxy.” In December, Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, wrote, “Election fraud is a real and persistent threat to our electoral system.” He accused Democrats of “standing up for potential fraud—presumably because ending it would disenfranchise at least two of its core constituencies: the deceased and double-voters.” Hasen believes that Democrats, for their part, have made exaggerated claims about the number of voters who may be disenfranchised by Republican election-security measures. But he regards the conservative alarmists as more successful. “Their job is really done,” Hasen says. “It’s common now to assert that there is a need for voter I.D.s, even without any evidence.”..."



Markle

Markle

boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

True or false?  That's all, TRUE OR FALSE.

Is what true or false?

Learned this on the kindergarten playground did you not?

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

True or false?  That's all, TRUE OR FALSE.

Is what true or false?

Learned this on the kindergarten playground did you not?



Seems like a fairly straightforward question. Have you forgotten what you were asking about as being true or false, Markle?

Here.

Confirmed:  FOX News lied about Benghazi to hurt Hillary. - Page 2 Bonbon-dbfbe36b2ab7e3e46f8bdbc19fcc3ada



_________________
I approve this message.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

PkrBum wrote:
2seaoat wrote:It is usually just funny that the stupidity can find no limits, but the use of these deaths through lies and innuendo, is really despicable behavior.  If only we could give Mr. Markle a few extra strokes so he could play in the sandbox and not appear severely challenged.....but sadly you cannot handicap stupidity.  He will not respond to Sal....he will run away and post another lie and falsehood.  They think this type of propaganda will reward them at the polls.....the same way they thought they would beat President Obama on the same issue.....again, there is no way to handicap stupidity.

You do the same thing with your repeating leftist talkingpoint that our military killed 100k civilians in iraq.

Propaganda is propaganda. You don't have an exclusive right to it comrade.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/

Half-Million Iraqis Died in the War, New Study Says

Household survey records deaths from all war-related causes, 2003 to 2011.

"War and occupation directly and indirectly claimed the lives of about a half-million Iraqis from 2003 to 2011, according to a groundbreaking survey of 1,960 Iraqi households. The violence peaked in 2006 and 2007, say public health experts who were part of the study.


On March 19, 2003, a U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq, beginning a ground war that culminated in the rapid capture of Baghdad and overthrow of the regime led by Saddam Hussein. A coalition-led occupation of Iraq lasted until 2011, marked by repeated bombings, an al Qaeda-linked insurgency, militia warfare, and other bloodshed in the nation of 32.6 million people.


In the new PLOS Medicine journal survey, led by public health expert Amy Hagopian of the University of Washington in Seattle, an international research team polled heads of households and siblings across Iraq. The researchers, including some from the Iraqi Ministry of Health, aimed to update and improve past estimates of the human costs of the war and occupation.


"We think it is roughly around half a million people dead. And that is likely a low estimate," says Hagopian. "People need to know the cost in human lives of the decision to go to war."..."

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Markle wrote:http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/10/dem-elijah-cummings-defends-shocking-emails-showing-he-coordinated-with-irs-effort-to-target-true-the-vote-111723#ixzz3u4teDBL4

An obscure wingnut blog.

True or false?  That's all, TRUE OR FALSE.

Just the other day semi-demented poster Markle was accusing others of changing the subject on threads. Well, he must exempt HIMSELF from this..... This thread is about Benghazi and is not about Elijah Cummings or the IRS targeting specific non-profits.


Confirmed:  FOX News lied about Benghazi to hurt Hillary. - Page 2 Laughi13

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

Floridatexan wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
2seaoat wrote:It is usually just funny that the stupidity can find no limits, but the use of these deaths through lies and innuendo, is really despicable behavior.  If only we could give Mr. Markle a few extra strokes so he could play in the sandbox and not appear severely challenged.....but sadly you cannot handicap stupidity.  He will not respond to Sal....he will run away and post another lie and falsehood.  They think this type of propaganda will reward them at the polls.....the same way they thought they would beat President Obama on the same issue.....again, there is no way to handicap stupidity.

You do the same thing with your repeating leftist talkingpoint that our military killed 100k civilians in iraq.

Propaganda is propaganda. You don't have an exclusive right to it comrade.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/

Half-Million Iraqis Died in the War, New Study Says

Household survey records deaths from all war-related causes, 2003 to 2011.

"War and occupation directly and indirectly claimed the lives of about a half-million Iraqis from 2003 to 2011, according to a groundbreaking survey of 1,960 Iraqi households. The violence peaked in 2006 and 2007, say public health experts who were part of the study.


On March 19, 2003, a U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq, beginning a ground war that culminated in the rapid capture of Baghdad and overthrow of the regime led by Saddam Hussein. A coalition-led occupation of Iraq lasted until 2011, marked by repeated bombings, an al Qaeda-linked insurgency, militia warfare, and other bloodshed in the nation of 32.6 million people.

In the new PLOS Medicine journal survey, led by public health expert Amy Hagopian of the University of Washington in Seattle, an international research team polled heads of households and siblings across Iraq. The researchers, including some from the Iraqi Ministry of Health, aimed to update and improve past estimates of the human costs of the war and occupation.

"We think it is roughly around half a million people dead. And that is likely a low estimate," says Hagopian. "People need to know the cost in human lives of the decision to go to war."..."

ANOTHER feeble attempt to change the subject. If you want to start another subject, start another thread.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum