Who is the liar? Rice? Petraeus? Obama? Hmmmmm.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/petraeus-to-testify-knew-libya-was-terrorism-from-start-source-says/

I doubt Petraeus is going to fall on his sword for the CINC. That is COMMANDER IN CHIEF for all of you who like to twist statements. SOMEONE is lying on this matter. I have NO DOUBT.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:SOMEONE is lying on this matter. I have NO DOUBT.

And being that PACEDOG#1 is extremely accurate in his predictions and political analysis, you can basically take this to the bank!

boards of FL wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:SOMEONE is lying on this matter. I have NO DOUBT.

And being that PACEDOG#1 is extremely accurate in his predictions and political analysis, you can basically take this to the bank!

Whatever bro. There is no middle ground on this issue. One of the three is lying and wow how convenient that Petraeus is now a discredited CIA director who resigns over an affair and the same behavior that Bill Clinton was nearly impeached for during his time of office.

A congressional source familiar with this week's testimony also told Fox News that the language in the CIA talking points about Benghazi was changed from "Al Qaeda-affiliated individuals to extremist organizations" -- which had the effect of minimizing the role of terrorists in the attack.


Hmmmmmm Al Qaeda.......vs.....extremist organizations......and this is the big revelation and lie which we waited anxiously for this hearing.......if four Americans did not die and if people were not trying to get political advantage from those deaths.......this would be a fricking joke.....however, this is no joke, and it clearly points to where the problem is in America.....and that problem has nothing to do with whether the distinction without a difference phraseology is important, rather how a media manipulated can have a tempest in a teapot bootstrapped into something as silly as this link.

Oh, I want to give you every opportunity to keep your streak alive and I will get back to you after this weekend on Georgia and Alabama....I need to watch Georgia one more time before I make any predictions......but after we get this settled could I pay for your air fare and hotel room at Caesars if only you will give me twenty picks on college games.....I could become a rich man betting just the opposite of your picks........but hey an extremist organization....or al queda......now that is earth shattering.

2seaoat wrote:A congressional source familiar with this week's testimony also told Fox News that the language in the CIA talking points about Benghazi was changed from "Al Qaeda-affiliated individuals to extremist organizations" -- which had the effect of minimizing the role of terrorists in the attack.


Hmmmmmm Al Qaeda.......vs.....extremist organizations......and this is the big revelation and lie which we waited anxiously for this hearing.......if four Americans did not die and if people were not trying to get political advantage from those deaths.......this would be a fricking joke.....however, this is no joke, and it clearly points to where the problem is in America.....and that problem has nothing to do with whether the distinction without a difference phraseology is important, rather how a media manipulated can have a tempest in a teapot bootstrapped into something as silly as this link.

Oh, I want to give you every opportunity to keep your streak alive and I will get back to you after this weekend on Georgia and Alabama....I need to watch Georgia one more time before I make any predictions......but after we get this settled could I pay for your air fare and hotel room at Caesars if only you will give me twenty picks on college games.....I could become a rich man betting just the opposite of your picks........but hey an extremist organization....or al queda......now that is earth shattering.

I know you are really counting on Obamacare so I will give you a pass on your bleating.

I know you are really counting on Obamacare so I will give you a pass on your bleating.


oops.....one more prediction missed.....I will never make it to 2014 and the implementation of the Affordable Health Act.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

2seaoat wrote:A congressional source familiar with this week's testimony also told Fox News that the language in the CIA talking points about Benghazi was changed from "Al Qaeda-affiliated individuals to extremist organizations" -- which had the effect of minimizing the role of terrorists in the attack.


Hmmmmmm Al Qaeda.......vs.....extremist organizations......and this is the big revelation and lie which we waited anxiously for this hearing.......if four Americans did not die and if people were not trying to get political advantage from those deaths.......this would be a fricking joke.....however, this is no joke, and it clearly points to where the problem is in America.....and that problem has nothing to do with whether the distinction without a difference phraseology is important, rather how a media manipulated can have a tempest in a teapot bootstrapped into something as silly as this link.

Oh, I want to give you every opportunity to keep your streak alive and I will get back to you after this weekend on Georgia and Alabama....I need to watch Georgia one more time before I make any predictions......but after we get this settled could I pay for your air fare and hotel room at Caesars if only you will give me twenty picks on college games.....I could become a rich man betting just the opposite of your picks........but hey an extremist organization....or al queda......now that is earth shattering.

I know you are really counting on Obamacare so I will give you a pass on your bleating.

You really can act like an ass, Pacedog. What is wrong with you that you feel the need to make a comment like that?

I sincerely enjoy Pace and I like the way he treats me in a normal fashion. Until you get really sick and people treat you with kid gloves....you cannot understand how much I need a smash mouth comment.....it means I am still alive and kicking......life is good, and the two of us understand each other completely....we are playing in the sandbox.

PBulldog2 wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

2seaoat wrote:A congressional source familiar with this week's testimony also told Fox News that the language in the CIA talking points about Benghazi was changed from "Al Qaeda-affiliated individuals to extremist organizations" -- which had the effect of minimizing the role of terrorists in the attack.


Hmmmmmm Al Qaeda.......vs.....extremist organizations......and this is the big revelation and lie which we waited anxiously for this hearing.......if four Americans did not die and if people were not trying to get political advantage from those deaths.......this would be a fricking joke.....however, this is no joke, and it clearly points to where the problem is in America.....and that problem has nothing to do with whether the distinction without a difference phraseology is important, rather how a media manipulated can have a tempest in a teapot bootstrapped into something as silly as this link.

Oh, I want to give you every opportunity to keep your streak alive and I will get back to you after this weekend on Georgia and Alabama....I need to watch Georgia one more time before I make any predictions......but after we get this settled could I pay for your air fare and hotel room at Caesars if only you will give me twenty picks on college games.....I could become a rich man betting just the opposite of your picks........but hey an extremist organization....or al queda......now that is earth shattering.

I know you are really counting on Obamacare so I will give you a pass on your bleating.

You really can act like an ass, Pacedog. What is wrong with you that you feel the need to make a comment like that?

Why can't he answer the question and not deflect the topic?

2seaoat wrote:I know you are really counting on Obamacare so I will give you a pass on your bleating.


oops.....one more prediction missed.....I will never make it to 2014 and the implementation of the Affordable Health Act.

I'll buy you steak dinner at McGuires if you make it. A deal?

It was President Barack Hussein Obama who said to not look at Ms. Rice about the lies, take it to him.

Seems pretty simple. President Obama has already confessed.

I wonder if executive privilege will work this time too?

PkrBum wrote:I wonder if executive privilege will work this time too?

Iwonder how long you will fall for neocon propaganda.

I'll buy you steak dinner at McGuires if you make it. A deal?

None of us make it my friend...my expiration date may be just a little sooner than others.....so take your family out to eat and enjoy the time we all have and cherish the same......I am not in need of anything....and I am literally having my best moments of my life.

2seaoat wrote:I'll buy you steak dinner at McGuires if you make it. A deal?

None of us make it my friend...my expiration date may be just a little sooner than others.....so take your family out to eat and enjoy the time we all have and cherish the same......I am not in need of anything....and I am literally having my best moments of my life.

********************************************************

You are a good man SO, I wish you the best and more beyond 2014.

Floridatexan wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I wonder if executive privilege will work this time too?

I wonder how long you will fall for neocon propaganda.

I wonder how long you fell for the liberal propaganda?

Or do you STILL believe those people were killed over a movie?

If so, I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you.

I wonder how long you fell for the liberal propaganda?

Or do you STILL believe those people were killed over a movie?

If so, I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you

What propoganda. I was watching tv that Sunday morning when all these offenses took place. The president said we would get the terrorist who did this and then Romney foolishly tried to say he did not, and then on meet the press the UN secretary was clearly wrong in giving the impression that this was an extension of the Egyptian protests.....but the president had clearly already said he would get the terrorist.....this is a bunch of distinctions without a difference.......a tempest in a teapot.......but I saw the meet the press live.....and she was wrong in her assessment, but to bootstrap that up to some political purpose to mislead after the President clearly said it was a terrorist attack is simple politics.....nothing more.....and the American people got that part and voted.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/petraeus-to-testify-knew-libya-was-terrorism-from-start-source-says/

I doubt Petraeus is going to fall on his sword for the CINC. That is COMMANDER IN CHIEF for all of you who like to twist statements. SOMEONE is lying on this matter. I have NO DOUBT.

Yes....Yes...and Yes....

2seaoat wrote:I'll buy you steak dinner at McGuires if you make it. A deal?

None of us make it my friend...my expiration date may be just a little sooner than others.....so take your family out to eat and enjoy the time we all have and cherish the same......I am not in need of anything....and I am literally having my best moments of my life.

You gotta make it bro.

WH denies making changes to Petraeus' talking points-



http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/white_house_denies_terror_delete_jkRAKvrDhUdpKpqBU3tMrM

Oh the tales that will get spun up on this one...

I thght they were better liars than this.

PkrBum wrote:I thght they were better liars than this.

This entire administration is so used to saying anything and the willing media gobbles it up and moves on without questioning anything...its arrogance and they cannot believe that anyone would question whatever tale they float...

David Petraeus, former CIA director, has testified on Capitol Hill that 'talking points' on Benghazi initially prepared by the CIA were subsequently altered before being given to Ambassador Susan Rice.

Far from expressing spontaneous or even personal opinions, Obama administration officials appearing on Sunday talk shows, as Rice did in the aftermath of the September 11th Benghazi attack, are given a virtual script beforehand.

These are usually distributed on Saturday night, when a conference call or meeting is held to go over key points.

As President Obama put in this week, Rice 'made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her'.

When foreign policy is involved, these 'talking points' are coordinated by the National Security Council after inputs from agencies throughout the U.S. government.

Representative Peter King of the House Intelligence Committee spoke on Friday of an 'interagency process' that Petraeus had said had changed the initial CIA assessment of the events in Benghazi.

'He said that the talking points that were drafted [by the CIA] were specific about an al-Qaeda affiliate...after they went through that process, whatever that process is, which they seem unclear about, that was taken out.'

King added that he had 'got the impression about seven, eight, nine different agencies' had been involved in drafting the talking points.

There are 16 different agencies in the U.S. intelligence community. In addition, it is overseen by the Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI), which almost certainly would have had an input.

In the case of Benghazi, the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), National Security Agency (NSA) and FBI would almost certainly have been involved in drafting the talking points.

The State Department would also have had a key role, perhaps drawing on work from its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), one of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

As well as the DIA input, the Pentagon and perhaps the U.S. Special Operations Command would have been consulted.

Representative Adam Schiff, a Democrat, said that Petraeus had disputed Republican suggestions that politics were involved in altering the talking points.

'There was an inter-agency process to draft it, not a political process. They came up with the best assessment without compromising classified information or sources or methods. So changes were made to protect classified information.'

'The general was adamant there was no politicisation of the process, no White House interference or political agenda.

-BY TOBY HARNDEN

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2233975/Petraeus-tells-Congress-Obama-administration-altered-CIA-talking-points-Benghazi.html#ixzz2CbqS9fop

I'm trying to understand what exactly the White House is being accused of when it appears that several agencies determined what the public would be told.

Floridatexan wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I wonder if executive privilege will work this time too?

Iwonder how long you will fall for neocon propaganda.

What "propaganda"? This was all the making of the White House. President Barack Hussein Obama said so. When Susan Rice went on five shows and lied, when President Obama lied and then he had a rare news conference and said, don't blame Ambassador Rice, blame me.

Why did they put her out as the sacrificial lamb? She didn't have anything, whatsoever to do with the incident.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is half a world away visiting friends and sampling wine in Australia.

Four years and they're still in utter chaos.

2seaoat wrote:I wonder how long you fell for the liberal propaganda?

Or do you STILL believe those people were killed over a movie?

If so, I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you

What propoganda. I was watching tv that Sunday morning when all these offenses took place. The president said we would get the terrorist who did this and then Romney foolishly tried to say he did not, and then on meet the press the UN secretary was clearly wrong in giving the impression that this was an extension of the Egyptian protests.....but the president had clearly already said he would get the terrorist.....this is a bunch of distinctions without a difference.......a tempest in a teapot.......but I saw the meet the press live.....and she was wrong in her assessment, but to bootstrap that up to some political purpose to mislead after the President clearly said it was a terrorist attack is simple politics.....nothing more.....and the American people got that part and voted.

As you know, President Barack Hussein Obama did NOT say this act was an act of Terrorism involving al Qaeda on the Anniversary of the Act of War on 9/11/2001. What President would ever want to let it be known that he had ignored warning and pleas for more security from that Embassy on that specific day.

Susan Rice wasn't wrong in her assessment, she had nothing to do with it. She was handed false talking points by the White House. Now they have a scandal growing by the day.

No one was killed in Watergate or Monicagate.