New Benghazi Hearings Could Be Explosive

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by pspr, Apr 28, 2013.

  1. pspr

    pspr

    Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) on Saturday promised that “explosive” congressional hearings over the Benghazi, Libya attacks are on the way.

    “There are more Benghazi hearings coming, I think they’re going to be explosive,” Gowdy said on Fox News.

    Gowdy, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the hearings are going to be “coming quickly” and seemed to hint that the public might for the first time hear from witnesses to the September assault that left four Americans dead.

    “I am bound by certain measures of confidentiality, but I would tell you that you are getting very warm,” Gowdy said when asked by a Fox News anchor whether witnesses could be coming forward. “[The hearings] are coming sooner rather than later.”

    Gowdy followed that up by saying that in a trial, “direct evidence, direct testimony by eyewitnesses is always the most compelling.” He said that if there is anyone who wants to come forward, the House committee will make legal counsel available to them.

    “Trust me when I tell you you will want to follow the hearings that are coming up,” he said.


    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/27/gop-rep-promises-explosive-benghazi-hearings-are-coming/
     
  2. pspr

    pspr

    Democratic congressman Stephen Lynch said this morning on TV that Susan Rice used "scrubbed" talking points on Benghazi to deliver "false information" to the American people:

    "Absolutely, they were false, they were wrong," said Lynch, after being asked about Steve Hayes's report on "The Benghazi Talking Points."

    "There were no protests outside the Benghazi compound there. This was a deliberate and strategic attack on the consulate there," said the Democratic congressman.

    "It was false information. There's no excuse for that."

    Lynch: “They certainly weren’t accurate. I don’t know what the process was there. But, absolutely, they were false. They were wrong. There were no protests outside of the Benghazi compound there. This was a deliberate and strategic attack on the consulate there. So any statements that this was sort of like the other protests that we saw in Cairo and other embassies- this was not that type of case. This was a concerted effort. ”

    Wallace “How do you explain the fact that that Sunday, UN Ambassador Rice came on this show and 4 other Sunday shows- never mentioned Al Qaeda extremists which had been scrubbed from the talking points- but did mention a reaction to the anti-Islam video which had never been in any of the talking points?”
    Lynch: “Well it was scrubbed- it was totally inaccurate. You’re absolutely right. There was no excuse for that. It was false information. And what they tried to was harmonize what happened in Benghazi with what happened everywhere else across the Middle East. Which was totally wrong.”

    Wallace: “And do you think part of that was- do you think it was scrubbed because of the fact that didn’t fit into President’s narrative that Al Qaeda was on the run?”

    Lynch: “Well I, yeah, I think it was a victory of ‘hope over reality’- to be honest with you. They were hoping this wasn’t the case.”


    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...alse-information-theres-no-excuse_720805.html

    <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xWcAClQTQCQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     
  3. The lame stream media doesn't care so it's irrelevant.
     
  4. In Hillary's words, what difference does it make. Obama got re-elected. That's all that ever mattered. The MSM remained willfully ignorant at best, acted as a accomplice to a criminally negligent misrepresentation at worst. The only thing worse, and more of a threat to our freedom from a criminally corrupt government, is a media who provides cover for such activities.
     
  5. Bingo.
     
  6. rcn10ec

    rcn10ec

  7. Even far left liberal host bob schieffer is turning on obama over this.

    <iframe src="http://videos.mediaite.com/embed/player/?content=DMN42N0JK7DY2QF5&content_type=content_item&layout=&playlist_cid=&widget_type_cid=svp&read_more=1" width="420" height="421" frameborder="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>
     
  8. The election is over, so he can pretend to be unbiased a few times.
     
  9. At least he's pretending. There isn't anyone over at MSNBC that will even pretend. You could have video of Obama praising Allah as the attack was happening and they'd ignore it. Hillary could be seen doing her nails while informed of the attack and say, gee, that's too bad, someone get me a drink. Not a problem for MSNBC.
     
  10. Not a problem for FOX either. Someone could say Obama is the Anti-Christ and FOX would pawn it off as news.
     
    #10     May 6, 2013