I don't buy it. F16s can fly at 1500 mph or more. So in 7 hours that would be over 10,000 miles. How could they possibly not gotten there soon enough?
It appears that the administration's Benghazi decision boils down to two scenarios:
Save the ambassador and lose the election and your power job...or...
Sacrifice the Ambassador, cover it up and win the election and save your power job.
All of the testimony so far runs along the vein that "it wasn't my fault", leading to the conclusion that the second scenario is the possible true answer.
I want to know why today on Drudge, there's several articles that say Hillary and obama were both not there makingthe decisions. Why did they post a picture of them all watching the drone footage then?
Panetta says he did not hear from Clinton on 9/11.
That's not very nice of Rand Paul to second guess the Most Respected Woman In America! The only way anyone will ever get the truth on Benghazi is to Waterboard everyone associated with Obama.
This is the first time I've heard about an interview with the ship captain and his saying that there were guns being transferred to Turkey.
This is what I want coming to the forefront of the discussion. What exactly was going on there. Not whether a stupid video was the cause of the attack.
Thank you Senator Paul. Its been my opinion the gun running operation is what caused the attack on Benghazi but few are mentioning or pursuing it. Could it be because it would be considered misconduct by the Traitor in Chief and ground for impeachment? Not that there aren't other things to impeach Obama on but IMO this warrants treason charges.
Hillary Clinton claimed that the ambassador that was killed in Libya, Chris Stevens, was a very good friend of hers. She knew him, spoke to him, and recommended him for what she even admitted was a dangerous job. So is it conceivable that if Chris Stevens was such a "good friend" that he never, ever, brought up to Clinton the deteriorating security situation in Libya, especially in Benghazi? Is it conceivable that Stevens never just picked up the phone and called his "good friend" Clinton to let her know that the diplomats in Libya were in danger, especially AFTER the British and the Red Cross pulled out of Benghazi because of terrorist attacks? We know for a fact that Stevens sent numerous cables to the State Department asking for more military help, yet not one of these cables was ever shown to Clinton, especially since they came from her "good friend" Chris Stevens?
This has all been a lie and a coverup from day one. Hillary Clinton obviously knew about the dangers in Libya and didn't lift a finger to help Stevens because she didn't want to admit that Obama's whole strategy of "leading from behind" in Libya had been a disaster. Also, she didn't want to admit that the Administration's bungling in Libya directly led to the deaths of four Americans, espcially just before a presidential election. So Stevens was left to twist in the Libyan wind. How confident do you now think people at the State Department AND at the CIA are that this administration will help them when the chips are down? I'm thinking they don't trust Obama at all.
I heard something on the radio that one politician is trying to pass a law that would make the manufacturers of guns liable!!
How about who make the manufacturers of knives, bats, swimming pools, prescription drugs (for those that OD from them), hammers all liable too??
It’s sickening what our country has now become!
He is the only senator that I know of that is bringing up the CIA weapons running
program being run out of this "consulate".
You know, this is simple... lock up Panetta and Hillary... put them in jail and tell America what really happened and why. When a company does poorly, it's usually the CEO who is fired. These clowns are so damn guilty and they simply retire... then move on with their happy, guilt-free lives.
And I like Rand... but for him to start out with: "they did everything they could", is ridiculous. He did clarify a bit later in the interview and make up for it.
What infuriates me is these ass-hats are going to get away with everything... again. With great power comes great responsibility. Actions... or lack thereof have consequences. Someone is accountable and this easily should go to the top. Hillary accepted all blame and she rides off into the sunset. Panetta holds some blame... and he's doing his obligatory roast, before also riding off.
Americans should be outraged and on fire to get these villains in jail. This is absolutely inexcusable... criminally negligent at best. And I want heads to roll...
but for him to start out with: "they did everything they could", is ridiculous. Agreed! He needs to talk to some Navy Seals who are saying there is no way the laser marking would have occurred unless the Seal knew there was help.
And Demsey responds to Cruz that he has no idea where the A130s were...yeah right. And Panetta says that Barky told them to do whatever they could to save American lives. Yeah right. And then there was a meeting, and they were never told to secure the scene. Do you really have to be told to secure the scene of a murder? Really?
Rand I get where you are going with this and I admire your courage but given your comments can you explain why you voted to confirm John Kerry? That man is nothing short of a traitor just for his actions in regards to Vietnam alone.
Some consistency would be good.
So on the mark... there's no excusing that vote... by anyone.
Kerry is a worthless traitor... a career poltician and a greasy car salesman. He has zero business representing this country - though he's perfectly suited to represent this pResident.
I was pretty upset about that. The excuses I've heard people make for him is that he was going to be confirmed anyways, that it's better to get him out of the Senate, and that even if he was rejected obama would've replaced Kerry with someone just as bad.
I still think Rand should've voted no on Kerry.
That being said I liked Rand's amendment to stop giving F16's and Abrams tanks to Egypt. Sadly only 19 or so in the GOP voted for that!
Let's see how Rand votes on Hagel.
I agree with his decision. Also, I didn't understand it at first either and
was a little annoyed until I heard the facts.
The Sec. of State just goes along with the president's policies. Kerry
did more harm where he was at in the senate.
Does that mean that whomever will replace Kerry in the Senate will be a conservative?
Does it mean they won't go along with voting the same way Kerry did?
Under Hillary the US didn't get squat for respect toward the US - it can only get worse with Kerry
I understand the logic, but I would rather some conservatives vote no as a matter of principle. Instead of only dissenting votes.
By your logic do you think Paul should vote yes on Hagel?
The difference here is there's a chance of a filibuster to stop Hagel. I'm all for fighting the good fight.
Even if you can't stop him, still vote no to send a message.
Most don't just go along. Secretary of State can create policy, doctrines, etc. Many have. The ME is lighting up and Kerry wants to focus on GW. That is just pathetic.
Rand's excuse is lame at best. All votes are a matter of record for all time. Vote wisely.
esn’t question the fact that the military response would have come too late on September 11 in Benghazi, but he does question the fact that Secretary Clinton didn’t pay close enough attention to th
Panetta is also at fault. He's another child ego in adult clothing. Right after the BinLaden operation, he went on the news wondering who was going to play him in the movie. That's how serious these people are.
They are political celebrities, not serious statesmen....and they are also ruthless and immoral.
Why didn't they ask who gave the order to STAND DOWN to the C130 gunship that was circling and could have come to their aid? I'm tired of the stupid questions that they always seem to ask in the hearings.
Exactly. If there was nothing they could do in time, where were they getting the video from?
Worse, he painted a target with IR, called for a strike, and Obama and Clinton denied it. The Jihadis saw his IR, and that's how they got him.
This is treason.
Come on now, we don't want to go that far now do we? That would be raaaccissttt!
It was ok to take Nixon down and make a movie about it, but going after a chicago thug who left 4 Americans behind to die..... who cares!!
I've been impressed with Rand. I'm keeping an open mind and want to hear more.
Don't like that he voted no on a resolution that Iran could never get nukes and that he's for civilian trials for terrorists.
Then again he's one of the few with a backbone nowadays.
I can't support him though if he's as batsh!t crazy as daddy is. Can't figure out quite yet if he's different or just a better salesman than daddy.
I don't now support him in a presidential run but he has shown himself to be vital in the Senate. We have a chance to take back the Senate with conservatives and we'd better not blow it and Rand would be a reliable ally for those newly elected.
yep trials for foreign terrorists
Drones/murder for Americans
At least this administration is consistent
Exactly what I am thinking or at least leaning towards.
I cannot support civilian trials for terrorists...EVER. I don't think people realize the impact of doing so nor the cost.
But the man does have a backbone so I have to admire that.
I hear you.
We know with Ron that he clearly blames America First. I don't know if Rand agrees with that.
There's no way I can support Krispy Kreme Christie or Jeb Bush.
Not too happy with Paul Ryan voting YES on the Fiscal cliff bill!
I agree more with Rubio on foreign policy but don't like that he supports giving more money to the UN.
I'd gladly take him over Obama or Romney. He would have made mush out of Obama in the debates. Our loss.
We had a conservative candidate. Establishment Republicans hated and vilified him because he knew how run rough shod over them and get things done.
Gingrich credentials for serving as president.
Architect of “Contract with America” leading to first Republican House majority in 40 years. Under his leadership Congress passed welfare reform, passed the first balanced budget in a generation, and passed the first tax cut in sixteen years. In addition Congress restored funding to defense and intelligence capabilities actions later lauded by the bipartisan 9/11 commission.
Twenty three books fiction and nonfiction New York Times best-sellers.
Non-fiction books. A Nation like no other.
Rendezvous with Destiny about Ronald Reagan
To save America - Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine
Rediscovering God in America
5 Principles for a Successful Life
Drill here Drill Now and Pay Less
Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract with America
To renew America, Lessons learned the hard Way
Saving Lives and Saving Money
Window of Opportunity
The art of Transformation and Rediscovering God in America
Historical Fiction. Gettysburg Grant comes East
Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant the Final Victory
1945 Peal Harbor
December 8, Days of Infamy
To Try Men’s Souls
Documentaries. A City upon a Hill
Nine Days that Changed the World
Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny
Rediscovering God in America I and II
We have the Power
United States Commission on National Security/21st Century
Hart/Rudman Commission to examine our national security challenges As far out as 2025 (the commission report concluded that the number one threat to the United States was A nuclear, chemical or biological weapon used against a large American city unless our defense and intelligence structures underwent massive transformation. The report was Published six months before September 11th.
General Chairman of American Solutions for Winning the Future
Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University
Honorary Chairman of the Nano business Alliance
Volunteerism. Donated time and money and raised money for
Habitat for Humanity, United Cerebral Palsy, The American Cancer Society and Zoo Atlanta.
In 1995 Washington Times called him an indispensable leader while speaker and Time magazine named him man of the year.
Bachelors degree from Emory University
Master’s and Doctorate in Modern European History Tulane University
Before his election to Congress he taught History and Environmental Studies at West Georgia College for 8 years.
His 21st Century Contract with America was an extraordinary plan which he laid out to begin solving some of our problems. He explained it in detail on a C-span address and it was also available on his website.
Being an excellent debater was only one of many talents and accomplishments.
If he had been our nominee I cannot guarantee he would have been a great president but what I do know is every person who watched what he said in speeches and in debates would have know what Obama had done, who he was and what he intended to do. That's why I supported him wholeheartedly.
Well, if I read Wikipedia correctly, he was born to U.S. citizens working in Canada who then returned when he was four.
Cruz then derives his citizenship from his parents.
Apologies. I immediately tried to self-censor by deleting my remark, but it didn't work. Sorry to offend.
2016... it would be nice to have someone like Sarah run (if she doesn't run herself). I adore Allen West... and yes, you make a great point about his questionable vote there - it really was inexcusable. But if that's the worse thing he's done, then I'm fine with him as a front runner. As for Ted Cruz... I don't know him very well yet but every single thing I've seen and heard about or from him is spot on. And the long list of people who endorse him is distinguished. He sure seems like he's a superstar.
So, I'd love to have the "embarassment of riches" with having those three run in 2016... especially if 2 out of the 3 were on the team for Prez. and VP. I'm not off the Rand Paul band wagon yet... yes, he has some quirky and distasteful things in his closet... but overall, I'm fine with him (right now) if that's who we have - as long as he doesn't beat out any of the three I already mentioned.
Plus, it's very early. There may be a few more who emerge who are even better. And maybe Perry will try again. I'm hopeful for 2016... as long as Karl - I sold my soul - Rove doesn't screw things up.
There's no hope for the RINO"s like Boner, Cantor, McConnnel, Grahamnesty, McCain...those types. They need to be primaried and defeated. .... and being from NH I'd like to add Ayotte to that list.
There may be some hope for Rubio.. but it's wavering with his hispandering.
I'm actually done with Paul Ryan who was who I wanted as VP. They made excuses for his poor votes in the past that was supporting Bush. What's the excuse for voting for the fiscal cliff bill? And he is a Boehner guy. To heck with Paul Ryan!
The good ones are Rand Paul, Cruz, Cornyn, Louie Gomart, Bachmann, Mike Lee. We need to support more like these guys in all levels: local, state, and federal.
Since you brought up Palin:
I still think she should've ran. I know the GOPe was against her but why not fight them just like she did in Alaska? I mean if Santorum who had little money and no name recognition could almost beat Romney, why couldn't Palin have won with all the grassroots support she'd have gotten? I certainly would've not only knocked on, but beaten down doors for her.
I don't think 2016 is too late for Sarah, she can run if she so desires, I hope she does. Still has one of the best combos of experience and a real conservative record. Unlike some others like Newt, Romney, and Santorum she doesn't have any major conservative flaws with socialized medicine (all 3 of them) or with global warming (Newt and Romney).
Cruz would be good... maybe a bit early but it was ok for obama to run early. And Cruz is 1,00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 more times qualified than maobama was and is now.
I like that West speaks his mind but don't like that he voted yes last year on raising the debt ceiling. I mean how could any conservative do that? Supposedly they know how dire things are, yet they still vote yes on raising the credit card limit even more? WTF??
All of the 'leaders' are scrambling and doing so because of couple of reasons IMO. One is they fail to listen to their base. They stay in that beltway bubble and listen to the media. The next is they fail to sell their ideas. They just vote with no explanation. The hubris of that alone irks me.
Republicans are scrambling chasing their tails out of fear instead of standing strong and grabbing the microphone. They will never out liberal a liberal progressive so I wonder about their personal character in even trying to do so.
I don't mind a politician voting against my wishes as I don't ever expect to agree 100% and I know where my line it. What I do mind is the callous disregard in which they do vote against me without explanation or regard.
None of them have learned from Reagan. He was called the Great Communicator for a reason and it that reason that he was such a bipartisan success.
You sound like me. The last election I said if we squished them altogether we would have the perfect candidate and president.
I hope we're not stuck in 2016 like we were in 2011 and 12 - with a bunch of candidates who each have great independent qualities (Romney - financial experience, Newt - great debater, Santorum - social conservative, Bachman - foreign affairs, Perry - governmental experience)... By the end of 2011 and into 2012, I was hoping to find someone who was an amalgamation of all of these folks... someone who had the best of each... but we got Romney. Ugh.
It better not happen in 2016. I'd like to see Ted Cruz, Allen West, and maybe Sarah Palin among the choices. I'm fairly okay with Rand right now... but we'll have to see where he goes from here. He's had a couple minor shaky detours imo.