I was wondering what the resignation achieved. Was thinking Obama just wanted him to go, and he had to do it in a way that pointed away from Benghazi. If this is true, then I assume they've scrubbed all the physical evidence. I read that the communists in the WH are now claiming that there were no assets within reach of Benghazi during the attack. So did they scrub all that now, because Panetta said before that it was too risky. If there were no assets, why did he bother to say it was too risky. They're all liars. To bad we don't have a free press. We now have Putin.
posted on 11/09/2012 1:34:05 PM PST
(The object of opening the mind, is as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.)
Come on folks, typical Chicago Mob. The CIA is what leaked all the inside emails, He is getting fired over it. End of story. The fix is in. Anyone remember Vince Foster or Ron Brown, that's what happens when you cross the insiders too much.
posted on 11/09/2012 1:39:20 PM PST
And to think these jokers took an oath to uphold the Constitution!
posted on 11/09/2012 1:45:07 PM PST
(We are all communist's now!)
Panetta said that Libyan WMDs’ whereabouts are not known, remember?
posted on 11/09/2012 2:29:32 PM PST
(The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
That dog won’t hunt. If there were no assets within reach of the attack then it makes the White House even more culpable, because there should have been. Doubly so for this case where assets were actually pulled from the consulate when the consulate was still requesting more.
posted on 11/09/2012 6:02:53 PM PST
(Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson