Skip to comments.Graham: ‘I Think the Dam Is About to Break on Benghazi’
Posted on 05/07/2013 9:54:36 AM PDT by F15Eagle
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) wrote Tuesday he believes major revelations about the lead up to the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, are eminent, in a Facebook message:
I think the dam is about to break on Benghazi. Were going to find a system failure before, during, and after the attacks.
Were going to find political manipulation seven weeks before an election. Were going to find people asleep at the switch when it comes to the State Department, including Hillary Clinton.
The bond that has been broken between those who serve us in harms way and the government they serve is huge and to me every bit as damaging as Watergate.
The post links to a Washington Post column by Marc A. Thiessen on the Benghazi whistleblowers.
A number of major news stories have broken in the last week about the attack, including the news that a team of U.S. Special Forces that was preparing to respond to the attack was told to stand down by the U.S. Special Forces Command Africa.
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
What difference does it make?
Yep, in the end they’ll say naughty, naughty and reach across the aisle to give ‘em a big ole hug.
Graham, Issa, Boehner - nutless wonders, all.
I fear they will find a lot of “system failures” and people no one has ever heard of “asleep at the switch.”
I’m not gonna hold my breath!
Liberals love licensing and registration - maybe journalists should be licensed and maybe they could be subject to losing those licenses.
Whoever wrote this item for the Washington Free Beacon is not an eminent wordsmith of the English language.
Unfortunately Graham and husband McCain were leading the charge to get into the Libyan mess to begin with.
I don’t trust them. They just want to be out front to cut off anything that may blow back on them.
Does the author mean eminent or imminent (or, possibly, immanent)?
Something gives me the gut feel that imminent was meant, but perhaps eminent applies as well. Unless entirely off base, immanent would not apply here (within the mind only).
Something about the date of the attack comes to mind. Alqueda loves anniversaries.
My bet is that Patrick F. Kennedy is who Hitlary will run over, stomp on, point the finger at and claim was incompetent.
Most likely this will come down to a he said she said “I wasn’t told” BS lie from Beasty Cankles.
“I dont trust them. They just want to be out front to cut off anything that may blow back on them.”
Looks like they’re on Hussein’s side to make the buck stop with BJ’s wife.
Yes, there are some definite issues with grammar and sentence structure, to be sure.
> “Were going to find a ***system failure*** before, during, and after the attacks.”
***system failure***....eh? Well Lindsey sir, you are awash in Beltway Government lingo. It seems the root explanations are much simpler than ***system failure***. It’s about liars, prevarications and political cover. It also borders on treason.
I believe the ‘system’ was and is capable to work as designed but the decision-makers in control are subverting the ‘system’.
NOPE!....you're going to find people that were wide awake and calculating every move.... u limp-wristed RINO....But that's a good start for your RINO “spin” to keep them from being prosecuted.....
We're onto u Lindsey Light-Loafers...
Instead, all I saw was the media filling sandbags.
Benghazi will somehow be blamed on Republicans, is my guess.
When Hillary tries to throw Kennedy under the bus the Repubs should just say, “What difference does it make, you are both going down.”
Watergate has not been a precise superlative in defining Presidential malfeasance since Billy Boy turned the Oval Office into the sport f^%*ing center of the western hemisphere
Words like, "system failure" and "asleep at the switch" all words to deflect responsibility from individuals, namely Obama and Clinton.
Make no mistake, Graham and McCain are setting out to whitewash this all by blaming "the system". Like storm clouds, you can just see the pattern forming.
Where did that 'order' originate?, THAT is the $64,000 question......
Graham...had better grab his ankles.
Romney through away the election when he didn’t go hard after Obama on this.
My User Name is testimony to the false hope I had 15 years ago. Nailing Hilary is the same as trying to catch a greased pig.
If the dam DOES break it can only mean one thing: someone inside the DemoRAT party is trying to take down Hilldebeast.
Excuse me if I don’t hold my breath.
Stand-by for the assistant deputy’ assistant to Middle East social protocol to resign.
“And to me every bit as damaging as Watergate”.
Watergate was a break in. No one got killed. No one was asleep at the switch. No one went to bed. It was a cover up & it backfired. They got what they deserved for committing the crime.
The people in charge in the Benghazi murders should also be held accountable just like Nixon & the plumbers were.
But I am afraid there will be no accountability at the highest levels.
A news writer might get sloppy sometimes and use the wrong word or misspell a word in a rough draft or internal memo, but when the errors get past an editor and they get published I begin to wonder whether the writer has been as sloppy with the facts of the story.
In any event, we are seeing a number of hints in the news that some politicians (including a few democrats) know more than what has been leaked so far. Even some journalists are giving hints by things said or unsaid. I wonder how much has been whispered about. This has a different feel about it than some other scandals that have surfaced in recent years.
Hillary could always blame Patrick Kennedy.
There, fixed it!
No. The media and the left (excuse the redundancy) will do anything and everything to protect the phoney that they helped elect.
Why did State repeatedly deny requests for more security in Benghazi, despite increasingly dire predictions? Instead, State completely stripped security from Stevens. No credible explanation has been offered for the removal of security by the White House or the State Department. It has been confirmed that the budget excuse proffered by State was completely false.
Who arranged Stevens' meeting with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akinin in Benghazi, not Tripoli, so late in the evening?
Why on 9/11 -- of all dates -- was there no special security posture ordered in diplomatic installations around the Middle East?
Why did so many people in the administration publicly lie about the nature of the attack when it was clear from the onset hat it was an organized attack by terrorists?
Why did the president go to sleep after getting word of the attack?
Why did he reportedly refuse security briefings in the aftermath of the attack, instead simply departing for a fundraiser in Las Vegas?
be ready for left’s response - both media whores and admin:
1. witch hunt
2. this is purely politics
3. they just hate obama
4. sore losers
5. lynching him for not handling this perfectly
6. an excuse to go after him
bla bla bla
media will of course back him up as they live in his underwear.
Yup—and is in imminent danger of inestimable eminence!
The only way we will get to the bottom of this is if the senate committee asks pertinent questions. After the questioning of Hillary I don’t believe they are up to the job.
Yep - back when FR was the 'White-water Files' link on Drudge...
why was Stevens' meeting with Turkish Consul General? why on 9 11?
Coming out and saying all of this beforehand is not smart politics and lets the enemy know you are gunning for them...but then again...look who is talking.
Good ones! *Shared*
As the great Clinton said when campaign finance violations were noticed about his 1992 campaign, “Mistakes were made, but we had a tough battle to win to overthrow 12 years of Republican rule.”
It was all about winning an election, and dead Americans were considered a small price to pay.
Big Media concurs.
8. Bush’s fault.
Romney couldn’t even hammer BO for not attending his security briefings—good grief-he was pathetic.
I think that may be what he meant. The system, for example, was designed to have the counterterrorism taskforce meet immediately with all of the others theoretically involved (SOS, Secy Defense, President...) to provide a rapid response. BTW, the taskforce received information directly from the site, not filtered through Hillary and Barry.
Hillary turned them away when they arrived. So I’d say the system did fail - because it was subverted by Hillary, without any doubt acting on the orders of the White House. No SOS makes those decisions on his or her own, and she probably didn’t even have the authority to turn them away, so it was clearly part of a rival “system” built up by the WH to minimize Islamist attacks and protect Barry’s rear end.