Posted on 05/12/2014 1:34:38 PM PDT by Hotlanta Mike
While some lawmakers have questions about what happened before or after the 2012 bombing of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Rep. Tom Cotton said he wants to know what President Barack Obama was doing during the attack.
"As a former soldier myself, I particularly want to know what happened during the attacks. Why didn't the president send reinforcements from Tripoli, or from our fleet in the Mediterranean Sea, or even from Italy?" the Arkansas Republican said Monday on "Fox & Friends."
While conceding that support forces "might not have reached Benghazi in time," Cotton said, "You just don't know how long a firefight is going to last whenever you're sending reinforcements to begin with."
Story continues below video.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
It would if he was drunk or stoned. Unfortunately, it would be a miracle to prove that.
No, he will be late for his neck tie fitting party........
He would not be removed from office for being drunk or stoned.
226 years of constitutional history shows that, unless he committed or ordered to be committed serious crimes that he will not be removed.
0bama was notified immediately and automatically when the Benghazi consulate triggered the "Imminent Danger Notification System" alert. He did nothing.
EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say
0bama abandoned his post.
0bama did nothing!!!
Yes, as the CIC, he should have been very involved in trying to get help to them, but he wasn’t, so where was he and what the hell was he doing?
It’s not that he didn’t do anything. He made a decision to let those in Benghazi fend for themselves, while assistance was provided in Tripoli.
OK. 0bama decided to do nothing positive. Better?
Tripoli rescue team told to stand down.
Hicks: Special Forces ‘Furious’ Upon Being Told to Stand Down video at link"According to Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks, the deputy chief of mission in Libya, special forces were “furious” when they were told to stand down during the Benghazi attack. “I will quote Lieutenant Colonel Gibson,” Hicks told the House Oversight Committee in hearings today, “He said, ‘This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military.’”"
This might be considered a stand down too.
Whistle-blower: Botched talking points hurt FBI probe of Benghazi attack"Another whistle-blower questioned Wednesday why more military assets were not deployed sooner during the Benghazi terror attack. Mark Thompson, a former Marine and official with the State Department's Counterterrorism Bureau, said he was rebuffed by the White House when he asked for a specialized team -- known as a FEST team -- to be deployed. This is a unit made of special operations personnel, diplomatic security, intelligence and other officers."
He made a political decision not to assist those in Benghazi. How many people there? Forty? So their lives were worth nothing in comparison to his political future. Which disturbs me immensely because there are survivors who should be be coming forward to call out this administration for its cowardice.
Yep.
I want to know what exchanged hands between the ambassador and his Turkish visitor
Yes it is. I am a bit surprised some politician asked this question. I am also surprised I don’t recall anyone asking before, but I might be wrong.
Yeah, that and bumpin’ pee-pees with Reggie. Stoned Obama: “Oh yeah Larry, just like that baby! Right their big guy! Fire away Larry!” Reggie: “Damn it Barry! That is the third freakin’ time you all be callin’ my azz Larry this week! It’s REGGIE damn it!!!” Stoned Obama: “Oops Reg, sorry buddy! Larry be aroun’ but you know you still be my main punch.....Hell, I didn’t moan ‘Mooch’ at you now did I???......Now back at it big boy!!!”
+1 as this is about the only area where laws could have been arguably broken.
"Oh, and for the Hildebeast, please elaborate on that $6 Billion the Dept of State says it cannot account for.
Funny how quickly that has dropped out of the news.
The fact is, Presidents are not always available 24/7/365x4. What if he was just tipsy and decided he shouldn't be making decisions? Would you applaud him for his prudence or put him on trial for it?
As for where he was? Not significant and you can't make a good argument for it without engaging in hypothetical's as for Bush -- well it would have been no problem cause he would have told where he was easily enough.
At this point should we know and should they be answered? Yes because the Administration let this devolve into political theater and sure acted guilty -- if only of trying to save his campaign from a last minute public opinion hit.
What's significant is what was Stevens doing in Benghazi and why was security drawn down? Was it an intelligence operation? Was it a military operation?
I know you are right. I don’t think anything this worthless creep does would get him removed from office. America no longer has the spine to do what is right.
I think where he was is extremely significant. I don’t know if we will ever find out, but it shows how pathetic he is. Plus, others have argued that he has to give the orders for our military to cross borders. I don’t know if that is necessarily true since we already had ongoing operations in Libya, but until put to rest, it is a factor.
I still don’t know why a few jets from Italy were not scrambled to do some high speed passes of the compound. It would have been good for our guys moral and would have likely caused confusion and maybe panic with the bad guys.
What is dereliction of duty and could it apply to the CIC?
I think there is more than just breaking the law that applies to this case.
A decision to send light infantry forces into urban combat, or not to do so, is a prerogative of the President.
Under no circumstances could such a decision result in 67 Senators voting to remove this President, or any President, from office.
Misfeasance, Malfeasance and Nonfeasance. Those are the choices with regards to Benghazi.
Malfeasance if he made his decisions with ill intent towards people ‘not our enemies’. Can be considered a degree of treachery if the malice was directed towards the U.S and her interests.
Misfeasance for making a series of errors in judgement so egregious as to bring harm.
Nonfeasance is the closest thing to ‘dereliction of duty’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.