Tony Stark
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2014
- Messages
- 9,626
Republicans have the option of not being extremely dishonest and hypocritical. I know, fat chance.I see just blatant personal attacks.
As I said? Classic!
Republicans have the option of not being extremely dishonest and hypocritical. I know, fat chance.I see just blatant personal attacks.
As I said? Classic!
That Republican witchhunters can't prove wrongdoing only proves that the coverup was successful.Remember when Republicans "knew" that Hillary would be found guilty of something?
That Republican witchhunters can't prove wrongdoing only proves that the coverup was successful.
I see just blatant personal attacks.
As I said? Classic!
It's not a personal attack, it's and accurate description of the right-wing on this "issue."
How did those investigations go, btw? Are you butt-hurt that Hillary isn't being indicted?
Th Benghazi investigation showed she was grossly incompetent which lead directly to the deaths of an ambassador and three other Americans the destruction of two American facilities, the complete breakdown of governmental control in Libya and the fact that it is the leading breeding ground for jihadists.
and Dreadful Hillary's fans are GLOATING that she didn't get indicted yet?
Th Benghazi investigation showed she was grossly incompetent which lead directly to the deaths of an ambassador and three other Americans the destruction of two American facilities, the complete breakdown of governmental control in Libya and the fact that it is the leading breeding ground for jihadists.
and Dreadful Hillary's fans are GLOATING that she didn't get indicted yet?
Th Benghazi investigation showed she was grossly incompetent which lead directly to the deaths of an ambassador and three other Americans the destruction of two American facilities, the complete breakdown of governmental control in Libya and the fact that it is the leading breeding ground for jihadists.
and Dreadful Hillary's fans are GLOATING that she didn't get indicted yet?
Th Benghazi investigation showed she was grossly incompetent which lead directly to the deaths of an ambassador and three other Americans the destruction of two American facilities, the complete breakdown of governmental control in Libya and the fact that it is the leading breeding ground for jihadists.
and Dreadful Hillary's fans are GLOATING that she didn't get indicted yet?
I could almost agree with this. In fact, I think if it didn't say "grossly", I could buy it. In other words, I think there is a legitimate criticism that says the administration's handling of Libya was incompetent, but it was a difficult situation. I'm not sure if there was anything obvious that they should have done. Their policy didn't work, so I think incompetence could be charged.
So why is it that Hillary's fans are GLOATING?
It is because the Republicans turned it into a witch hunt and made it a major part of an effort to discredit Ms. Clinton. By doing so, they managed to give her the opportunity to claim victory, or at least vindication, for a failed policy. The right wing media has been clamoring for her head, some of them demanding an indictment for.....something...... When the dust settled around the investigation and all that could be found was that there was some confusion for a couple of days in the middle of a difficult and developing situation, she could claim that the right wing got it wrong, and end up diverting attention from her own failures.
in other words, you made your bed. Now lie in it.
Th Benghazi investigation showed she was grossly incompetent which lead directly to the deaths of an ambassador and three other Americans the destruction of two American facilities, the complete breakdown of governmental control in Libya and the fact that it is the leading breeding ground for jihadists.
and Dreadful Hillary's fans are GLOATING that she didn't get indicted yet?
No. There are any number of people in this thread who are not fans of Dread-Inducing Hillary. They/we are more fans of watching the HDS sufferers flop around gasping for air like a beached shipwreck victim.
I could almost agree with this. In fact, I think if it didn't say "grossly", I could buy it. In other words, I think there is a legitimate criticism that says the administration's handling of Libya was incompetent, but it was a difficult situation. I'm not sure if there was anything obvious that they should have done. Their policy didn't work, so I think incompetence could be charged.
So why is it that Hillary's fans are GLOATING?
It is because the Republicans turned it into a witch hunt and made it a major part of an effort to discredit Ms. Clinton. By doing so, they managed to give her the opportunity to claim victory, or at least vindication, for a failed policy. The right wing media has been clamoring for her head, some of them demanding an indictment for.....something...... When the dust settled around the investigation and all that could be found was that there was some confusion for a couple of days in the middle of a difficult and developing situation, she could claim that the right wing got it wrong, and end up diverting attention from her own failures.
in other words, you made your bed. Now lie in it.
You have constructed a strawman built from artificial straw. The investigation wasn't even directed at Hillary per se, but rather the entire administration. It's true that her behavior was front and center, since she was in charge of the agency with the central role in the fiasco, but the investigations focused on the CIA, the military, and the actions of Obama ...
I go back to my answer to 16.5. If you want to say that the administration response was incompetent, I can accept that. Ok. It was incompetent.
Of course, nothing new has been revealed lately on that topic. There has been no new information. It doesn't seem to me that anyone was trying to find any new information. If they were, though, they seemed particularly focused on any failures by the Secretary of State, as opposed to the rest of the administration.
Certainly, when the report came out last week, all the discussion from right wing sources was all Hillary, all the time.
Given the incredible degree of coverage her role has received, I don't think you can call my discussion a straw man. The straw man here was erected by the right wing itself. They built it up, and they insist it is still standing, as opposed to having been mercilessly shredded.
That was the essence of my answer to 16.5. The left can get away with GLOATING about no indictment because the right was so focused on defaming Hillary and, if at all possible, prosecuting her. As I said in a different place, they moved their own goalposts. In so doing, they lost their chance to score.
ETA: Even your own post was all about "rebuke". Is that a worthy goal of a Congressional investigation? Well, maybe. I suppose it is fair to use that stage as a means of exposing something to the American people, and they did so. Fair enough. If they had stopped at "the administration response was incompetent", it would have worked. Unfortunately for them, they kept going and going and going, and the people who were following started to see it as less and less about factfinding, and more and more about an anti-Hillary vendetta.