New Disclosures on Benghazi

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
Yup.
Click to expand...

What day is he scheduled to give public testimony?

By the way, the theory that Issa doesn't want to call him is hilarious!

You think that Issa doesn't want to ask these two questions:

1. Did you talk to Hillary Clinton?

2. follow up: Why the **** not?
Click to expand...

So, he didn't he call Pickering as a witness on the 8th? Issa explicitly stated he would have allowed Pickering to testify that day if the Democrats had called him, despite the last-minute notice. Why didn't he call Pickering to testify that day?
 
ANTPogo said:
So, he didn't he call Pickering as a witness on the 8th? Issa explicitly stated he would have allowed Pickering to testify that day if the Democrats had called him, despite the last-minute notice. Why didn't he call Pickering to testify that day?
Click to expand...

LOLZ, no. tsk, tsk, tsk.
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
This is childish. A valid question was asked. "No" is not an answer to that question.
Click to expand...

That's because the actual answer to that question says things 16.5 would rather not hear.

And you didn't answer my question about what day Pickering's public testimony is scheduled for, 16.5.
 
ANTPogo said:
That's because the actual answer to that question says things 16.5 would rather not hear.

And you didn't answer my question about what day Pickering's public testimony is scheduled for, 16.5.
Click to expand...

Because you are lying about what he said.

C'mon man.
 
ANTPogo said:
That's because the actual answer to that question says things 16.5 would rather not hear.

And you didn't answer my question about what day Pickering's public testimony is scheduled for, 16.5.
Click to expand...
I've been googling, I can't find it. That doesn't mean he's wrong but I've made a good faith effort to demonstrate someone elses claim.
 
16.5 said:
Because you are lying about what he said.

C'mon man.
Click to expand...

“Well, as the ambassador just said, the day before the hearing, if the White House said, ‘We’d like to have him,’ there’s a procedure. He could have been the Democratic witness, and we would have allowed him.”

There's even video of Issa saying that at the link I previously provided.

If Issa would have allowed Pickering to testify at the hearing on May 8th if the Democrats had called him as a witness despite only giving notification the day before the hearing, then why didn't Issa himself call Pickering as a witness?

EDIT: And what day is Pickering's public testimony scheduled for, 16.5? Why can't you tell me?
 
Last edited:
ANTPogo said:
“Well, as the ambassador just said, the day before the hearing, if the White House said, ‘We’d like to have him,’ there’s a procedure. He could have been the Democratic witness, and we would have allowed him.”

There's even video of Issa saying that at the link I previously provided.

1If Issa would have allowed Pickering to testify at the hearing on May 8th if the Democrats had called him as a witness, then why didn't Issa himself call Pickering as a witness?

2EDIT: And what day is Pickering's public testimony schedule for, 16.5? Why can't you tell me?
Click to expand...
  1. Things that make you go hmmmm....
  2. I'm guessing the claim was was simply made up.
 
ANTPogo said:
“Well, as the ambassador just said, the day before the hearing, if the White House said, ‘We’d like to have him,’ there’s a procedure. He could have been the Democratic witness, and we would have allowed him.”

There's even video of Issa saying that at the link I previously provided.

If Issa would have allowed Pickering to testify at the hearing on May 8th if the Democrats had called him as a witness despite only giving notification the day before the hearing, then why didn't Issa himself call Pickering as a witness?

EDIT: And what day is Pickering's public testimony scheduled for, 16.5? Why can't you tell me?
Click to expand...

“Well, we were told the majority said I was not welcome at that hearing. I could come at some other time,” Pickering explained.

WHOOPS! Hot off the press, Issa and Pickering make peace!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/darrell-issa-subpoena_n_3321620.html 3

The Dep is off, the interview will be scheduled the testimony will be scheduled thereafter.

Great thread, all your Benghazi news in one place!
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
“Well, we were told the majority said I was not welcome at that hearing. I could come at some other time,” Pickering explained.

His deposition is tomorrow and I believe his testimony will be either May 28 or June 3
Click to expand...
[citation missing]
 
16.5 said:
“Well, we were told the majority said I was not welcome at that hearing. I could come at some other time,” Pickering explained.
Click to expand...

Yes, and if you believe Pickering is telling the truth there, you're going to have to explain why Issa lied when he said "we would have allowed him [to testify]."

If you believe Pickering is lying there, you're going to have to explain why, if Issa would have allowed Pickering to testify at the hearing on May 8th if the Democrats had called him as a witness despite only giving notification the day before the hearing, then why didn't Issa himself call Pickering as a witness?

Pick one, and answer it, please.

His deposition is tomorrow and I believe his testimony will be either May 28 or June 3
Click to expand...

You believe?
 
ANTPogo said:
Yes, and if you believe Pickering is telling the truth there, you're going to have to explain why Issa lied when he said "we would have allowed him [to testify]."

If you believe Pickering is lying there, you're going to have to explain why, if Issa would have allowed Pickering to testify at the hearing on May 8th if the Democrats had called him as a witness despite only giving notification the day before the hearing, then why didn't Issa himself call Pickering as a witness?

Pick one, and answer it, please.

You believe?
Click to expand...

Not anymore. See my edit.

Facts: Hot and Fresh courtesy of 16.5
 
ANTPogo said:
Where does that article mention public testimony?
Click to expand...
I can't find anything on a public meeting. The word "public" only appears once and is in reference to Issa's claim that the meeting first needs to be public.
 
GOP Hero Petraeus, Not Obama, Was Behind Changed Benghazi Talking Points

PoliticsUSA said:
The Washington Post reported late Tuesday that the emails released by the Obama administration reveal a rather shocking surprise. No, the Obama White House did not craft the Benghazi talking points to protect their reputation or that of the State Department. Nor did the State Department protect their image with “changes” to the talking points.

It was Republican hero, General David Petraeus, then the head of the CIA, who sought to burnish his image with demands to change the talking points. In fact, his version put him at “odds” with the State Department, the FBI, and officials within his own agency:
Click to expand...
 
16.5 said:
Bro, they have not even scheduled the interview yet, as far as I can tell.

The Public Testimony will come after.
Click to expand...

So, despite your earlier assertion, public testimony hasn't been scheduled after all, only private, closed-doors testimony.
 
And in the spirit of Bi-partisanship, I take a look at a recent link.

From a left wing blog of nitwits.

"It was Republican hero, General David Petraeus, then the head of the CIA, who sought to burnish his image with demands to change the talking points."

Bwhahahaha!!!!!!
 
16.5 said:
And in the spirit of Bi-partisanship, I take a look at a recent link.

From a left wing blog of nitwits.

"It was Republican hero, General David Petraeus, then the head of the CIA, who sought to burnish his image with demands to change the talking points."

Bwhahahaha!!!!!!
Click to expand...

The Washington Post is "a left wing blog of nitwits"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom