| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
anomalocaris 11-Nov-12, 06:16 |
How is this possible?First we learned the news that General Petraeus abruptly resigned just one week before he was scheduled to testify in front of the Congress on the Benghazi terrorist attack and now we are learning that another key witness will not be testifying either. Much like General Petraeus’s announcement conveniently benefited the Obama regime and helped to aid the Benghazi cover up, so to does the news that Hillary Clinton will be unavailable to testify to the Congress next week because she will be out of the country. Isn’t it funny how the General Petraeus news broke so shortly before the hearing and isn’t it just as funny how Hillary Clinton’s schedule will conveniently not permit her to testify either? Two of the most important figures in this scandal will not be testifying and I think we all know why that is, don’t we? It is clear to me that the cover up is still ongoing and nobody of any import is going to testify willingly so it appears as if it will be up to the Congress to issue subpoenas in an attempt to make the most transparent administration in United States history come clean. |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 06:33 |
stinkyIs 'testify' even the right word, or is it spoken explanation. Can congress order someone to testify anyway, and to what end? |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 06:40 |
Petraeus |
||
|
anomalocaris 11-Nov-12, 06:49 |
So its not |
||
|
anomalocaris 11-Nov-12, 06:51 |
This....This is the question and the answer is...its all for show anyway to satisfy the families of the dead men and some Americans. IT will be to no end at all. |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 06:53 |
stink |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 06:54 |
But going backwww.brisbanetimes.com.au True or not? |
||
|
anomalocaris 11-Nov-12, 07:08 |
All |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 07:12 |
|
||
|
The question is why is he really resigning and is it true or not? And, that is only a question because everybody wants to know all about Benghazi. Why the stupid video story? Why was security reduced before the attacks? Why was help not dispatched in a timely manner? Why were pleas for help ignored, both before and after the attack? Now that Hillary Clinton will be out of the country, it further fuels speculation of a cover-up. They may evade testimony this time, but I have a feeling that they will get subpoenaed sooner or later. (It took about two years to get to Nixon. It may be even longer this time) |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 07:42 |
|
||
|
You aren't? You know the answers to any of those questions? Do you even have any possible explanations for these questions? Another question is why haven't heard any answers or explanations from our government? |
||
|
While Patreus' announcement was coincidentally post election, it's also a time that he could have personally chosen ... so his personal affairs did not conflict with more important election issues on one hand, yet soon enough so he could control the message first (something he's quite well known for). |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 13:16 |
softy you are watching the wrong news feeds. |
||
|
changeI have asked some relevant questions. I would like some appropriate answers from the government that should have those answers and the government that supposedly works for me. Are you saying that a government should not be accountable to its' citizens? It's ok with you if your government hides the truth from you? |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 21:49 |
softyThe question is why is he really resigning and is it true or not?..." My post is in answer to that. Also: fox news and abc news both reported over here this morning (our time) that spokesmen/persons from both the Republican Party and the Democrat Party agree that Petraeus' resignation was both warranted and timely. |
||
|
changeling 11-Nov-12, 21:52 |
I would think if he was involved in any conspiracy of the Benghazi debacle the Republicans would be screaming for satisfaction, that does't seem to be the case if reports this morning are correct. |