MSNBC: Benghazi Scandal Makes White House 'Look Terrible,' Possibly Impeachment

[mrclose]

Full Title: MSNBC: Benghazi Scandal Makes White House 'Look Terrible,' Possibly 'Impeachment Issue'

Will someone Please run outside and see if the sky is still ... up there!

5/10/13 - After examining all the details that emerged on Friday relating to the efforts by members of President Barack Obama's administration to remove references to Islamic terrorism when explaining the reasons behind the 2012 attack on an American consulate in Benghazi, the panel guests on MSNBC's Now agreed that the appearance of a scandal makes the White House "look terrible." One guest even suggested that the controversy could lead to impeachment proceedings against the president.

MSNBC: Benghazi Scandal Makes White House 'Look Terrible,' Possibly 'Impeachment Issue' - Patriot Action Network

[ColonelCarrots]

Oh man! this is exciting. My first presidential scandal!

[mrclose]

Oh man! this is exciting. My first presidential scandal!

Satire or just incredibly young?

[Dori]

Satire or just incredibly young?

I don't think it's satire 

[ColonelCarrots]

I don't think it's satire 

You are correct.

The monica lewinski thing happened when I was a kid, but this is something I understand and am witnessing.

[Chris_]

You are correct.

The monica lewinski thing happened when I was a kid, but this is something I understand and am witnessing.

Coincidentally, they both have something in common... lying Democrats.

[zeitgeist]

A bit of an embedded bouncy here.  Today I was talking with a leftist who did not understand how Humphrey lost.  No really they are that clueless about what happened in '68.  Now lets look at an article about Woodward and Bernstein and the Nixon impeachment myth as told in this article from the National Review.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/344038/truth-about-bob-woodward-conrad-black/page/0/1

March 28, 2013 4:00 AM

The Truth about Bob Woodward 
Forty years after Watergate, the myth is unraveling. 

By Conrad Black





{snip}

Now, it is all unraveling. There were not grounds to remove Nixon from office, shabby and neurotic though the tone of the administration’s response to its enemies often was. What occurred was a tragedy that wounded the country and the presidency and facilitated the Democratic desertion of the anti-Communists of Indochina — which led to the massacres of the South Vietnamese resisters, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, and the Boat People. Woodward and Bernstein are conducting an inelegant and unpersuasive rearguard action, with an implausible claim that Nixon was guilty of “wars on the anti-war movement, the Democrats, the media, justice, and history,” and was more odious even than they had suspected 40 years ago. In fact, finally, without the veneer of sanctity in which almost two generations of aspirant investigative journalists cloaked them, Woodward and Bernstein are naked to posterity, Woodward a mendacious, journalistically incontinent hack, Bernstein a burned-out tabloid journeyman, and both silent partners even in an antique book business of questionable ethics (Glenn Horovitz Books, which gives new warmth and depth to the old warning “caveat emptor”). Tanner Colby mentioned in Slate that, earlier this month, Woodward had claimed to have been “threatened by a senior White House official” for revealing details about budget sequester negotiations. The White House released the e-mail correspondence in question, which only cautioned Woodward against needless embarrassment if he published an erroneous report.

 

I suggest those who missed the Watergate years read the entire linked article.  Most DUmmies think Nixon was brought down by Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford.


 

[98ZJUSMC]

... lying Democrats.

BYRY

[Ptarmigan]

If this is from MSNBC, than I surprised. 

[CG6468]

But like Billy Blowjob, he can be impeached but (sadly) not convicted.

[J P Sousa]

I had to check the link to make sure this was not the Onion. 

[chitownchica]

Chris Matthews hardest hit.

[CG6468]

Chris Matthews hardest hit.

Awww. Poor Chrissy. I wonder how that tingle is doing now.

[chitownchica]

Awww. Poor Chrissy. I wonder how that tingle is doing now.

That tingle turned out to be burning pee.

[CG6468]

That tingle turned out to be burning pee.

Piss on fire? 

[Big Dog]

Full Title: MSNBC: Benghazi Scandal Makes White House 'Look Terrible,' Possibly 'Impeachment Issue'

I wouldn't rely on MSNBC to tell me the sun rises in the east.

If they're right, it is purely by accident.

[chitownchica]

Piss on fire? 

Yeah, there's a cream for that  .

Hahahaha

[CG6468]

Yeah, there's a cream for that  .

Hahahaha

Well, I have heard of guys creaming in their pants. Is that different? 

[chitownchica]

Well, I have heard of guys creaming in their pants. Is that different? 

 

[drazor1]

Carney was quoted yesterday, "The overriding concern of everyone involved in that circumstance is always to make sure that we're not giving to those who speak in public about these issues information that cannot be confirmed, speculation about who is responsible, other things like warnings that may or may not be relevant."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/10/white-house-scrambles-to-contain-benghazi-gate-fallout/#ixzz2SzEe6wSq

He was referring to the fact that spokesperson for the State Department, Victoria Nuland, had attempted to change the CIA communications regarding the possible culprits in the Benghazi attacks.  However, the agreed upon narrative of a "spontaneous protest over a video" fit this exact description...it could not be confirmed, it was speculation, and it was not relevant.  So, instead of stating the obvious, that Al-Qaida was responsible, they opted to completely fabricate the response, thinking in their shrunken little heads that the alternative, an offensive video, was more likely to be well-received by the ill-informed newshounds, and arrogantly enough, that the well-informed American public would be stupid enough to believe it.  These people truly are agonizingly stupid.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Coincidentally, they both have something in common... lying Democrats.

But really, is there any other kind?

[vesta111]

Carney was quoted yesterday, "The overriding concern of everyone involved in that circumstance is always to make sure that we're not giving to those who speak in public about these issues information that cannot be confirmed, speculation about who is responsible, other things like warnings that may or may not be relevant."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/10/white-house-scrambles-to-contain-benghazi-gate-fallout/#ixzz2SzEe6wSq

He was referring to the fact that spokesperson for the State Department, Victoria Nuland, had attempted to change the CIA communications regarding the possible culprits in the Benghazi attacks.  However, the agreed upon narrative of a "spontaneous protest over a video" fit this exact description...it could not be confirmed, it was speculation, and it was not relevant.  So, instead of stating the obvious, that Al-Qaida was responsible, they opted to completely fabricate the response, thinking in their shrunken little heads that the alternative, an offensive video, was more likely to be well-received by the ill-informed newshounds, and arrogantly enough, that the well-informed American public would be stupid enough to believe it.  These people truly are agonizingly stupid.

Just who is this Victoria Nuland ????    Was she voted in for her position or appointed by the Govenment?

[zeitgeist]

Just who is this Victoria Nuland ????    Was she voted in for her position or appointed by the Govenment?

Since it's Mother's Day   
Click here

Happy Mother's Day Vesta, enjoy, that's all I'm getting you .