- AARP Online Community
- :
- Politics & Society Forums
- :
- Politics, Current Events
- :
- Re: Benghazi
- AARP Online Community
- Ideas, Tips & Answers
- Caregiving
- Entertainment
- Health
- Home & Family
- Money
- Retirement
- Technology
- Travel
- Work & Jobs
- ITA Archive
- Health Forums
- Brain Health
- Conditions & Treatments
- Healthy Living
- Medicare & Insurance
- Retirement Forum
- Retirement
- Social Security
- Retirement Archive
- Money Forums
- Budget & Savings
- Invest, Diversify, Integrate Your Financial Life
- Scams & Fraud
- Travel Forums
- Destinations
- Solo Travel
- Tips
- Home & Family Forums
- Comunidad Hispana de AARP
- Dogs, Cats and Pets
- Friends & Family
- Introduce Yourself
- Housing
- Late Life Divorce
- Love, Sex & Dating
- Our Front Porch
- Random Thoughts and Conversations
- Singles Perspective Revisited
- The Girlfriend
- Veterans
- Home & Family Archive
- Politics & Society Forums
- Politics, Current Events
- Technology Forums
- Computer Questions & Tips
- About Our Community
- Rewards for Good
- AARP Rewards for Good archive
- Entertainment Forums
- Rock N' Roll
- TV Talk
- Let's Play Bingo!
- Leisure & Lifestyle
- Writing & Books
- Games
- Entertainment Archive
- Caregiving Forums
- Caregiving
- Grief & Loss
- Work & Jobs
- Work & Jobs
- AARP Help
- Benefits & Discounts
- Membership
- General Help
- AARP Rewards
- AARP Rewards
- AARP Rewards Tips
Benghazi
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
Are you assuming that Susan Rice having to give a deposition to the slime that is Judicial Watch is the same as the Government or a law enforcement agency having an interest in talking to her? It doesn't matter if your answer to that is yes or no, since it is Judicial Watch's lawsuit, THEIR past history and reputation matter. In both instances, it is bad and they shown a willingness to lie and stretch the truth.
No, she lied - this is not about who she gave any deposition to.
This thread is an attempt to imply that there is something new going on with Benghazi, when this is nothing but several FOIA lawsuits filed by a nuisance organization that loses the vast majority of their cases. What they are looking for is information about Clinton's E-Mail server. Since Rice already testified before congress, what new information do you expect them to find?
Not really new. Rather something that was covered up by the same corrupt elements of the DOJ that attempted to stop President Trump from getting elected and then to hamper his efforts to government?
This has nothing to do with Trump. Rice already testified before Congress. Congress already beat Benghazi to death. Are you implying that the Republican led Congress let all of this happen because thy were secretly for Clinton? This is nothing but a nuisance lawsuit filed by an organization that like to think they are actually relevant. I for one, do not want to have to fund our court system so idiots like these can feel important. The courts have more important work to do.
The Administration's official line was that it was caused by the anti-Muslim video. Hillary had told the Egyptian Ambassador the truth, she told her daughter the truth. But then they told the American people and not long afterwards the families of the deceased their lie.
Rice was on all the Sunday shows spreading the lie. She may wall have some information worth hearing.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
Are you assuming that Susan Rice having to give a deposition to the slime that is Judicial Watch is the same as the Government or a law enforcement agency having an interest in talking to her? It doesn't matter if your answer to that is yes or no, since it is Judicial Watch's lawsuit, THEIR past history and reputation matter. In both instances, it is bad and they shown a willingness to lie and stretch the truth.
No, she lied - this is not about who she gave any deposition to.
This thread is an attempt to imply that there is something new going on with Benghazi, when this is nothing but several FOIA lawsuits filed by a nuisance organization that loses the vast majority of their cases. What they are looking for is information about Clinton's E-Mail server. Since Rice already testified before congress, what new information do you expect them to find?
Not really new. Rather something that was covered up by the same corrupt elements of the DOJ that attempted to stop President Trump from getting elected and then to hamper his efforts to government?
This has nothing to do with Trump. Rice already testified before Congress. Congress already beat Benghazi to death. Are you implying that the Republican led Congress let all of this happen because thy were secretly for Clinton? This is nothing but a nuisance lawsuit filed by an organization that like to think they are actually relevant. I for one, do not want to have to fund our court system so idiots like these can feel important. The courts have more important work to do.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
Are you assuming that Susan Rice having to give a deposition to the slime that is Judicial Watch is the same as the Government or a law enforcement agency having an interest in talking to her? It doesn't matter if your answer to that is yes or no, since it is Judicial Watch's lawsuit, THEIR past history and reputation matter. In both instances, it is bad and they shown a willingness to lie and stretch the truth.
No, she lied - this is not about who she gave any deposition to.
This thread is an attempt to imply that there is something new going on with Benghazi, when this is nothing but several FOIA lawsuits filed by a nuisance organization that loses the vast majority of their cases. What they are looking for is information about Clinton's E-Mail server. Since Rice already testified before congress, what new information do you expect them to find?
Not really new. Rather something that was covered up by the same corrupt elements of the DOJ that attempted to stop President Trump from getting elected and then to hamper his efforts to government?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
Are you assuming that Susan Rice having to give a deposition to the slime that is Judicial Watch is the same as the Government or a law enforcement agency having an interest in talking to her? It doesn't matter if your answer to that is yes or no, since it is Judicial Watch's lawsuit, THEIR past history and reputation matter. In both instances, it is bad and they shown a willingness to lie and stretch the truth.
No, she lied - this is not about who she gave any deposition to.
This thread is an attempt to imply that there is something new going on with Benghazi, when this is nothing but several FOIA lawsuits filed by a nuisance organization that loses the vast majority of their cases. What they are looking for is information about Clinton's E-Mail server. Since Rice already testified before congress, what new information do you expect them to find?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
The Benghazi attack is just another example of the dangers of American interventionism abroad.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@Olderscout66 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying
ofaboutSusan Rice??Because Judicial Watch is a gaggle of ninnys whose only function in life is to give GOPers something to talk about, namely their latest baseless harrassment of somebody who has actually accomplished something in life.
This is not about any "gaggle of ninnies". This is about Rice (and Hillary BTW) lying to the American public about the cause for the attack. That is the issue, not GOPers, not ninnies, and not your lengthy litany of the chronology of the attack.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@sp362 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
Are you assuming that Susan Rice having to give a deposition to the slime that is Judicial Watch is the same as the Government or a law enforcement agency having an interest in talking to her? It doesn't matter if your answer to that is yes or no, since it is Judicial Watch's lawsuit, THEIR past history and reputation matter. In both instances, it is bad and they shown a willingness to lie and stretch the truth.
No, she lied - this is not about who she gave any deposition to.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@Snoopy48 wrote:
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
What lie?
About the video.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying
ofaboutSusan Rice??
Because Judicial Watch is a gaggle of ninnys whose only function in life is to give GOPers something to talk about, namely their latest baseless harrassment of somebody who has actually accomplished something in life.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: Benghazi
@rk9152 wrote:
@sp362 wrote:
@easyed598 wrote:I also understand they are also going after the corrupt FBI agents and also Obama DOJ personel(Susan Rice etc.)
In the US, any idiot can file a lawsuit for almost anything, it doesn't mean they are going to win. Judicial Watch's history on both factual reporting and won lawsuits is poor. I wouldn't get excited about anything this organization does. Larry Klayman has never been shown to be trustworthy and has actually been banned from several court rooms.
How does the court winning record of Judicial Watch effect the lying of Susan Rice??
Are you assuming that Susan Rice having to give a deposition to the slime that is Judicial Watch is the same as the Government or a law enforcement agency having an interest in talking to her? It doesn't matter if your answer to that is yes or no, since it is Judicial Watch's lawsuit, THEIR past history and reputation matter. In both instances, it is bad and they shown a willingness to lie and stretch the truth.
Open Enrollment: Oct 15-Dec 7, 2019 Find resources to help you decide on the best healthcare insurance plans for you during Open Enrollment season
- Trump
- Republicans
- VoteBlue
- Trump's swamp
- GOP failed logic
- GOP can't govern
- Democrats
- fbi
- DONALD TRUMP
- Impeachment
- DOJ
- PRESIDENT TRUMP
- GOP incompetence
- Mueller
- GOP LIES
- Robert Mueller
- Climate Change
- Ukraine
- 2020 election
- collusion
- GOP victimhood
- russia
- Adam Schiff
- GOP hypocrisy
- White Supremacy
- Kavanaugh
- GOP Hatred
- Putin
- Iran
- Traitors