Reply With Quote
No i dont. If bush were in this situation id be looking for impeachment too
Too late, he already moved the goalposts on that one.
No i dont. If bush were in this situation id be looking for impeachment too
Interesting to get a rise out of liberals. Nothing more.
1) Even SA210 thinks this sanctimonious criticism of Bush is too transparent.
It was interesting getting you to make excuses for Bush as well.
When are you going to realize this isn't a debate between bush and obama? Ok, lets say Bush should have been impeached? That doesn't change anything for Obama tbh
Oh boy, the ol' "I was just trolling!" defense
It makes you a hypocrite as you've already admitted you didn't call for Bush's impeachment.
Again, i dont care about bush, never thought he was a good prez. AGAIN, this isn't a debate between bush and obama.
It's interesting to see you run away from any actual discussion.
I was speaking hypothetically.
And I was answering you hypothetically.
actually discussion? Like you said, didn't I start the thread? Dont remember bringing up Bush when i started this
It became one when you outed yourself as an apologist for Bush's competency leading up to 9/11
Yeah, you did start the thread for no reason. You don't even have any charges in mind.
oh my god. understand me please. Hypothetically speaking, lets say bush should have been impeached. That doesnt change the situation for Obama. You cant look at the Benghazi situation and think "hhmm well one time bush had a situation and didn't get impeached!" You cant base situation off of different situations, all situations are different and have different details. This ISNT about obama vs bush
Not my job, just like its apparently not Obamas job to help and protect americans
You failed worse than you claim Obama failed tbh.Not my job, just like its apparently not Obamas job to help and protect americans
Chumpy is a troll, but your not listening to facts anyway...
FACT: There Were Multiple Teams Of Armed Guards At Libyan Consulate
WSJ: Consulate Security Included "A Four-Man Team Of Armed Guards Protecting The Perimeter" And "Five Armed State Department Diplomatic Security Officers." A September 21 Wall Street Journal article reported that security at the Libyan consulate included "a four-man team of armed guards protecting the perimeter and four unarmed Libyan guards inside to screen visitors." The Journal also noted: "Besides the four armed Libyans outside, five armed State Department diplomatic security officers were at the consulate."
WSJ: Prior To Attacks, "Embassy Personnel Conducted A Security Review." The same Wall Street Journal article reported that a security review was conducted right before the attacks on the consulate:
In the days before Sept. 11, intelligence agencies issued their annual warning of heightened security risks around the anniversary of the 2001 attacks. Many counterterrorism officials saw a lessened risk this year than last year, which was the 10th anniversary and the first one after the killing of Osama bin Laden.
In Libya, embassy personnel conducted a security review right before the anniversary. It determined there was no reason to think an attack was planned or the consulate in Benghazi was "insufficiently postured," said a senior administration official.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201...and-p/190150#c
So what are you trying to say exactly? The obama administration did nothing wrong? and we are all just overreacting?
Since Bush wasn't impeached, yeah it does.
So I have to hold Obama to higher standards than other presidents are held to? Why?
Details like Bush getting an intelligence briefing a month before 9/11 that said, "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" perhaps? Maybe details of Bush receiving word about 9/11 and continuing to read a book to a bunch of kindergarteners?
The way you defended Bush's actions as satisfactory, yes it is.
Or Bush's job either.Not my job, just like its apparently not Obamas job to help and protect americans
Main problem was bad intel on the ground. Happens a lot. Bush could tell you about that.
I only defended bush becasue you brought him up. But im losing interest in this convo, ill talk to you later buddy. See im ok with saying that because obviously we aren't going to change each others minds, and when i log off its going to have no repercussions on my day. Thanks for the convo though!
I'm saying nothing Obama did was grounds for impeachment. Nothing Bush did on 9/11 was grounds for impeachment either. Incompetency* has never been grounds for impeachment.
*I'm not admitting Obama was incompetent before you jump on that like Laura Bush on an opportunity to murder her friend, just saying so for argument's sake.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions