You deserve a stink for many things babe. Like your jumping to conclusions.
I am arguing one single tennet of this case. not the entire case. For example, I absolutely think Clinton lied (like blaming the video), and as said in this very thread I do not trust her at all. SO next time you want to jump at someone try to know what the hell you're talking about.
This panel wanted to get to the facts not for their sake but to damage a rival. You want to buy their song and dance fine. Go for it. I don't trust them either.
Oh, this is where you blame the British.
I don't blame the British people for voting for what amounts to an illusion of sovereignty for their nation, or an illusion of democracy, or an illusory hope for actual relevance to their own government. I am amazed they could dig so deep they could find some of their roots that made them great in the first place.
you used to be a different person, before you were a mod. I saw some pretty realistic and decent posting back then. Now you're blind to what you have become.
I say stuff I hope will make people think again, and probably most of the time it's a useless rhetorical exercise.
Here is what you said///// I consider it important to focus on that as the basis of my comment, not your denials of what you actually said//:
This review was extremely partisan. Justified or not it was done for political reasons. That by itself makes me suspicious of it. This report make claims like "It is not clear what additional intelligence would have satisfied either Kennedy or the Secretary in understanding the Benghazi mission compound was at risk -- short of an attack" but gives no basis for that claim.
I am supposed to just take their word? No thank you. I don't trust her but I don't trust them either.
My comment was responded by saying it was not partisan, but factual:
you deserve a stink for this position. Headlines should have been "Hillary Lied while Americans Died".
That is the fact, and that is why the House select committee was interested in getting the facts on the record. Dissing it as politics minimizes the importance of Americans actually knowing the truth of what their government has done.
Some important things came out of the investigation, which we wouldn't have known without it. Stuff like Hillary's server in a utility closet, the private server which was not secure, and designed to keep a lot of official correspondence undiscoverable by meddling security personnel. A violation of the Federal Records Act and our FOIA rights.
It's easy for political pundits to say someone lied. Without the investigation we would just be throwing unfounded insults back and forth. Now, if you or I throw out unfounded insults, it is because we refuse to educate ourselves, not because the truth in unobtainable.
Historians will have a resource, if they're inclined to reference it, they would not have had without the investigation.
You are giving folks above a lot of crap asking for them to substantiate their views. If you are going to diss the report as "partisan", go get the report and show us the partisanship in specific statements of the report that are not supported by fact.
