“Greg, we’re under attack.”
Those were the words uttered by Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi when Gregory Hicks, deputy chief of mission in Libya, called him.
He didn’t say “Greg, there is a large demonstration outside.”
Gregory Hicks testified that the Libyan president said the attacks were led by Islamic extremists with possible terror ties.
The Libyan president didn’t say “hey, it was just a demonstration that got outta hand”
“The only report that our mission made through every channel was that this was an attack. No protest.”
Beth Jones, a high ranking State Department employee, testified that she emailed the Libyan ambassador:
“I told him that the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al-Sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.”
But what did the Obama administration conjure up in the days after the attack?
That it was all a protest that got outta hand.
The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.
As intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of events unfolding in Libya, they concluded even before the assaults had ended that al Qaeda-linked terrorists were involved. Senior administration officials, however, sought to obscure the emerging picture and downplay the significance of attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The frantic process that produced the changes to the talking points took place over a 24-hour period just one day before Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her now-famous appearances on the Sunday television talk shows. The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.
No cover-up?
Gregory Hicks testified that he was demoted once he questioned the blaming of a youtube video for the attack.
No cover-up?
Gregory Hicks testified that he was ordered not to talk to Representative Jason Chaffetz, who was in Libya to investigate the attack.
No cover-up?
Eric Nordstrom testified that the Accountability Review Board did not interview the people who were directly involved with the attack before they issued their findings:
“They stopped short of interviewing people who I personally know were involved in key decisions,”
No cover-up?
This is a obvious cover-up. It’s so clear…
and so sad to see political loyalties being placed ahead of the truth.
See author page
The Serpent is always able to slither away as long as the righteous are afraid to bruise it beneath their heel. “You’ll see a lot of strange things now George!” said Clarence.
Please!!!!!!
How can they keep a man in jail for a misdemeanor and not be under it for the failings and at least not sued by the victims families. I know they are protected from suit by being govt employees but they should should be punished for the misleading and out and out lying that they have purported to congress and the American public……
Only those who are blind or who want to not see can not consider this a cover up!
What’s the next step? That’s my concern.
So, they are liars; what difference does it make?
When American have, in the past, been attacked be it Kobar Towers, the U.S.S. Cole, the Beriut Marine Barracks or the Twin Towers in New York, along with the Pentagon, I wanted to know first, who did it? I also wanted to know what our government did to prevent those attacks, and who failed to protect Americans. Sometimes a Republican was in office during those attacks, sometimes a Democrat. It did not matter. And I would wager most Americans felt the same as I did.
But not this time. The press refuses to do its job, which is to ferret out all the facts, and let the blame fall where it may. Americans are supposed to demand answers from out elected officials when Americans are slaughtered, despite the party. No one cares except for the families, and a few others, of these slain Americans in Benghazi.
You see, winning is everything, even at the cost of American lives. And Obama knew this well as he was well taught by David Axelrod (a very brilliant man). So a couple (four, actually) Americans were slaughtered. The Administration, with complicity from the press, went into high gear to cover the actual facts of Benghazi up. Even lying to the father of one of those slaughtered was not below them. Winning the election was everything and if Americans learned that Obama, either directly or indirectly though Pannetta and Clinton, let these four FSOs be slaughtered, it could have cost him the election. They were not about to let that happen.
So the lies began. Susan Rice, the Ambassador to the U.N. and not one who would normally be sent out to plead the Administrations story line, was sent to five TV talk shows to spin the lie. Not Hillary, not Panetta, Rice. Why? She was playing “useful idiot” for the Administration.
The families of Chris Stevens, Ty Woods, Glen Doherty and Sean Smith deserve better than what they got. Their sons served honorably, and in return for giving up their children to the nation, all they got was a pack of lies.
Have liberals/progressives become so crass, so hardened in their goal of shoving their socialist goals on us that they no longer care about American lives or the truth? I think so.
Would the admin here consider contacting SD and Sharon at CTH and making this a guest post?
A chain letter of sorts is in order for this one, I think. Please read and consider. This needs to go viral.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/05/09/trumpets/
Hopefully, the truth will get out.
Benghazi must really be hard on obama. Think of all of the golfing and vacationing he had to give up because of it. It definitely is a bump in his road.
The Damning Dozen: Twelve Revelations from the Benghazi Hearings article is chock full of horrifying facts as well as new directions for follow-up lines of questionings.
Of the 12 these two sections stand out to me:
Told TWICE not to go help.
Was Obama in the room or not, and, if not, WHY NOT?
Told it was not the right time to help.
Cut out of loop.
YIKES!
Then this:
I watched as Dems read ”talking points” without awareness of who might have said what, over and over.
”Well, one of you said it.” One Dem actually said.
Then, one by one, as they finished their prepared speeches-passing-as-questions, these Dems left the room.
Their entire side was vacant well before the hearing was over.
To see Dems lie during this hearing was pathetic!
To see Dems had no real interest in learning the truth was even worse.
All 12 points are worth reading over, checking the sources included and thinking about what it means as we go forward.
ABC News had (and finally is publishing) 12 different sets of talking points from the Administration on Benghazi.
Here is a PDF of all 12 showing each revision as changes were made:
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/Benghazi%20Talking%20Points%20Timeline.pdf
Their article about this:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/
Hillary had seen ALL 12 before she said, ”What difference, at this point, does it make?”
Susan Rice had seen all 12 before her 6 show Sunday lie-fest.
The major new agencies all have a spin this morning: Benghazi might impinge Hillary’s run in 2016. That’s about it . . .
LA Times headline: “Ridiculous Republican rhetoric undermines Benghazi probe”
That’s what was written in a major news source. Partisan rhetoric passed of as objective news? This is the issue. The press’ job is to report, not influence public opinion using the 38 ways to win an argument. And yes, this is an “opinion” piece, but it comes up in searches in the top five. Wonder why?
Nothing will come of this, because the Dems control the media. Totalitarianism, here we come.
The right wing has a credibility problem with the American public. They have been screaming at the top of their lungs for too long about things that simply were untrue. MUSLIM!! SOCIALIST!! KENYAN!! USURPER!! GUN GRABBER !! Sure the 10 or 20 percent of US may believe that, but most do not. It is like scandal of the month, Rush et.al. are looked at like National Enquirer. Maybe even less reliable. Look at last months MENENDEZ AND TEEN HOOKERS !!! That turned out to be untrue but I can’t recall anyone here noticing that fact. Or asking who the “Republican operative” was that paid for the Dominicans to read off his script.
If the facts as laid out are true, then there is no question that Hillary and Obama and all their acolytes are traitors against the United States. If they are not held accountable for their obvious refusal to allow military assistance to get from Tripoli to Benghazi during the attack, nor their refusal to ensure adequate security there at the Ambassador’s compound, and for the blatant lies told about some irrelevent video causing a spontaneous protest in order to shield Obama during the pending election, then there is no justice left in this country and the people will deserve the hellish nightmare that follows when the left finishes burning the Constitution.
All of you who continue to defend Obama and Clinton, and obfuscate in light of such damning evidence are unworthy of the gift of liberty bestowed upon us by the Founding Fathers.
@john: What do you think of the mass reporting of the Boston Marathon bombing being “right wing” extremists before the facts were out?
The issue is that there’s a propaganda machine in place to influence the people into thinking . . . well, let’s use what you just said:
I’m surprised that anyone would think the dems are anymore “credible” in their reporting or motivations. They perpetuated the myth that Romney was rich fat-cat and ignored all he did for others–things that would not have been obscured or out-right twisted if he were a Dem.
No, the issue here is that there is a concerted effort to erase one side of argument by using any means necessary, and those means are completely unethical and wrong. The Dems and lib media successfully brand any scrutiny on the part of the right as ridiculous and silly. Too many people aren’t thinking critically.
The left is completely out of touch with reality and needs to re-construct itself if it hopes to have a future. (Say that enough, broadcast it on every news channel, magazine . . .get entertainers to parrot it, and soon enough, people will believe it).
You’re supporting a tyrannical entity that thinks it’s justified in silencing all who disagree with it, and it’s using pop-culture to play people like you like a harp. Following the Dems fall will only lead to death and poverty . . . whoops, guess that can easily be dismissed. I’m surprise that so many well-meaning people can’t see where fabricating and demonizing a class of people as the source of all society’s ails ends up (seriously, even you have to have more critical thinking skills than you are using).
If the MSM is suckered into believing algore’s global warming/climate change/weather, then it is not a stretch that they cover and spread the WH talking points of Fast and Furious and Bengasi.
@Nathan Blue: It is the far right that is “out of touch with reality” A vocal minority who yell “Muslim, Kenyan birth,Usurper,Marxist”–How can they be taken seriously on other important issues while yelling such foolishness?
BTW Romney WAS a rich fat cat that did a lot of good things for others—-his 47% comment cost him an election he surely should have won.
The MSM has a problem. It didn’t do its homework when the attack on Benghazi occurred, and now has difficulty lifting the veil covering its own serious blundering inadequacy.
A President and a Secretary of State, left the Nation’s representatives in a dangerously volatile foreign environment to die brutally for political gain. I doubt anyone can come up with an occurrence of such betrayal having taken place at any prior time in American history. Where is this OK? Are we sliding into an alternate universe?
I haven’t posted my website on your site for years. Mine disappeared when Apple quit hosting iWeb, the format on which the site appeared. In 2010, after many years of trying to tell the story without success, I gave up. At Benghazi however, all the same players are back in spades. I’m done whistle blowing. It’s way too dangerous and expensive. Should anyone have copied and archived my site though (naming all the same players), you’re welcome to use any or all of it to further the cause. Good luck.
Breaking out today…(and not from Fox), the official statements from the admin and it’s officials has been that the intelligence community provided the talking points, that they just use what they were given. As soon as Patraeus opened his mouth that the talking points “he” gave DID say it was a terrorist attack and mentioned AlQueda,…and this was at odds with what the WH and State were saying….he was suddenly gone: taken down in an extra-marital affair scandal that happened previously. Noticing a trend? The people who were closest to knowing what was going on…and who began to question the “video protest gone wild” meme…were pushed out and/or demoted.
Now we have the evidence…there are 12 different edited versions of the intelligence community original talking points…that were all done outside the intel community after the fact…and directed by the State Dept according to the emails they have. And it doesn’t come from Fox.
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/10/abc-benghazi-talking-points-went-through-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-reference/
Greg?
I included the Hotair reference because it’s pretty comprehensive coverage with links to the original reporting as well as video. This also implicates statements by press spokesman Carrey to the public/press as being demonstrably false. Like people say…it’s the crime so much as the cover up. We have always known that there was some kind of disconnect between what happened and what the WH was saying. They have insisted all along that this was simply fog of war…and they were only going by what they were given by intel community. Now we have proof that..this was not true. And I think this also raises questions about Panetta and Clapper who have never come forward to say…that the WH story about a protest differed from their Intel on the event and pushed the president not to use it. (ie, see Bush and “cherry picking” intel reports).
So, what in this case? They cherry picked details out of an overall intel assessment that included events in the surrounding region (ie. ,protests in Egypt, elsewhere) and did NOT include the facts on the ground of what actually happened…and then rewrote it so that it presented an entirely different event that never happened?
What do you call that? Creating a cherry tree, then picking it?
I think even more disturbing after all that…are the facts that the Intel community has not stepped forward on this (other than Patraeus who was immediately tossed aside), and the growing body of people who actually know the real story…being pushed out, demoted and/or told not to speak.
And just for you Greg…the link above is supposed to include links to the actual emails that show discussions of the editing process directed by the State Dept. At the very least..we know that within 24 hours the Intel community already knew there was never a protest…but a direct attack. So, question to ponder…why didn’t Panetta or Clapper tell the president or anyone else…that what they were saying, was simply not accurate as to the event? And lets remember…the hearings that happened far after..Clapper still insisted and inferred that the “view” Rice presented…was supported by the intel they gave her (ie., she was just repeating intel that originated from them). What do you think?
And where is the president? (hiding?) who so wants to get to the truth of this to “get it right” for the sake of those 4 dead Americans and their families that they told nose to nose…that this was because of a video protest gone wrong?
@retire05: Your last statements are entirely correct — do not forget the killing fields of the 20th century’s many bringers of utopia — they are now not only inside the gates but have been for 100 years and have recently gained access to and control of the keys to the powder magazine.
@Nan G: I wonder how long those a-holes have been sitting on that info and who leaked it (hopefully Patreus and has the transfer of info to ABC well documented).
@john: Deflect we much!
@Richard Wheeler: Yeh — that’s what he got for telling the truth!
The wages of appeasement:
US military units put on alert as security situation deteriorates in Libyan capital (Wires)
Also:
The United States and Britain are withdrawing some of the staff from their embassies in Tripoli, Libya because of a standoff between the government and heavily armed militias blockading parts of the capital, embassy officials said Friday.
The embassies had not been fully staffed since last September when militants attacked U.S. consulate in Benghazi, killing U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
In Washington, the State Department issued a travel warning for Libya on Friday, advising that it had ordered a number of diplomatic personnel to leave Tripoli.
The evacuation is being seen as an indication of serious anxiety in Washington and London about the security situation in Libya.
@JDR-Taq: Done and it’s up as a guest post.
@Richard Wheeler: The issue is that there are extremists in any situation, and the left has done a good job of labeling anyone on the right as being “far-right.” Sad.
@Nathan Blue: @Nathan Blue: I’m not labeling all on the right as “far right” I’m labeling the “he’s a Muslim,born in Kenya etc etc” If you’re in that group well quacks like a duck. If you can outright disown those as extremists outside critical Conservative thinking we can certainly talk rationally. Thanks—–Semper Fi
@Richard Wheeler: The real issue is that the extremists on the left are in charge of the WH. That’s where my attention is needed, not playing PR officer for the GOP. Most of the people I know who hate the GOP and conservatives are stuck in a cultural fad that started 30+ years ago (or more). It OK to be a lib, and it’s OK to be a con. The issue is the libs have waged a war of information with the intent of eradicating conservative thought. That is wrong and un-democratic. In 2008, the WH was there’s to lose, but still–it took the creation of a branded demagogue and Billions over those two elections to keep control. That sound like a strong party to you? Usurpation by way of cultural engineering and mass marketing is the only way I can describe it.
And as far as quacking, the progressives seem to quack about whatever it is that makes them emotional in the moment. Not sure what I would label you, but as I see labeling as a hostile, unethical piece of the dems current propaganda scheme, I’ll just leave you label-free. I suggest you start doing the same to others and see that the current national crisis can’t be served by labeling people and marginalizing their right as a citizen, no matter who they are and what they think. That’s why I oppose the dems now, and will continue to do so until they return with an actual platform beyond furnishing Justin Bieber-style candidates and catering to entertainers, not real people.
@Richard Wheeler: I’ll let you in on a little secret: the Tea Party isn’t “far-right.” The dems and the media were quick to label them as such in an effort to undermine their very plain, very practical approaches. Instead, they are the butt of every college-student’s joke. Until the Dems stop trying to engineer culture, or allowing those within their party to do it, I’ll oppose them 100%. The Obama regime represents a desire for cultural supremacy, and I will not let that stand. People have the right believe and say whatever they want, even if ignorant. As long as they obey laws, all is good. The Far Left (Obama was a radical . . . let it sink in . . . he’s a true radical in the poli-sci defintion) let the extremists take over their party, and they were quick to instill fear in all of us about the far right. Well, I think it’s obvious which one poses the greater threat right now . . . and it isn’t the right.
@Nathan Blue: The Tea Party consists primarily of Repubs. There is maybe 20% self described Indies and less than 10% self described Dems. It’s over 80% white. Again,if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck—-
I absolutely agree that the First gives everyone the right to play the fool. The radicals on both sides are the problem Both present a threat and should be marginalized when possible. Obama is center left—don’t consider him a radical left like say code pink. My personal concern is with those who would reverse our gains in civil rights,human rights and personal freedom–My fight always begins there. Thanks
Semper Fi
@Richard Wheeler:
Rich, you are the man. Perfectly put.
Regardless of what any party is made up of….to have an arm of the Federal Gov…abuse it’s power to target “speech” or political views…of specific groups that they disagree with or for other personal motives…is something we should all abhor and see that the people responsible are punished.
I’m quite sure the delegator in chief knows nothing about this, but having it been brought to the attention of everyone…perhaps you’d think they might be interested in speaking to it? Or suggesting that this has no place in his admin? Or saying he will order people in the IRS to comply with investigation, etc.
@Nan G: #10
####Then, one by one, as they finished their prepared speeches-passing-as-questions, these Dems left the room.
Their entire side was vacant well before the hearing was over.####
If you are a democrat, and a part of the coverup, would you want to stick around and hear all the testimony against you?
@Nathan Blue: #12
The press hasn’t been a news media for many years. They have turned into a propaganda machine for liberals. One easy way to tell if a news media is a propaganda machine is if they call the USA a democracy.
Please say the Pledge of Allegiance right now………………………………….. What kind of a government did you pledge allegiance to? A REPUBLIC. If the propaganda media called the USA the republic that it is, what political party would you think of. REPUBLICAN. When they call the USA a democracy, what political party do you think of? DEMOCRATIC.
One way to fight the propaganda machines is to call the USA the REPUBLIC that it is. When someone asks you why you call it a REPUBLIC, you can tell them.
Different times I have suggest people write to the media who call the USA a democracy, and ask them a simple question: Why do you call the USA a democracy? I have written to many, and never received a reply from any of them. Has anyone else asked them? If so, did you get an answer? You might want to ask your politicians who call the USA a democracy the same question.
@Pete: #14
I was awe stuck by your statement. The fact is that the gift of liberty is bestowed upon Americans equally. What we do with it is up to us. Some choose to use it to try to change America into some kind of a non-free country. The rest of us will do whatever we can to keep it free.
Merle Haggard’s, “If you don’t love it, leave it.” never applied more than it does today.
@Richard Wheeler:
Couldn’t agree more which why I have little use for this administration because they seem to have an issue with the personal freedom part.
@Dc: #20
Greg won’t be able to answer you until his leader comes up with one and passes it on to him.
@john: So this admin has had multiple scandals and instead of asking yourself why that is; why this admin seems to constantly be back pedaling and dancing around the head of a pin, you blame the “right wing?”
Amazing, lol!
Go light a candle on the alter to Obama that you have in your house…
@Richard Wheeler: And you get these statistics, where?
@another vet: Amen!
Some Democrat who was ”on the committee,” was interviewed while I was at the gym and reading the captions on CNN.
(I really do feel sorry for all those hearing impaired people who rely on pathetically bad captions, but let’s say the ones I read were accurate this time.)
This man blamed politics for the hearings.
He said the Republicans only want to make Hillary look bad before she can run in 2016.
He also said the Republicans only wanted to make Obama have to fight them on more than one front, healthcare AND Benghazi.
He ALSO said there was no way the men in Benghazi could have been saved so (to quote Hillary) what difference would it have made if orders had been sent to try to assist.
OK….2 ”only’s” is probably a captioning error.
But neither ”only” had a thing to do with the committee.
IF Hillary is going to run, she will have to deal with all her own baggage.
IF Obama can’t ”walk and chew gum,” what’s he doing as president?
Then that last one.
IF a little girl is drowning in the waves at the beach and a lifeguard sees her he begins to gather his stuff to race out and swim to her to try to save her.
BUT, if his supervisor sees all this and orders the lifeguard not to bother on the chance he will be too late, there is no chance he can save her.
Our national conscience cannot heal when we see our leaders take that supervisor’s tack when lives are on the line.
Sure, the men might NOT have been saved had we sent in aid, but at least we would have tried.
Even Carter tried!
@Richard Wheeler: #32
I went through my pictures of the Tea Party rallies I have been to and there are few blacks, but you have to keep in mind that they have been brainwashed into going along with whatever the democratic party tells them. Unlike your kind of rallies, at Tea Party rallies, you don’t hear any cussing, threatening harm, or see any offensive signs. The leaders of the Tea Parties emphasize these things all the time, and most demonstrators police these things. Do your kind of rallies have any rules?
@Richard Wheeler: #32
I went through my pictures of the Tea Party rallies I have been to and there are few blacks, but you have to keep in mind that they have been brainwashed into going along with whatever the democratic party tells them. Unlike your kind of rallies, at Tea Party rallies, you don’t hear any cussing, threatening harm, or see any offensive signs. The leaders of the Tea Parties emphasize these things all the time, and most demonstrators police these things. Do your kind of rallies have any rules?
The liberal’s view of civil rights, human rights, and personal freedom is the government paying them not to work, but guaranteeing them a high paying job if they want one, an education that lets them take courses that have nothing to do with getting a good job, but guaranteed a good job after graduation, getting student loans, but not finding jobs while at school to help pay the expenses so that their loans will be less, then partying all through school, then complaining about how much they owe, and the government needs to lower the amount they owe. Liberals always want the government to do things for them. Conservatives want the government to leave them alone and they can take care of themselves.
A true conservative wants to pay their way through school if they can, and most of them worked several jobs while in. Both my kids did, and they are doing fine on their own.
@Nan G: #43
If it is a live show, the one doing the captioning is doing it while they speak. How many people can type as fast as a person speaks? I don’t know if they are using a stenotype machine like is used in courts, or a regular keyboard. My ex studied to be a stenotype operator, and there are only 15-16 keys. Push the right ones at the same time and it prints a word, so that one stoke produces a word. Maybe the closed captioning companies need to hire stenotypists.
Just in case anyone is wondering Gregory Hicks is a registered Democrat. He voted for Obama twice.
Which tells me the man is brave and cares. At least for him political affiliation is not a priority.
I guess it’s too much to ask for the Obama folks to respect that as NBC’s Lisa Myers has been getting calls from dems in an attempt to discredit the man.
Nothing to see here. Just move along. Nothing to see
The Administration has massaged the message (all TWELVE versions of it) into a soft pablum for the masses.
Move along now. Nothing to see.
The IRS will have questions for you if you persist on pursuing your quest.
@Richard Wheeler:
Good to know that you are on the side that is opposing Obama. After all;
-Obama dropped the charges against people belonging to the NBPP, after convictions had been reached against them, in a voting rights intimidation case. Nothing like telling the white people who were intimidated that they have no one watching their back as they go to practice their civil right of voting.
-Obama’s Justice Dept. allowed thousands of weapons to “walk” over the border into the hands of Mexico’s drug cartels, and the result was hundreds of innocent Mexicans and a couple of Border patrol agents dead. Obama sure does care about human rights, doesn’t he?
-Personal freedom? Well, you no longer have the personal freedom to engage in(or not, if you so choose) the commerce within the health industry. According to Obama, you shouldn’t have the personal freedom to engage in anti-government rhetoric, but instead should reject those voices out of hand. If Obama had his way, you wouldn’t have the personal freedom to buy an AR type rifle, or magazines holding more than 10 rounds, or buying any type of firearm and ‘giving’ it away to family members, or selling them to friends, even though none of that, or the multitude of other limitations and regulations on firearms the Democrats proposed, would have stopped what happened in CT.
-And personal freedom, civil rights, and human rights, all went by the wayside, with the help of Congressional Democrats, when legislation was passed where, during the deliberation phase, the Republicans were locked out of the deliberations and the writing of the legislation. Millions of voters, who voted in these Republicans, had their voices effectively silenced by this lockout, effectively telling them that their personal freedom to vote didn’t matter, that their civil right of voting didn’t matter, and that their political voice didn’t matter.
Oh wait, you haven’t criticized Obama for any of that, have you?
But go ahead, keep telling yourself and anyone who reads this site that you really care about civil rights. Or human rights. Or, and this is the most laughable, a person’s personal freedom. Keep reminding us how you didn’t speak up when Democrats wished to monitor your salt intake. Keep reminding us how you didn’t speak up when Democrats(Bloomberg is a Democrat, even if he doesn’t have a D by his name) wanted to limit your soda intake. Keep reminding us how you haven’t spoken up any of the times that Obama has told audiences they should reject out of hand any voice that is against his utopian ideals, including the most recent account at tOSU. Keep reminding us how you didn’t speak up when Obama’s DOJ went on a gun running binge in the southwest that resulted in hundreds, maybe thousands of innocent lives lost.
@Smorgasbord: Talk about spewing the party line about those lazy,daedbeat,party animal Libs. Over and over you go Smorg–same ol same ol from the late night poster boy of Conspiracies,ODS and just pure B.S.
Semper Fi
J.G. Just read your #49. You espouse a viewpoint that has no water carrier. WHY DON’T YOU RUN .