House Benghazi report slams administration response to attacks

[JWB]

2 minutes ago, Big girl said:

We're you an adult when the incident in Beirut happened? We're you infuriated with Reagan? 

Reagan had nothing to do with Benghazi! quit changing the subject....Have you seen the movie or not?

[Peppermint Patty]

41 minutes ago, Big girl said:

We're you an adult when the incident in Beirut happened? We're you infuriated with Reagan? 

In what way was Ronald Reagan directly or indirectly responsible for the bombing in Beruit?

Would you then say Bill Clinton was directly or indirectly responsible for the OKC bombing?

No. Neither one of those presidents make decisions that would have prevented the loss of life from either of those terrorist attacks.  

Sec of State Hillary Clinton did. She failed to send supporting troops in a timely manner. She hung those men and women out to dry.

[Big girl]

Chris Stevens's family said not to blame Clinton for his death in Benghazi

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Big girl]

31 minutes ago, GCMPats said:

In what way was Ronald Reagan directly or indirectly responsible for the bombing in Beruit?

Would you then say Bill Clinton was directly or indirectly responsible for the OKC bombing?

No. Neither one of those presidents make decisions that would have prevented the loss of life from either of those terrorist attacks.  

Sec of State Hillary Clinton did. She failed to send supporting troops in a timely manner. She hung those men and women out to dry.

Please read, this will give you a better understanding of what transpired in Beirut.  Reagan ignored warnings and the soldiers were "sitting ducks". I used the article from fox news, because some of you guys love fox

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[stevenash]

6 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Please read, this will give you a better understanding of what transpired in Beirut.  Reagan ignored warnings and the soldiers were "sitting ducks". I used the article from fox news, because some of you guys love fox

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Big Girl- If this article is correct, I still have a question for you.  I thought the democrats are/were " so much smarter/enlightened  than Republicans like Reagan and were not capable of making similar judgment errors?

[Peppermint Patty]

1 hour ago, Big girl said:

Please read, this will give you a better understanding of what transpired in Beirut.  Reagan ignored warnings and the soldiers were "sitting ducks". I used the article from fox news, because some of you guys love fox

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Apples and oranges. Reagan did not make a proactive decision to a possible attack. Clinton refused to even be reactive while the attack was taking place.

[77]

This nonsense has nothing to do with Reagan!

[LumRaiderFan]

Guys...give it up. 

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

25 minutes ago, 77 said:

This nonsense has nothing to do with Reagan!

Bill did it and Dubya did it.

[Englebert]

On ‎6‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 1:18 PM, BLUEDOVE3 said:

Man, there is no way in America will I carry a gun as a Black man, pull it out in a crowd and try and defend... That's suicide..

Where do you find these white guys that come in blazing, shooting innocent bystanders and looking for black people to shoot? I've been around white people with guns all of my life and can't recall ever seeing one that fits your description.

[baddog]

I work with two black guys who conceal carry. Guess everyone doesn't view it quite that way, but I'm glad you are in touch with your feminine side, Dove. Lol

[new tobie]

7 hours ago, Big girl said:

Chris Stevens's family said not to blame Clinton for his death in Benghazi

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Chris Stevens sister blames congress more than Clinton, who was the majority in congress?

[Hagar]

8 hours ago, Big girl said:

We're you an adult when the incident in Beirut happened? We're you infuriated with Reagan? 

I was, and I certainly was infuriated at what happened.  But Reagan didn't blame it on a YouTube video.  As I posted earlier, Obama & Hillary had just come out and said they made the wrong call, this would have been a non issue.

[Big girl]

56 minutes ago, REBgp said:

I was, and I certainly was infuriated at what happened.  But Reagan didn't blame it on a YouTube video.  As I posted earlier, Obama & Hillary had just come out and said they made the wrong call, this would have been a non issue.

The report said that there is nothing more that could've been done. She didn't have the time or the resources. Chris Steven's sister said he knew the situation. She doesn't blame Hiliary, she blames Congress.

[Hagar]

16 minutes ago, Big girl said:

The report said that there is nothing more that could've been done. She didn't have the time or the resources. Chris Steven's sister said he knew the situation. She doesn't blame Hiliary, she blames Congress.

I'm not interested in what Chris Steven's sister said at this point.  If you want to defend Hillary, explain why she and Obama fabricated a story about a YouTube video.  If you can explain that, no problem.

[Hagar]

Heard this on the news this morning.  On the night of Benghazi attack at 6:49 pm, Hillary called Lybia's president and said as-Sharia is claiming responsibility.  At 10 pm she blamed the attack on the YouTube video.  An hour later, she emailed Chelsea and told her the attack was by an Al Qaeda like group.  The next day, she called the prime minister of Egypt and told him, We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film.  It was a planned attack - not a protest.

And that's an example of why she's known as lying Hillary.  And I have to question her intelligence if she thinks that simply hitting a delete button will wipe everything off a computer.   

[LumRaiderFan]

11 hours ago, new tobie said:

Chris Stevens sister blames congress more than Clinton, who was the majority in congress?

Are you interested in where any of the other family members place blame?

The fault of Congress???...smh.

[tvc184]

2 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Are you interested in where any of the other family members place blame?

The fault of Congress???...smh.

 Obviously it is Congress' fault. After all they are the commander in chief over the US military and they control the State Department. 

 Being uneducated as you are, you probably believed that the president was the commander-in-chief of the US military forces and the secretary of state was the head of the State Department. 

 Consider yourself educated now.  

[BLUEDOVE3]

18 hours ago, stevenash said:

Big Girl- If this article is correct, I still have a question for you.  I thought the democrats are/were " so much smarter/enlightened  than Republicans like Reagan and were not capable of making similar judgment errors?

Big Girl, watch the deflection here. Its common among this group.

[BLUEDOVE3]

10 hours ago, REBgp said:

I'm not interested in what Chris Steven's sister said at this point.  If you want to defend Hillary, explain why she and Obama fabricated a story about a YouTube video.  If you can explain that, no problem.

Well Big Girl, read between lines on this post. 

[JWB]

37 minutes ago, BLUEDOVE3 said:

Well Big Girl, read between lines on this post. 

2 hours ago, BLUEDOVE3 said:

Big Girl, watch the deflection here. Its common among this group.

Dove, have you watched the Benghazi movie 13 hours?

2 hours ago, BLUEDOVE3 said:

 

[thetragichippy]

On 6/28/2016 at 11:03 AM, nappyroots said:

Is it a coincidence on this board that everytime a white cop kills someone, the cop is innocent. But when the black cop in orange killed the guy at the auto parts store the victim was innocent. Ive been disrespected by cops and I am a tax paying citizen and a hard working family man, and furthermore if the person wasn't a cop he would have been on the receiving end of a a...whoopin. I respect cops, and all other men that respect me.

There was a twenty something page post on The Orange cop that killed the unarmed retired vet. I'm sure it was lost in the crash. I wish it was around to bump back up to the top of the forum. I recall most of the folks on this forum thought the cop was in fear of his life or wanted to wait for further information. 

Buddy, you recall?

 

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

17 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

There was a twenty something page post on The Orange cop that killed the unarmed retired vet. I'm sure it was lost in the crash. I wish it was around to bump back up to the top of the forum. I recall most of the folks on this forum thought the cop was in fear of his life or wanted to wait for further information. 

Buddy, you recall?

 

I remember it being talked about alot on here, not sure what happened to the thread. I dont recall the cop being in the wrong. 

[baddog]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Buddy Garrity said:

I remember it being talked about alot on here, not sure what happened to the thread. I dont recall the cop being in the wrong. 

I think everyone sided with the cop. Mostly what fueled debate was if the races were switched. Good Lawd!

[tvc184]

On 6/29/2016 at 0:18 PM, Big girl said:

 According to what I read, the only footage they had was of her refusing to put out her cigarette which infuriated the cop. There was about a 11/2 hour loss of video footage between the time she arrived and the time her body was found at the police station.

You didn't ask anything about time frames. You asked what crimes she committed and I listed those that could be seen on camera.

Time frames have nothing to do with her crimes. The officer's anger or actions have nothing to do with her crimes. 

Not that you are likely concerned what the law actual says but....

In Pennsylvania v. Mimms the US Supreme Court says that a driver can be ordered out of a car. While the USSC do not say that refusing to do so was a crime (they don't make law per se), refusing a lawful order by an officer in TX is a crime. Under the Penal Code it is Interference With Public Duties. Part of which states.... "A person commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law". 

That is with "criminal negligence" which means that there does not even be any need to show "intent". Clearly when the officer tells her to step out of the car, as the the USSC has upheld as lawful, the officer is performing a public duty granted by law and she refuses. That is a crime. 

In the video she says "you don't have the right to arrest me", I am assuming for the minor traffic violation of fail to signal intent of turn. The USSC in Atwater v. Lago Vista TX ruled that TX has the lawful right to arrest for minor traffic violations even if the violation itself carries no jail time as punishment but in order for the accused offender to be brought to jail to post bail.

She appears to be (and almost certainly is) resisting arrest when the officer is reaching into the car. Under TX law a person cannot resist even a lawful arrest. The place to contest an arrest is in the court, not on the side of the roadway. In fact in this case the officer asked her to sign the citation as a field release and then several times asked her to get out of the car and at one point stated "I am giving a lawful order" which is correct as I have explained on two above USSC rulings.  

Under TX resisting arrest law is states.... "A person commits an offense if he intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer from effecting an arrest".... and.... "It is no defense to prosecution under this section that the arrest or search was unlawful"

Merely not liking or agreeing with an arrest is no lawful excuse to resist arrest or fail to comply with an officer's commands. 

As in almost all cases like this, an officer gives a lawful command and usually several times (which is not required) in order to give the person a chance to submit to lawful authority and not use force. In almost all cases like this, the person wants to make a show and refuses.

According to the FBI statistics, about 35,000 people a day are arrested in the USA by the police. Out of all those people, most go to jail for even very serious charges without any use of force needed or given. The USSC has said in many cases that officers can make arrests, can order people out of cars (even passengers), can arrest for minor crimes that don't even carry jail time and can use what the officer believes is reasonable force even if the reason that the officer used that force later turns out to be incorrect. Such a case was Graham v. Connor where the officers stopped a guy for an armed robbery that did not happen. They saw a guy run in and out of a store so quickly they thought it was a robbery. In fact it was a guy having a diabetic crisis and needed sugar (I believe this guy normally drank orange juice for it). When he was stopped he was showing signs on intoxication from the medical issue and not any illegal substance and in that state of mind, resisted the officer's commands. They roughed him up enough to put him in the hospital to be treated and released. So we have a guy that is guilty of nothing. He was in a medical crisis and the police detained and injured him. A very rare unanimous USSC ruled that the officers' actions were lawful because under the circumstances, through their eyes it appeared reasonable. 

It is always so simple. Comply with the officer's commands and about 99.99% of the time nothing more will happen. Run, resist arrest, fight, refuse to comply with lawful orders and it goes downhill from there. That is why officers, making almost 250,000 per week and we rarely hear of them.