Benghazi Attack: The Cover Up Of Our Generation

Fox is basically the only network trying to make a big deal out of this.

 

because theyre the only major non liberal news outlet.

 

Not true, most if not all of the networks dealing with the stockmarket are conservative as well as the new Blaze network that is run by the most despicable of them all Glenn Beck. Conservatives cry all the time about the liberal media, but they don't realize that the conservative media outlets are far larger and outnumber the liberal media outlets. Look at radio shows - who do you hear about when they talk about radio shows? Conservative commentators - Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, and the rest. They all have at least one radio show if not more and then a TV show.

 

Sacro, I don't understand what was covered up? I agree there was a massive fuckup/intelligence failure, resulting in American (and an Ambassador's death). But where's the massive scandal? What's the impeachable offense? The Obama administration/Susan Rice would have no motivation to lie to the UN and say this was not a terrorist attack when it actually was. Additionally, it was by unlucky coincidence that the ambassador was even there, which would make the administration less suspicious of a longterm planned attack. Clearly, while there was actionable intelligence that this was a planned terrorist attack without hours after it happened somewhere in the chain, the top was fed that it was the result of a public uprising, at least through the time of the UN meeting. I don't see what Obama or his administration did wrong.
Your two claims that hold the Obama administration accountable were not supported with any evidence: that they were watching via live feed and directly denied support.
There would be no reason for support to be denied...an ambassador was on the ground taking fire. There is no situation where observatory forces would not be deployed and prepare for action.
Additionally, AFRICOM commander General Ham was not fired, that was just a rumor...

 

They said the attack wasn't related to Al-Qaeda, when it was and there had been leaks, rumors of such a plot happening in the months before the attack that Obama nor the administration looked into which could have prevented the death of US civilians.

 

Originally, they did. But they corrected their stance. I think it was because they did not have the proper intelligence (lack of information), not because of a huge coverup (why even cover such a thing up?).
The failure to put more protection at embassies ended up being a grave mistake, but the ambassador was not at the embassy when he was killed.

 

No. It's because they are a Republican propaganda station not a news station. They twist everything to fit their narratives. Most of the other news outlets try to be non-biased.

 

I heard this from a few people IRL. He tried covering it up by straight out lying before the presidential election, because he didn't want it to interfere with his voters (shows how little knowledge people voting for him have). He should be impeached for the sole fact he lied about it, to get more votes. Just goes to show how much BS he feeds people just to get a vote out of them. He was practically busing people from the projects to the voting stations to get votes from them. I also find it funny how Obama snorts crack in highscool, and smokes weed, and nothing comes up until he's elected. Romney plays a prank on somebody in highschool and it gets blowin' out of the water like he fucking killed somebody! This happened on many occasions.

 

So your argument is unsubstantiated slander?

 

Lmfao what? I respect the people who I heard it from, and I know they don't listen to any bullshit amateurs. Go look at the Yahoo news archives if you don't believe me or just want to have a look for yourself.

 

Or you could list your sources.

 

Well, when everyone else starts listing there sources every post they make I'll be more inclined to list mine.

 

I don't get how they disobeyed orders.. Who did they leave behind?