Quoted from CICERO

Hillary isn't going to dust off the ole "vast right wing conspiracy" is she?  

Quoted from Box A Rox

It looks like we are going to get both... "A Clinton With A Bush"!  
(Yea I know... pretty bad)

Quoted Text

New York Times reporter: We had a reporter on the ground during Benghazi attack

On Monday, David Kirkpatrick, the New York Times reporter who penned last week's controversial article claiming al Qaeda played no role in the Sept. 11, 2012 terror attack on the consulate in Benghazi, issued a tweet saying the paper had a reporter on the ground in Benghazi during the attack. Moreover, Kirkpatrick said, that reporter was talking to the attackers.

"[W]e had a reporter on the scene talking to the attackers during the attack- still invaluable," he said.

"Was the @nytimes reporter supposedly in #Benghazi witnessing the murder of Amb. Stevens an American?" asked lawyer Robert C. O'Brien.

"Did he call for help for Amb. Stevens & Sean Smith?" O'Brien asked in another tweet.

Another person asked for the identity and the current location of the reporter, but did not get an answer from Kirkpatrick.

"Was he giving them tips?" asked Chris Loesch. "Taking a poll on YouTube videos? Just standing by? Wow!"

Another person wondered what a New York Times reporter was doing embedded with U.S. embassy attackers.

That tweet was followed by another wondering how a reporter could embed with a "random, spontaneous protest sparked by a video," echoing the initial excuse given by the administration.

"So you knew an attack was coming enough in advance to send a reporter?" another person asked.

Apparently so, if Kirkpatrick is serious. It would also mean the Times had the identity of those who murdered four Americans but kept it silent.

Fox News contributor Richard Grenell wondered: "[W]hat is the ethical line for a journalist? Just watching a US Amb being attacked by terrorists?"

"It must be ethical to wait 15 months before everyone knows a reporter was there," one person said in response.

Yet another person wondered if the Times was protecting those who attacked U.S. soil for a story.

According to the story, the attack was in response to a YouTube video that another report said was not even mentioned on social media the day of the attack.

The entire article was blasted by members of the House and intelligence experts, although the far left wing Media Matters bought the entire story, labeling those who believe the attack was planned and involved al Qaeda, "Benghazi hoaxers."

Quoted from BuckStrider

More....They were also getting the 'play by play' from the attackers
http://twitchy.com/2013/12/31/.....the-benghazi-attack/

Quoted from Box A Rox

Wow! Sounds like some great journalism to come up with the 'inside story' like this!

Who should we thank for this story??? A reputable source???
LMOA!  Duhhhh of course not.

!

Quoted from BuckStrider

Hey retard....

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

LMAO @ "HEY RETARD"  

Bucky's a real class act!  

Quoted from BuckStrider

Hey retard....That's what the NYT reporter TWEETED ON TWITTER and the responses that followed, M'kay. The only thing Twitchy did (does) was copy it. M'kay.

Quoted from Box A Rox

So an unnamed "twitter account", most likely an independent Libyan (or a kid who wanted to make
a few bucks covering a protest) is the basis for the NEXT CONSPIRACY ThEORY!

Quoted from BuckStrider

Have a nice day, a**hole

Quoted Text

Republicans hoping that the Senate intelligence committee's new Benghazi report would expose
former secretary of state (and potential 2016 presidential candidate) Hillary Clinton's errors once
and for all will be sorely disappointed.

The report only mentions Clinton once -- and it comes in the section where
Republicans on the panel got a chance to weigh in.

The report doesn't offer a whole lot of detail on how the talking points evolved,
but the Democrats on the panel do say (emphasis mine): "The majority concludes
that the interagency coordination process on the talking points followed normal,
but rushed coordination procedures and that there were no efforts by
the White House or any other Executive Branch entities to 'cover-up' facts
or make alterations for political purposes."

Quoted from Madam X

The cover up was that Rice idiot running around talking about a Youtube video. I don't see a mention of that being the cause in the committee's report, or did I miss it?