Kerry lets Benghazi-linked employees back on job

The House’s top investigator said Tuesday that the Obama administration has failed to hold anyone accountable for last year’s attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi after four employees who had been implicated in security lapses were allowed to return to active duty.

The Daily Beast reported that the four employees, who had been shifted to other assignments but were still being paid, were told to return to their regular jobs on Tuesday.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/20/kerry-lets-benghazi-linked-employees-back-job/#ixzz2cXRziYWC

Rep. Darrell E. Issa, the California Republican who chairs the House oversight committee, said that reinstatements mean that nobody has been fired or lost a day’s pay for the lapses that led to the deaths of four Americans when terrorists assaulted the diplomatic compound and an annex on Sept. 11, 2012.

“Instead of accountability, the State Department offered a charade that included false reports of firings and resignations and now ends in a game of musical chairs where no one misses a single day on the State Department payroll,” Mr. Issa said in a statement. “It is now clear that the personnel actions taken by the department in response to the Benghazi terrorist attacks was more of a public relations strategy than a measured response to a failure in leadership.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/20/kerry-lets-benghazi-linked-employees-back-job/#ixzz2cXSPSkcy

Where are all the excuses?

They got 8 months of paid vacation.  

Maybe they'll receive a promotion?  

What does it take to see meaningful consequences for blunders with this administration?

That's a good question.

News Hawk wrote:They got 8 months of paid vacation.  

Maybe they'll receive a promotion?  

What does it take to see meaningful consequences for blunders with this administration?

If you had your way it would be death by a firing squad.

Donzel wrote:

News Hawk wrote:They got 8 months of paid vacation.  

Maybe they'll receive a promotion?  

What does it take to see meaningful consequences for blunders with this administration?

If you had your way it would death by a firing squad.

What a great response!

 

News Hawk wrote:They got 8 months of paid vacation.  

Maybe they'll receive a promotion?  

What does it take to see meaningful consequences for blunders with this administration?

Where are the "meaningful consequences" for the "blunders" of an illegal war in Iraq?

News Pigeon wrote:
Where are the "meaningful consequences" for the "blunders" of an illegal war in Iraq?

Not only illegal but completely incompetent as well. The Sunni and Shia tribes have been fighting for centuries, but Bush and Cheney thought we were going to just waltz in there and impose our style of Democracy. Five thousand of our dead soldiers and one hundred thousand dead Iraqi citizens later they realized that it wasn't Mission Accomplished! The right wing nut jobs don't see any correlation between our regime change in Iraq and the Arab Spring. It's much closer to their narrative to blame the black guy in the White House!

Putting aside the fact Republican and Democrats overwhelmingly voted to go to Iraq…

The consequence was the election of Obama…I don’t know how “meaningful” putting the least qualified man in the most powerful position on the planet.

While I would love to discuss the illegal activities of our government, enough deflection, lets’ not stray to from the subject of this thread.

Why has the Obama administration failed to hold anyone accountable for last year’s attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi after four employees who had been implicated in security lapses were allowed to return to active duty?

They have a lead on a few suspects, don't they?

As usual the New Crows want to change the subject. Good idea to bring them back on topic, Outer.

Why do you Crows go away for weeks at a time and then return? And you seem to come back together….

Outerlimits wrote:Why has the Obama administration failed to hold anyone accountable for last year’s attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi after four employees who had been implicated in security lapses were allowed to return to active duty?

Since when do we have to go around firing people for being implicated? Do you have concrete proof that these guys screwed up? It seems to me that the alleged Benghazi scandal is evaporating, as is the alleged IRS scandal.

Was anyone in our government held accountable for 9/11, or do you keep blaming Clinton?

Outerlimits wrote:Putting aside the fact Republican and Democrats overwhelmingly voted to go to Iraq…

That vote was authorization to go into Iraq  only if it was proven that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attack...it's time someone called you on that little discrepancy.

The consequence was the election of Obama…I don’t know how “meaningful” putting the least qualified man in the most powerful position on the planet.

Ah, that sounds more descriptive of the little drunk from Crawford Tx....the one who left the gov'ment in ruins.

News Buzzard wrote:Since when do we have to go around firing people for being implicated? Do you have concrete proof that these guys screwed up? It seems to me that the alleged Benghazi scandal is evaporating, as is the alleged IRS scandal.

Was anyone in our government held accountable for 9/11, or do you keep blaming Clinton?

 
Obama vowed to bring those responsible to justice.
 
Wouldn’t that include everyone responsible…both there and here?
 
Why is it only the Republicans are looking answers? Where is the DOJ?  
 
The truth, Obama is holding no one responsible for what happened before, during or after the deadly attacks on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.  Kerry has decided to reinstate the four State Department officials put on administrative leave last year over the inexcusable lack of security at our compound.
 
The independent review of what happened in Benghazi noted that security was "grossly inadequate," and faulted "systemic failures, and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels".  
 
 
The real problem here is that we do know who was responsible over there and over here.  Over there, we have seen the interviews with the terrorists/murderers.  They are openly bragging about their exploits.  Over here, The person responsible is being protected as she may be running for office in 2016.
 
 
According to CNN, your FBI, under the direction of your Attorney General, still hadn’t been granted access to the Benghazi site, two weeks after the attack.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/26/world/africa/libya-investigation
 
Meanwhile, one of the top suspects sipped a strawberry frappe with reporters just days after your vow to bring those responsible to justice.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/world/africa/suspect-in-benghazi-attack-scoffs-at-us.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
 
Even major news networks are wondering why nobody has heard from any of the Benghazi survivors. What is your administration hiding?
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57573613/six-months-later-where-are-the-benghazi-survivors/
 
Just recently, nearly a YEAR after the attack, CNN was able to find the suspect and conduct another interview.
 
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/08/01/cnn-we-managed-to-track-down-and-interview-one-of-the-benghazi-terrorists-n1653676
 
The cherry on the top of this “phony” scandal Joe Biden’s upcoming presidential campaign slogan:
 
What difference does it make Hillary?

Witnesses and the authorities have called Ahmed Abu Khattala one of the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 attack on the American diplomatic mission here. But just days after President Obama reasserted his vow to bring those responsible to justice, Mr. Abu Khattala spent two leisurely hours on Thursday evening at a crowded luxury hotel, sipping a strawberry frappe on a patio and scoffing at the threats coming from the American and Libyan governments.

Libya’s fledgling national army is a “national chicken,” Mr. Abu Khattala said, using an Arabic rhyme. Asked who should take responsibility for apprehending the mission’s attackers, he smirked at the idea that the weak Libyan government could possibly do it. And he accused the leaders of the United States of “playing with the emotions of the American people” and “using the consulate attack just to gather votes for their elections.”



NY Times

The Honorable Hillary Rodman Clinton...that's what the sign says.  Must be true.  
The picture is when she said "What difference does it make".

It won't be long before the sign will say: "President Hillary Rodman Clinton". So...get used to it.

"I for one think it was a very big deal that our ambassador was murdered in Benghazi. In saying “I take responsibility” for it as secretary of state, Hillary should have resigned immediately. The weak response by the Obama administration to that tragedy has given a huge opening to Republicans in the next presidential election. The impression has been amply given that Benghazi was treated as a public relations matter to massage rather than as the major and outrageous attack on the U.S. that it was."

Camille Paglia

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/08/21/camille-paglia-hillary-disqualified-herself-presidency-fist-pounding

News Pigeon wrote: That vote was authorization to go into Iraq  only if  it was proven that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attack...it's time someone called you on that little discrepancy.

 
Hitting the sauce early today???  NICE.
 
The Bush administration is no longer in office.
 
There are prominent members of Congress as well as Obama administration officials who were in Congress at the time who are also responsible for the war. The Democrats controlled the Senate at the time of the October 2002 vote and could have stopped it.
 
It was no "mistake"; it was negligence on BOTH sides.  They SHOULD have known full well about the consequences of the invasion and the likely absence of Iraqi weapons or weapons systems.  In scores of policy reports, newspaper articles, academic journals and other sources, the tragic consequences of a US invasion of Iraq and were made available to every member of the House and Senate.
 
They passed it without reading it.  
 
Sure now they say they were “tricked”.
 
Kerry's vote in support for the war and his false claims about Iraq's weapons capabilities, the debate during the fall campaign was not about who was right about Iraq (since they were both wrong), but Kerry's "flip-flopping" for belatedly raising questions about the conduct of the war.
 
Hillary, in justification of her vote to authorize the invasion, falsely insisted that Iraq's possession of such weapons was "not in doubt" and was "undisputed."
 
Biden, (then head of the Senate foreign Relations Committee) falsely claimed that Iraq under Saddam Hussein severely weakened by UN disarmament efforts and comprehensive international sanctions.  Somehow constituted both "a long-term threat and a short-term threat to our national security" and was an "extreme danger to the world." Despite the absence in Iraq of any "weapons of mass destruction" or offensive military capabilities, Biden, when reminded of those remarks during an interview in 2007 - replied,
 
"That's right, and I was correct about that."
 
By the way…we know you love George W. Bush but bringing him up in a Benghazi thread is a little weak.
 

There is no doubt that Bush was the hero in the war with Irag.

His famous "Mission Accomplished" statement resonated all over the world and it showed just what an ASS HOLE he was and still is.

Bush just about destroyed this country during his 8 years of Fuc*ing around like a two year old.

Donzel wrote:The Honorable Hillary Rodman Clinton...that's what the sign says.  Must be true.  
The picture is when she said "What difference does it make".

It won't be long before the sign will say: "President Hillary Rodman Clinton".   So...get used to it.

That's right!! This whole Benghazi witch hunt is all about destroying Hillary's candidacy! Who's going to beat her, Ted Cruz?   

Wait a minute, he might not be a citizen!!

Donzel wrote:If you had your way it would be death by a firing squad.

Shoot the witnesses?
 

I don't think so!

 

[quote]

Outerlimits wrote:

News Pigeon wrote: That vote was authorization to go into Iraq  only if  it was proven that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attack...it's time someone called you on that little discrepancy.

 
Hitting the sauce early today???  NICE.

LOL, nope .. not for me, girlfriend.........everyone knows you lose with booze!!
As to the rest of your response, you can't fool everyone with your revision of history. I remember quite well how it all played out! I think it was the Germans (maybe the French) who reported that "the Bush Admin were manipulating the facts on Iraq, to further their neo-con agenda"...have you ever read their manifesto, Project For The New American Century?
They blatantly speak of taking control of all the resources on land, air, water and space...think perhaps that would have any bearing on our invasion of a sovereign country that had no WMD nor any affiliation with Al Qaeda but DID have plenty of oil resources? Remember Cheneys first closed door secret meeting with all the oil fat cats.. what was it, like 2 minutes after being sworn in?? Yeah....you nut jobs have such a short memory!!!