Security was removed in Libya???<quoted text>
Security was removed in Libya of all places. Has there been any accounting of who made that decision or an explanation as to why?
If Hillary didn't read those cables of distress, why not and who did?
Who made the decision to take al-Qaeda out of the mix and replace the video as the reason for the attack? Who made the decision to put Rice in front of the cameras to falsely claim that was the reason for the attack?
Where was the president when all these decisions were being made to intentionally deceive the American public - and why was he willingly a part of it?
It's the deception that lingers. Hillary didn't even seem to think it mattered who was responsible or why. That's an astonishing statement in itself considering the many unanswered questions that still haven't been answered.
Or maybe you have them. Most of us are still waiting to find out how far up the chain this deception went.
Do you not care about deception for no other reason than political posturing to win an election when four Americans are dead in a terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11?
Because I certainly do.
When you start out with that sort of nonsense It's difficult to continue reading you post.
There were 1.3 million cables from the various embassies/missions to the Secretary of State last year, each addressed to Hillary Clinton. The specific cables from ambassador Stevens re; security are classified, we don't know what those cables requested.
There was a single tough question yesterday, a (R) congressman asked Hillary if she had any idea why Stevens had traveled to Benghazi without his security. The committee chair quickly interrupted telling the congressman that he could not ask that question at the hearing but would have to submit it in writing.
Too many secrets Carol__that's how the CIA rolls__the hearings amount to no more than political Playhouse 90.