That was a complete falsehood that was brought forth as the defense to misdirect the blame. The State Department told the Committee, a woman, can’t remember her name but I watched her testimony, that said budget never came into the decision. The two issues were simply that the State Department was sucking up to the Libyan government by hiring Libyan security. The second issue is that the State Department didn’t listen when they were told to increase security, period. It wasn’t a budget issue.
Rory From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 4:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [political] [utah] um Rory, the republican congress in it's infinite wisdom turned down secretary clinton's budget request to increase security for the embassies and especially these smaller consulates...instead they decreased the budget by $296 million and lo and behold one was attacked and people died! so where is the outrage for that?!?!? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/27/benghazi-attack-followed-deep-cuts-in-state-depart/?page=all just sayin' -Sean she's a witch! https://youtu.be/zrzMhU_4m-g?t=23s On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: This is an old story and only partially true. The problem is the Republican base wants an explanation for why these Americans died and why nobody in the administration and the State Department did their job before and during, and then lied afterwards. Some Republicans have that opinion. The rest of us and the majority of Republicans on that committee want the truth. BTW, every wonder why nobody was able to find most of the witnesses that were there for 2 years? Rory From: Af [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 11:26 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [political] [utah] Hey Rory, Another Republican admits: Benghazi panel is political http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/another-republican-admits-benghazi-panel-political just sayin' ok here's fox news finally admitting to it also...since you probably don't like rachel meadow and msnbc http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/10/16/fox-news-finally-concedes-benghazi-committee-is/206217 -sean On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I've been called worse than dumb so I can live with that. What do you call someone who supports a candidate under investigation for obvious criminal activity, probably traitorous, and the fact that she became incredibly rich selling influence in the State Department? Nothing personal but dumb doesn't even come close, but definitely intellectual dishonest. Rory -----Original Message----- From: Af [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Bill Prince Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 9:48 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [political] [utah] Fascinating. Trump actually can offend some people. Probably the smarter ones... bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 3/23/2016 7:10 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: > This is the outcome I would have expected. > -----Original Message----- From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Tuesday, March > 22, 2016 11:45 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [AFMUG] > [political] [utah] > Chuck, > > So I'm watching the polling right now.. it's *very* early, only 3% (R) > and 11% (D) ballots counted. > [R] So far It's Cruz 58.8%, Kasich 22.0%, Trump 19.2%. > [D] So far it's Sanders 74.8%, Clinton 24.1%. > > Since you're over there in beautiful Utah, I'm interested in hearing > your (and others) thoughts on this so far.
