If this becomes public, and is valid, it presents a real constitutional crisis

[Itgoes]

" Before It's News " wouldn't be a LIBERAL site by any chance would it ?

The point is , many don't believe a word he says. Benghazi has been termed by his mouthpiece , as " a long time ago " , so , therefore , not worth talking about. 8 months is not a long time ago , when our countryman were murdered by a bunch of towel head terrorists and he was sleeping or playing basketball , but gave the order to " STAND DOWN " when the United States Military could have at least scattered the bastards during the time frame of the prolonged attack . Help was available . He blamed Bush for everything bad in the USA , 6 YEARS ago. THAT , my friend , IS a long time ago........ and I still miss him. President Bush would not have hidden from his responsibility as a true COMMANDER IN CHIEF !

Here is what happened under President Bush's watch.....you have a short or selctive memory.

June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.

January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.


Doesn't look like the Terrorists had any reservation about launching atttack after attack when President Bush was in office.

 

[jfeagins]

Here is what happened under President Bush's watch.....you have a short or selctive memory.

June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.

January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.


Doesn't look like the Terrorists had any reservation about launching atttack after attack when President Bush was in office.

To my knowledge and recollection, NONE of those incidents involved a circumstance in which our President was called upon to send in troops in a time frame that would have clearly had an opportunity to save lives, but instead, decided to give a "stand down" order, then spent precious time trying to wash it all under the rug later when it came to light that by doing so, he had cost precious lives. :confused2:

Not sure how any of these former tragedies could possibly be considered as evidence to support what Obama and his admin has done regarding the more recent tragedy.

just sayin'......

 

[Traumahawk]

not sure how any of these former tragedies could possibly be considered as evidence to support what obama and his admin has done regarding the more recent tragedy.

Just sayin'......

+1

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Here is what happened under President Bush's watch.....you have a short or selctive memory.

June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.

January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.


Doesn't look like the Terrorists had any reservation about launching atttack after attack when President Bush was in office.

Perhaps my memory is short. Which of these examples was accompanied by the Secretary of state, and the the President, among others (such as the majority of the mainstream media) fabricating an elaborately crafted chain of lies intended to mislead the american public about a clearly identified terrorist attack during which they instructed military forces to NOT INTERVENE in preventing the murders of our people??
At what point did they blame such an event on a largely unknown YouTube video and use this lie to arrest and imprison the creator of said video?
:hmmm:

 

[alorio1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDc9cGmL0e0

 

[forestdaledave]

Hey fellows, roll up the pant legs, it's too late to save the shoes.
David, written from Mexico

 

[tothemax93]

Hey fellows, roll up the pant legs, it's too late to save the shoes.
David, written from Mexico

Thanks for the advice Dave. I put on my chest waders January 20th, 2009. I kept stepping in hope and change. Good thing I did. It's gotten a lot deeper and rotten as of late :damn angry:

 

[Traumahawk]

Hey fellows, roll up the pant legs, it's too late to save the shoes.
David, written from Mexico

yep...your right...all of the past lies about benghazi have gotten deep. But look at it this way...its very easy to pick up an AR-15 in Mexico because of Eric Holder....

 

[Traumahawk]

This is one of the things that Wikipedia says about Benghazi

A study released on November 2 found that leading newspapers in the U.S. framed the attack in terms of a spontaneous protest (the Obama administration’s version) four times as often as a planned terrorist attack (the Republican version).[184] The study was based on a computer-assisted analysis of 2,572 words and phrases related to the attack in 348 news stories from September 12 to October 12 in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. On the day of that study's release, two of the newspapers—The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal—published editorials critical of the Obama administration's handling of Benghazi. The Washington Post editorial asked such questions as, "Did the Obama administration’s political preoccupation with maintaining a light footprint in Libya lead to an ill-considered reliance on local militias, rather than on U.S. forces?"[185] The Wall Street Journal editorial asked such questions as "Why did the U.S. not heed warnings about a growing Islamistpresence in Benghazi and better protect the diplomatic mission and CIA annex?" and "Why has the Administration's story about what took place in Benghazi been so haphazard and unclear?"[186]
On November 4, two days before the presidential election, CBS News released a portion of its interview with President Obama for 60 Minutes that was filmed on September 12 but did not air originally on its September 23 show.[187] Journalist Bret Baier, host of Special Report with Bret Baier, noted that in these newly released portions of the interview "Obama would not say whether he thought the attack was terrorism. Yet he would later emphasize at a presidential debate that in the Rose Garden the same day, he had declared the attack an act of terror."[188] Baier noted that President Obama had been saying that he declared the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack since his announcement in the Rose Garden on September 12 and highlighted the newly released video interview with Steve Kroft: "KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack? OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other."[188]

Allegations of media bias

Some conservatives have argued that the mainstream media have ignored or played down the significance of the Benghazi story; and some have also pointed to an alleged liberal bias, claiming that, if a Republican were president, there would have been much more critical and aggressive reporting.[189][190][191][192][193][194][195][196][197][198]
On the last weekend of October a message posted on Facebook by a Political Action Committee (SOS PAC) claiming President Obama denied them backup in Benghazi was taken down twice by the social networking site. After the post was removed and SOS’s Facebook account suspended for 24 hours, the post was reinstated and SOS received an email from Facebook apologizing for the matter.[199]
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer argued on Fox News' channel's Special Report with Bret Baier on October 24, “This is really a journalistic scandal. I mean, the fact there was not a word about any of this in the [New York] Times or the [Washington] Post today.” Krauthammer was referring to recently released emails that proved that the White House, contrary to its assertions, knew of terrorist connections to the attack almost immediately.[200]
The National Review argued that, on October 28 (less than 2 weeks before the presidential election), of the five Sunday news shows, only Fox News treated it as a major story. It argued that on the other four news shows, the issue came up only when Republicans mentioned it.[201] On NBC's Meet the Press, host David Gregory changed the subject when a guest tried to bring up the subject of the Benghazi attack, saying, "Let's get to Libya a little bit later." Gregory never did get back to Benghazi.[201][202]
A November 2, 2012 article in The Huffington Post detailed how The Associated Press, The New York Times, and The Washington Post held back information about the attack at the request of the CIA and the Obama administration.[203] The media organizations held back information at the government's request that the two former SEALs killed in the attack (Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty) were working for the CIA.
On November 26, 2012, journalist Tom Ricks went on Fox News' Happening Now with Jon Scott to discuss the attack. While being interviewed on Fox News by Jon Scott, Ricks accused Fox News of being "extremely political" in its coverage of the attack and said that "Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican Party." Ricks accused the network of covering the story more than it needed to be. The interview was cut short and Ricks and the interview was not mentioned or covered by Fox News again. Fox News was subsequently criticized for cutting the interview short.[204][205] Jon Scott was also criticized by Media Matters for America for making no mention of the interview on Fox News Watch, a media analysis program he hosts.[206][207] In an interview with the Associated Press, Fox News' White House correspondent Ed Henry suggested that he thought Benghazi was being covered too much by the network. Henry said, “We’ve had the proper emphasis, but I would not be so deluded to say that some of our shows, some of our commentators, have covered it more than it needed to be covered.”[208][209]

 

[bazwell]

Thanks for the info guys. I thought there was something more to it than meets the eye, but there isn't.

Innacurate records can't really be counted upon. The article which Alorio1 originally posted said "indicate several events were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be handwritten and spelled “Burack” and “Biraq”)"

If I got a speeding ticket with the wrong name, it is a tainted record and isn't proof of me speeding, because the name is not mine. These records from Kenya are quite tainted too, not naming the son, or getting the Fathers name right.

 

[bazwell]

Thanks for the info guys. I thought there was something more to it than meets the eye, but there isn't.

Innacurate records can't really be counted upon. The article which Alorio1 originally posted said "indicate several events were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be handwritten and spelled ?Burack? and ?Biraq?)"

If I got a speeding ticket with the wrong name, it is a tainted record and isn't proof of me speeding, because the name is not mine. These records from Kenya are quite tainted too, not naming the son, or getting the Fathers name right.

 

[forestdaledave]

This is one of the things that Wikipedia says about Benghazi

A study released on November 2 found that leading newspapers in the U.S. framed the attack in terms of a spontaneous protest (the Obama administration?s version) four times as often as a planned terrorist attack (the Republican version).[184] The study was based on a computer-assisted analysis of 2,572 words and phrases related to the attack in 348 news stories from September 12 to October 12 in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. On the day of that study's release, two of the newspapers?The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal?published editorials critical of the Obama administration's handling of Benghazi. The Washington Post editorial asked such questions as, "Did the Obama administration?s political preoccupation with maintaining a light footprint in Libya lead to an ill-considered reliance on local militias, rather than on U.S. forces?"[185] The Wall Street Journal editorial asked such questions as "Why did the U.S. not heed warnings about a growing Islamistpresence in Benghazi and better protect the diplomatic mission and CIA annex?" and "Why has the Administration's story about what took place in Benghazi been so haphazard and unclear?"[186]
On November 4, two days before the presidential election, CBS News released a portion of its interview with President Obama for 60 Minutes that was filmed on September 12 but did not air originally on its September 23 show.[187] Journalist Bret Baier, host of Special Report with Bret Baier, noted that in these newly released portions of the interview "Obama would not say whether he thought the attack was terrorism. Yet he would later emphasize at a presidential debate that in the Rose Garden the same day, he had declared the attack an act of terror."[188] Baier noted that President Obama had been saying that he declared the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack since his announcement in the Rose Garden on September 12 and highlighted the newly released video interview with Steve Kroft: "KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack? OBAMA: Well it?s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other."[188]

Allegations of media bias

Some conservatives have argued that the mainstream media have ignored or played down the significance of the Benghazi story; and some have also pointed to an alleged liberal bias, claiming that, if a Republican were president, there would have been much more critical and aggressive reporting.[189][190][191][192][193][194][195][196][197][198]
On the last weekend of October a message posted on Facebook by a Political Action Committee (SOS PAC) claiming President Obama denied them backup in Benghazi was taken down twice by the social networking site. After the post was removed and SOS?s Facebook account suspended for 24 hours, the post was reinstated and SOS received an email from Facebook apologizing for the matter.[199]
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer argued on Fox News' channel's Special Report with Bret Baier on October 24, ?This is really a journalistic scandal. I mean, the fact there was not a word about any of this in the [New York] Times or the [Washington] Post today.? Krauthammer was referring to recently released emails that proved that the White House, contrary to its assertions, knew of terrorist connections to the attack almost immediately.[200]
The National Review argued that, on October 28 (less than 2 weeks before the presidential election), of the five Sunday news shows, only Fox News treated it as a major story. It argued that on the other four news shows, the issue came up only when Republicans mentioned it.[201] On NBC's Meet the Press, host David Gregory changed the subject when a guest tried to bring up the subject of the Benghazi attack, saying, "Let's get to Libya a little bit later." Gregory never did get back to Benghazi.[201][202]
A November 2, 2012 article in The Huffington Post detailed how The Associated Press, The New York Times, and The Washington Post held back information about the attack at the request of the CIA and the Obama administration.[203] The media organizations held back information at the government's request that the two former SEALs killed in the attack (Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty) were working for the CIA.
On November 26, 2012, journalist Tom Ricks went on Fox News' Happening Now with Jon Scott to discuss the attack. While being interviewed on Fox News by Jon Scott, Ricks accused Fox News of being "extremely political" in its coverage of the attack and said that "Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican Party." Ricks accused the network of covering the story more than it needed to be. The interview was cut short and Ricks and the interview was not mentioned or covered by Fox News again. Fox News was subsequently criticized for cutting the interview short.[204][205] Jon Scott was also criticized by Media Matters for America for making no mention of the interview on Fox News Watch, a media analysis program he hosts.[206][207] In an interview with the Associated Press, Fox News' White House correspondent Ed Henry suggested that he thought Benghazi was being covered too much by the network. Henry said, ?We?ve had the proper emphasis, but I would not be so deluded to say that some of our shows, some of our commentators, have covered it more than it needed to be covered.?[208][209]

Instead of relying on what everyone's opinion is, did you watch the hearings live on T.V.?

 

[alorio1]

Instead of relying on what everyone's opinion is, did you watch the hearings live on T.V.?

I missed it Dave, what is your take on it or viewpoint, no joke, I missed it....

 

[Traumahawk]

i missed it dave, what is your take on it or viewpoint, no joke, i missed it....

+1

 

[forestdaledave]

I missed it Dave, what is your take on it or viewpoint, no joke, I missed it....

I only watched a very short part of it. Damn boring. The hearings are a sham as usual for congress. Political posturing by the Republicans. I was reading Wikipedia this morning about Benghazi. Interesting factual account, non-political. Hindsight is always 20-20. It amounts to would've, should've, could've. What always missing is the Tea Party Congress removing $100 million from embassy security worldwide. If the goal is to place blame then everyone has skin in that game including Stevens. If the goal is to find out what went wrong and how to correct it then the hearings are what I said, a sham.
Sorry to read about the wackos shooting up the mothers day parade. I hope no one you know got hurt. Some friends of mine just moved from here back to NOLA. Recently as they were leaving in their Lincoln SUV they ran over a drunk who was sleeping under their vehicle.
David from Mexico

 

[Klatuu]

"Here is what happened under President Bush's watch.....you have a short or selctive memory."

Lmao. Ironic that some yahoo copy/pasting screed from Democratic Underground admonishes his fellow Americans for a short memory, when he clearly doesn't remember them himself. I remember almost everyone one of them because I was paying attention when they happened. Fill in the blank time, to separate the buckwheat from the obfuscatory bullshit.

June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

12 Pakistanis killed. 0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack

February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.

9 Americans died. This facility was privately owned, and not under US Gov't security in shape, form or fashion. Not US soil, not US controlled.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

Two Pakistani guards. 0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

Two Uzbeks killed. 0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

5 Saudis killed. 0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.

This is the attack that killed David Foy, an administrative officer. 3 Pakistani killed, 52 injured. It happened not at the consulate, but at a nearby Marriott hotel. Successful attack, but not on US soil.

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.

One Syrian killed, 13 Syrians wounded. 0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack.

January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.

In other words, a failed attack.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

Three Turkish policemen killed. 0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

In other words, a failed attack.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.

0 Americans killed/injured. In other words, a failed attack

So, 11 attacks, lots of dead folks, but only 1 American, who was killed at a hotel. But notice how it leads, by omissions, the reader to the reasonable conclusion that scores of Americans died under similar circumstances as the Benghazi attack. Which, as you can see, is clearly inaccurate. Another way of saying that is that it's a bald-faced, goddamned, motherfucking lie, told by a bald-faced, goddamned, motherfucking liar (NOT the member who posted it here, who is at worst a plagiarist, as all he did was copy and paste it from another site, blissfully unaware it was a bald-faced, goddamned, motherfucking lie, is probably a wonderful human being, and is welcome to go hunting with me anytime he wants). Whoever wrote that is someone who puts their politics on pretty much the same level that the terrorists in those incidents put their religion.

There were 0 Americans killed by foreign terrorist on US soil from 9/11/01 to 9/11/13. IIRC, that is the longest period since the Phenom Pen attack in 1971(ish) that such a statement can be made. That's not because G.W. Bush was so great, and the attack in Benghazi wasn't successful because Obama sucks donkey dicks. I sat through through too many embassy security briefings back when I had "U.S. Army" written on my shirt to think that. A lot of dedicated intel & security people made that happen. A lot of them were not even Americans. Several of those non-Americans gave their lives protecting Americans. There was also a shit load of luck involved.

Again, this is all obfuscation anyway. The reason Benghazi is a story is not that an attack happened, or even that it was the first successful such attack in over decade. What makes it a story is:

1. They were screaming for help and were denied any.
2. And this is the really significant one, this shit was covered up because there was an election less than 2 months away, and crowing "I killed Bin Laden" rings hollow when Al Qaeda just greased the ambassador to the country you recently helped overthrow.

If you aren't pissed off about this, then you should ask yourself "am I putting my politics ahead of my country?".

To reiterate, the fact that a terrorists finally got through again isn't the issue; they eventually will score a success here and there. That means other terror attacks are not an apt comparison. This was a deliberate cover up, driven by political desire. If you want an apt comparison, think Watergate. Although, again, 0 Americans killed/injured there, so I'm not sure that is such a great comparison, either. I'm sure of this, however: somewhere, Jimmy Carter is laughing his fucking ass off.

 

[Rollie]

Klatuu , well stated and researched. We gotta go for a ride soon.

Hoo rah unk:

Paul

 

[Traumahawk]

I only watched a very short part of it. Damn boring. The hearings are a sham as usual for congress. Political posturing by the Republicans. I was reading Wikipedia this morning about Benghazi. Interesting factual account, non-political. Hindsight is always 20-20. It amounts to would've, should've, could've. What always missing is the Tea Party Congress removing $100 million from embassy security worldwide. If the goal is to place blame then everyone has skin in that game including Stevens. If the goal is to find out what went wrong and how to correct it then the hearings are what I said, a sham.
Sorry to read about the wackos shooting up the mothers day parade. I hope no one you know got hurt. Some friends of mine just moved from here back to NOLA. Recently as they were leaving in their Lincoln SUV they ran over a drunk who was sleeping under their vehicle.
David from Mexico

Well reading the wikipedia page it shouldve reminded you about something....that was what I copied and pasted for my post...

 

[Redbone]

I wonder if any part of the stand down order from the President played the ultimate role in this. Of course it did, maybe not for all the reasons why this could happen but it's the reason that it did happen. No political card tricks should hide that from any view.
The 2/3 of our government is led by democrats so they get majority of the spotlight but the stinking smell that emanates for our government is from all the dirty politicians! :damn angry:

 

[Rollie]

Well reading the wikipedia page it shouldve reminded you about something....that was what I copied and pasted for my post...

My understanding of " Wikipedia " , is that anyone can post there , and anyone can correct a post , if they don't agree with it. I don't see how that could be considered a reliable reference point for important research. ( please correct me if I'm wrong ) and who owns / controls the site , and what side of the aisle do they sit on ? ...... just asking.