Discussion for article #244744
Everyone loves a good batch of war fiction with an agenda.
5 Likes
Haha, that is by far the crummiest theater in Des Moines. Old, no stadium seating, small screens. (At least it was when I lived there) Seems like the perfect place to watch a propaganda film.
13 Hours.
The perfect Michael Bay movie.
Lots of explosions, painfully sophomoric dialog, tramples history in the search for $$$.
The only thing missing is the slow-motion shot of the beautiful young womenâs boobs bouncing as she runs away from a HUUUUUUGGGGE explosion.
Ammo-Sexual Porn.
3 Likes
Is this legal? Can a candidate just give free stuff? How about a free six-pack to everyone who promises to vote for him? (Or shows a selfie of themselves actually voting for him?)
4 Likes
Trump is the Michael Bay film of the presidential race, I guess, so this makes sense.
6 Likes
This latest Trump stunt will get heavy coverage â which means that millions of people will hear about a questionable film that they would otherwise have ignored.
2 Likes
Dang! I just read that the film was NOT politicalâŚ
YeahâŚriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
1 Like
Great questionâŚTPM? How about some journalism?
For those paying attention, the House hearing on Benghazi is all one needs to have seen. Even if people werenât paying attention, the fact that Republicans backed off tells people all they need to know.
Then there is the little Brad Podliska and Trey Gowdy matter.
1 Like
The text of the previous committeeâs report should have been enough:
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi%20Report.pdf
US. House of Representatives
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Investigative Report on the Terrorist Attacks on US Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012
A report by Chairman Mike Rogers and Ranking Member C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
US. House of Representatives
113th Congress
Executive Summary
The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (or âthe Committeeâ) conducted a comprehensive and exhaustive investigation into the tragic attacks against two U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 11-12, 2012. The nearly two-year investigation focused on the activities of the Intelligence Community before, during, and after the attacks. During the course of thousands of hours of detailed investigation, HPSCI reviewed thousands of pages of intelligence assessments, cables, notes, and emails; held 20 Committee events and hearings; and conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials and eyewitnesses to the attacks, including eight security personnel on the ground in Benghazi that night.
This report details the findings and conclusions of investigation. In summary, the Committee First concludes that the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities in Benghazi and, without a requirement to do so, ably and bravely assisted the State Department on the night of the attacks. Their actions saved lives. Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support. The Committee, however, received evidence that the State Department security personnel, resources, and equipment were unable to counter the terrorist threat that day and required CIA assistance.
Second, the Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did not have specific, tactical warning of the September 11 attacks.
Third, the Committee finds that a mixed group of individuals, including those affiliated with Al-Qaâida, participated in the attacks on US. facilities in Benghazi, although the Committee finds that the intelligence was and remains conflicting about the identities, affiliations, and motivations of the attackers.
Fourth, the Committee concludes that after the attacks, the early intelligence assessments and the Administrationâs initial public narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully accurate. There was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks. The Committee found intelligence to support initial assessment that the attacks had evolved out of a protest in Benghazi; but it also found contrary intelligence, which ultimately proved to be the correct intelligence. There was no protest. The CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24, 2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September 18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke), and after the FBI began publishing its interviews with US. officials on the ground on September 22, 2012.
Fifth, the Committee finds that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI asked for, and which were used for Ambassador Riceâs public appearances, was flawed. HPSCI asked for the talking points solely to aid Membersâ ability to communicate publicly using the best available intelligence at the time, and mistakes were made in the process of how those talking points were developed.
Finally, the Committee found no evidence that any officer was intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress, or polygraphed because of their presence in Benghazi. The Committee also found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.
This report, and the nearly two years of intensive investigation it reflects, is meant to serve as the definitive House statement on the Intelligence Communityâs activities before, during, and after the tragic events that caused the deaths of four brave Americans. Despite the highly sensitive nature of these activities, the report has endeavored to make the facts and conclusions within this report widely and publicly available so that the American public can separate the actual facts from the swirl of rumors and unsupported allegations. Only with a full accounting of the facts can we ensure that tragedies like the one that took the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty never happen again.
7 Likes
Hell, I was wondering the other day, what would stop someone like tRump from paying for an Uber ride or gas money for a bunch of people, and/or cash to show up and caucus for him in Iowa. Does that ever happen? What would stop him or some other candidate from doing that? Whoâs watching the watchers?
Just curious.
Oh, yes. That too.
And lastly, Kevin McCarthy didnât help the republican cause at all. Truth will out eventually.
10 Likes
I think the Trump campaign ought to hand out free handguns, beer, and popcorn. That poor movie screen wonât stand a chance.
You and K_in_VA are talking about two different American populations. Yours is much smaller.
I originally heard that about âAmerican Sniperâ, yet just the other day, there was his wife all over cable being interviewed about President Obamaâs executive order on guns and how she was very much against it. I still havenât seen the movie.
1 Like
Not according to the last two presidential elections.
Eventually, the Browns will win the Superbowl.
Did anyone that watched the debate last night hear Crispy Creme say that Hillary Clinton was under criminal investigation by the FBI? It was part of him saying people would be watching Hillary go from the White House to the Courthouse for the most part, if she became President. I swear that tidbit went mostly unnoticed, even after the debate by most of the bloviatorsâŚeven though its complete bullshit. That brazen lie was just astoundingâŚand no moderator bothered to correct himâŚ(of course.)
2 Likes