4 ms·

Is it a scandal if it isn't true? And you're right, Obama never had anything in this scope, it's worse, because people died from things he perpetuated. 1) Fast

Is it a scandal if it isn't true? And you're right, Obama never had anything in this scope, it's worse, because people died from things he perpetuated. 1) Fast and Furious: Continued program that caused a border agent to be murdered with one of the many guns the US sold to the cartels. 2) Benghazi: We all know this disaster that killed 4 Americans. Severely understaffed embassy that should have never even been there. No support when requested. Blamed the whole thing on a video. 3) Iran Nuclear Deal: Pallets of unmarked Euros flown over to a sponsor of terrorism in the dead of night 4) Spied on conservative reporters 5) IRS Scandal: Targeted conservatives with the IRS 6) Private Email Server: Lied about knowledge of her server, turns out he had a pseudonym on it and received emails from it. He said he found out about it from the media, woops. 7) NSA Spying: Obama forever known as the spying President.

akhilcacharya 8y ago
All of those were less consequential (and with half of those unfounded) and didn't warrant a SCO investigation.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
  Which are unfounded, and how are deaths less consequential? The only reason a SCO investigation was pushed for in this case is because the media stoked for it.
  - Fjolsvith 8y ago
    It was an insurance policy in the highly unlikely event that Trump was elected. [1] 1. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-page-and-the-fbi-texting-scandal-explained https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-page-and-the-fbi-tex...
CptFribble 8y ago
I must take issue with two of your points: 2) The State Dept. approved some requests for security upgrades, and denied others. If they had approved everything, would it have stopped the attacks? There's no way to know. Placing blame on Hillary or Obama specifically is problematic at best. 3) Before the revolution in 1979 the Iranian govt signed an arms contract with the US and paid money into a US account. Then the revolution happened and the equipment was never delivered. The cash flown over was just them getting their money back out of that account, with 30+ years of interest. The rest I either know nothing about, or are too general to get into here. For what it's worth, I'm not just an Obama apologist. I also think a lot of stuff he did was problematic, especially the unaccountable drone campaigns, and especially Anwar Al-Alwaki and his son, which should have been considered a major scandal.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
  2) The problem wasn't stopping it, it was fighting it back. They were too understaffed to make a defense. Given how long they held out with what they had is a good indicator that they could have repelled it with more defenses. Air support would have sufficed. 3) Fair enough, but how it was done that wasn't appropriate.

akhilcacharya 8y ago

All of those were less consequential (and with half of those unfounded) and didn't warrant a SCO investigation.

s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
Which are unfounded, and how are deaths less consequential? The only reason a SCO investigation was pushed for in this case is because the media stoked for it.
- Fjolsvith 8y ago
  It was an insurance policy in the highly unlikely event that Trump was elected. [1] 1. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-page-and-the-fbi-texting-scandal-explained https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-page-and-the-fbi-tex...

CptFribble 8y ago

I must take issue with two of your points: 2) The State Dept. approved some requests for security upgrades, and denied others. If they had approved everything, would it have stopped the attacks? There's no way to know. Placing blame on Hillary or Obama specifically is problematic at best. 3) Before the revolution in 1979 the Iranian govt signed an arms contract with the US and paid money into a US account. Then the revolution happened and the equipment was never delivered. The cash flown over was just them getting their money back out of that account, with 30+ years of interest. The rest I either know nothing about, or are too general to get into here. For what it's worth, I'm not just an Obama apologist. I also think a lot of stuff he did was problematic, especially the unaccountable drone campaigns, and especially Anwar Al-Alwaki and his son, which should have been considered a major scandal.

s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
2) The problem wasn't stopping it, it was fighting it back. They were too understaffed to make a defense. Given how long they held out with what they had is a good indicator that they could have repelled it with more defenses. Air support would have sufficed. 3) Fair enough, but how it was done that wasn't appropriate.