All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Obama loses again.
5/13/2013 3:10 PM
What exactly are they covering up? That the explanations given in the days immediately following the event weren't accurate? Oh ******* well.
5/13/2013 3:32 PM
I guess most of us would like our elected/appointed officials to tell us the truth when their decisions cost Americans their lives.    The simple truth of the matter is it was covered up because of the election.

Didn't Nixon get in trouble for covering up some stuff?
5/13/2013 3:40 PM
Covering up illegal acts of your own administration is different. Obama didn't do anything illegal. The government lies all the time. Sometimes those lies are necessary, sometimes they aren't, but the lies themselves are rarely illegal or a scandal.
5/13/2013 3:46 PM
Again, lives lost.   I think most of us can live with that because there's an inherent risk with taking jobs in areas like that.   But, when the actions of our leaders are covered up, in all likelihood for political gain, it becomes a different problem.
5/13/2013 3:54 PM
The lives were already lost. The scandal isn't that the admin somehow caused those lives to be lost but that the attack was attributed to protesters instead of terrorists after the fact. All smoke, no flame.
5/13/2013 3:55 PM
Nobody died in the Watergate scandal, but that coverup and lies sure did some damage to Nixon's presidency.
5/13/2013 4:00 PM
I think we all understand the order of the events.   I think it upsets people that the Administion, in the middle of an election, decided to deceive the public rather than tell the truth.    It doesn't bother me all that much, I expect politicians to lie to further themselves, but I didn't lose a family member in Benghazi. 
5/13/2013 4:19 PM
So what exactly is the scandal? In Watergate, a crime was committed and then the admin was involved in the cover up. The lies were used to cover up the criminal activity.

What is Obama covering up? Certainly not the deaths themselves. Those weren't preventable (at least not at the moment of the attack, security could have been better but that falls on both parties - Issa voted to cut funding for embassy security multiple times) and is not something anyone is lying about. 

So is the big cover up that they didn't know what happened the day after the attack? Maybe they knew but didn't want to say it publicly so they used a different story? Neither of those options are scandalous.
5/13/2013 4:24 PM
So intentionally misleading the public, not for national security but for election time politics, isn't scandalous?

It doesn't have to be but, again, you don't get to decide for the nation.   I think it is.  Maybe not on the WMD that didn't exist level but scandalous nonetheless.
5/13/2013 4:30 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/13/2013 4:24:00 PM (view original):
So intentionally misleading the public, not for national security but for election time politics, isn't scandalous?

It doesn't have to be but, again, you don't get to decide for the nation.   I think it is.  Maybe not on the WMD that didn't exist level but scandalous nonetheless.
And if the admin comes out tomorrow and says "sorry, we lied. We knew what happened but because of the tension in the region we felt that the truth would have done nothing but damage."

Is the scandal over?

Because, at this point, everyone knows what happened. What is there left to investigate?
5/13/2013 4:33 PM
No, the right will keep it alive for the same reason the left wants to bury it. 

Who knew what and when they knew it is what's left to investigate.   The right will say it's to provide closure for the family members but we know why it's in the news.   And why the OA is saying "non-story".
5/13/2013 4:37 PM
Because it is a non-story. How does the admission of a lie told after the fact bring any closure?
5/13/2013 4:40 PM
Our government lying about their actions/knowledge when American lives are lost is not a non-story.

Pat Tillman, a soldier who died in action, was a story for a long time because the military attempted to cover up the details of his death.  One man, a soldier who chooses to put himself in the line of fire, was a story for years. 
5/13/2013 5:05 PM (edited)
Yes, because they were covering up friendly fire. No one is covering up how the people at the embassy died. The "cover up" is that the admin said it was a protest while supposedly knowing it was terrorism. Now they say it was terrorism. No lie is being told. End of story?
5/13/2013 5:01 PM
So you're good with "Yeah, we lied then but now we're telling the truth!"

Good to know.   So, if your wife ***** around on you and lies to cover it up, it's all good when she comes clean.   You're an understanding fellow.
of 12
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Obama loses again.

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.