Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:25 PM

DonViejo (4,478 posts)

State Dep't Rejects Call for UN Ambassador to Quit

Source: AP/NYT

State Dep't Rejects Call for UN Ambassador to Quit
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 1, 2012 at 2:19 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration on Monday rejected a demand from a senior Republican lawmaker that the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to resign.

Rep. Peter King of New York said last week Susan Rice's explanation of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was a foreign policy failure.

He told CNN that Rice — a possible candidate for secretary of state if President Barack Obama wins re-election — should resign for comments she made five days after the attack saying the evidence gathered at that point indicated it was not a premeditated or coordinated strike.

Officials now say it was a planned terrorist attack distinct from the mob protests in the Arab world over a U.S.-made Internet video ridiculing Islam.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/10/01/us/politics/ap-us-us-libya-attack.html?_r=1&ref=news

10 replies, 1521 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

10 replies	Author	Time	Post
State Dep't Rejects Call for UN Ambassador to Quit (Original post)	DonViejo	Oct 2012	OP
King Peter has an awfully loud mouth	bucolic_frolic	Oct 2012	#1
They've got his title wrong. He's not a "senior Republican lawmaker",	GoneOffShore	Oct 2012	#2
I can't stand CNN. They have done nothing but character assasinate the president	Liberal_Stalwart71	Oct 2012	#3
King can go pound sand!	atreides1	Oct 2012	#4
So by King's logic, wouldn't she be in line to resign behind Romney? . . .	Journeyman	Oct 2012	#5
Peter King can't kick a duck in the ass. . .	DinahMoeHum	Oct 2012	#6
Normal people	The Wizard	Oct 2012	#7
Here is what Hillary Clinton stated on the day after the attack.	JDPriestly	Oct 2012	#8
I watched Susan Rice say those words five days after the attack...	Comrade Grumpy	Oct 2012	#9
They may have told the truth on the 12th and then, to confuse the terrorists,	JDPriestly	Oct 2012	#10

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:30 PM

bucolic_frolic (708 posts)

1. King Peter has an awfully loud mouth

even by New York standards.

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:37 PM

GoneOffShore (11,118 posts)

2. They've got his title wrong. He's not a "senior Republican lawmaker",

He's a senior Republican enema nozzle.

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:38 PM

Liberal_Stalwart71 (13,826 posts)

3. I can't stand CNN. They have done nothing but character assasinate the president

ever since the Libya incident.

It's no coincidence that the Republicans have gone after every black official in the Obama cabinet in some form or fashion.

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:39 PM

atreides1 (10,166 posts)

4. King can go pound sand!

As if a supporter of terrorists has a lot of credibility...it's King who should resign, not Ambassador Rice!

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:44 PM

Journeyman (9,197 posts)

5. So by King's logic, wouldn't she be in line to resign behind Romney? . . .

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:49 PM

DinahMoeHum (12,311 posts)

6. Peter King can't kick a duck in the ass. . .

. . .unless he stands on a cement block; and even then, he'll miss the mark more than half the time.

Piss on that stupid fuckbag.

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 05:21 PM

The Wizard (7,010 posts)

7. Normal people

understand Peter King is a drunk bully. Normal people don't give one whit what Peter King has to say about anything.
This is the same Peter King who, while drunk, bragged that the Republicans were going to rig the 2004 presidential election.
Congress is not the correct institution for King. The drunk tank is.

Reply to this post

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 07:54 PM

JDPriestly (37,725 posts)

8. Here is what Hillary Clinton stated on the day after the attack.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101757258

She speaks in the first sentences of an attack by armed militants. That was official. Susan Rice may have spoken based on the first impressions about the attack and based on what was going on in both Egypt and Libya. That may have been erroneous but no one and nothing was hurt by it. Rep. King needs to back off and admit honestly what really happened in the news reporting by the White House and State Department.

Susan Rice did nothing wrong.

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #8)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 09:06 PM

Comrade Grumpy (3,346 posts)

9. I watched Susan Rice say those words five days after the attack...

...when everyone already knew it was an attack by jihadis, including, presumably, Susan Rice. It was weird.

Reply to this post

Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #9)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 03:35 AM

JDPriestly (37,725 posts)

10. They may have told the truth on the 12th and then, to confuse the terrorists,

have told a different story. It may have been an intentional way to confuse the terrorists in order to buy time to go in and attack the militants. Not many days later, it is my understanding some unarmed Libyans stormed an area in which militants were located and ousted the militants.

Reply to this post

Latest Breaking News (Forum)