Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

blm

(112,920 posts)
57. Baloney on Paul - the entire point of Deep State is that no prez actually controls
Fri Oct 23, 2015, 01:57 PM
Oct 2015

the Deep State, but, instead must employ focused diplomatic efforts to get around it. I doubt a President Paul would NOT have the character to tap a Sec of State like Kerry who is doing some really heavy lifting in various regions in order to PREVENT the war expansion goals of the powerful elites.

I think your use of Wellstone, who may have been murdered, to bolster your delusions about Rand Paul is total BULLSH!T!

I agree sandyshoes17 Oct 2015 #1
Is there a way for Hillary to trip them up and make them reveal that it was a CIA op that went bad? kelliekat44 Oct 2015 #28
at the very beginning The Tortoise revealed that there was a CIA presence there Angry Dragon Oct 2015 #32
Yet NONE of that comes out at these bullshit 'hearings'. blm Oct 2015 #55
I think it possible that both sides could be trying to lay that bait blm Oct 2015 #42
This isn't your fault but I hate it when a link directs me to an article behind a paywall tularetom Oct 2015 #2
Sorry - it wasn't behind a paywall when I posted it previously. blm Oct 2015 #3
There's a simple way to get around the WSJ paywall starroute Oct 2015 #5
Daily Mail picked up on WSJ report: blm Oct 2015 #6
Here's some links with info Ichingcarpenter Oct 2015 #7
Notice the absence of broadcast 'news' networks who ignored these facts blm Oct 2015 #8
I called it a CIA clustefuck from the beginning Ichingcarpenter Oct 2015 #9
Remember to thank our BFEE overlords for over 5 decades of Mideast madness. blm Oct 2015 #11
Yep. H2O Man Oct 2015 #12
And also know State cannot publicly admit it concedes to CIA on these matters blm Oct 2015 #13
Right. H2O Man Oct 2015 #14
+1 mmonk Oct 2015 #26
Aren't most State Department operations really just fronts? erronis Oct 2015 #25
Truth being that all 4 men killed knew they were acting with/for CIA. blm Oct 2015 #33
YEY YES YES SoLeftIAmRight Oct 2015 #4
Recommended. H2O Man Oct 2015 #10
Well, assuming it was a big gun-running operation, did the State Dept. know about it? TwilightGardener Oct 2015 #15
I'm with David Talbot - No prez has crossed 'Deep State' since Kennedy. blm Oct 2015 #16
I'd like a REAL investigation. Because something illegal/unethical may have occurred. TwilightGardener Oct 2015 #17
"This is blowback from CIA Bullshit run from a backwater embassy." bvar22 Oct 2015 #18
That secret CIA operation is the real Benghazi scandal. Comrade Grumpy Oct 2015 #19
Yes - further proof that GOP has NO INTEREST in the truth about Benghazi. blm Oct 2015 #21
This message was self-deleted by its author Comrade Grumpy Oct 2015 #20
They keep repeating that it was an "embassy" too. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2015 #22
consulate with an annex being used by CIA just doesn't fit the GOP's storyline blm Oct 2015 #23
It was the size of a mini-mall too. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2015 #29
Gowdy wants America to believe that Blumenthal is more relevant than Petraeus' blm Oct 2015 #34
He wants to prove there was a political motive to cover it up prior to the election.... Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2015 #39
LOLOLOLOL!!!! blm Oct 2015 #41
Petraeus' game was to make more war a go-go. Octafish Oct 2015 #24
Salute blm Oct 2015 #38
It was more of a CIA operation than a State Department operation... kentuck Oct 2015 #27
They are, but, they have to make the narrative they adopted for political reasons blm Oct 2015 #31
Yep. kentuck Oct 2015 #49
hey, old buddy…. blm Oct 2015 #52
That is EXACTLY what this is about, actually. joshcryer Oct 2015 #30
Dems are always at a disadvantage as they won't out CIA operatives while Republican blm Oct 2015 #36
Yup. K&R! nt riderinthestorm Oct 2015 #35
Perhaps some crowdsourcing action on the side too .. MinM Oct 2015 #37
They were running guns to al nusra in Syria AngryAmish Oct 2015 #40
Call me stupid, but if that's the case (and I believe it is) ... Myrina Oct 2015 #43
They know that DEEP STATE CIA answers to no president. Making it an issue would blm Oct 2015 #44
Saving link, thanks! Myrina Oct 2015 #45
Once its understood it can never be un-understood. blm Oct 2015 #47
Good article. ronnie624 Oct 2015 #58
Abso-fvcking-lutely!!!!! blm Oct 2015 #62
K & R !!! WillyT Oct 2015 #46
On Benghazi, just as Seymour Hersh wrote in 2014 seafan Oct 2015 #48
Hey, seaman……. long time. blm Oct 2015 #63
But why won't the administration jamzrockz Oct 2015 #50
LOLOL - You think a President Rand Paul would throw CIA under the bus on a matter blm Oct 2015 #51
President Paul jamzrockz Oct 2015 #53
Baloney on Paul - the entire point of Deep State is that no prez actually controls blm Oct 2015 #57
Pm Kick!! nt riderinthestorm Oct 2015 #54
kick for people to wake up and smell the capuccino librechik Oct 2015 #56
i assume this is why petraeus hasn't been called in front of this committee. spanone Oct 2015 #59
Exactly, their vote-getting storyline would be shot to pieces. blm Oct 2015 #61
.. which happened to take place on 9/11. ucrdem Oct 2015 #60
k&r nt Electric Monk Oct 2015 #64
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»ONE simple fact: Benghazi...»Reply #57