Steve Kelley by Steve Kelley

Steve Kelley

Comments (14) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. gmgodsil

    gmgodsil said, about 1 year ago

    How asinine of a choice! She’s a joke, just like barry. She has no business doing anything in politics at this point.

  2. mikefive

    mikefive said, about 1 year ago

    I don’t really think it proper to denigrate Susan Rice for the story she told about Benghazi. If she was given what she thought was authoritative information to present to the American public by the State Department, there would have been no reason for her to doubt that information and present it. Of course, she may have known the information was false, but as of now that is only speculation with many trying to present it as fact.

  3. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    So did the edits come from Obama? Did Obama come up with spontaneous and YouTube? Obama sure used that for his lie cover talking points for a few weeks. And as a reward for giving him cover before an election he promotes the women. Really? Well she has the same qualifications as Obama in that they both know how to stick with a lie.
    I bet the “moderator” of the 2nd debate is a little ticked off. She covered his butt on live TV. i wonder if she feels shorted for her “misunderstanding” she used to cover Obama LIE.

  4. coffee_mom11

    coffee_mom11 said, about 1 year ago

    @gmgodsil

    Yes, he’s just rewarding her for toeing the party line and being a good “player”

  5. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @mikefive

    I don’t really think it proper to denigrate Susan Rice for the story she told about Benghazi. If she was given what she thought was authoritative information to present to the American public..
    Then she is an idiot!
    But what do you say of Obama repeated the lies 2 weeks after tothe UN. How long before the “truth” was known that it was a attack and the guy was murdered, because the White house knew in what 10 minutes when Steve called and said “We are under attack”
    But hey it was 5 o’clock and Obama needed to be in vegas in the morning.

  6. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    How does U.N. rep Susan Rice being provided with C.I.A. talking points compare to that other Rice, National Security Advisor Condi Rice going on TV to scare the people with blatant lies of nuclear holocaust?
    .
    “The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly Saddam can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud”.
    .
    I’d say not even close.

  7. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    How does U.N. rep Susan Rice being provided with C.I.A. talking points compare to that other Rice, ..
    The C.I.A. talking points as is would have not been an outright lie for one thing. Please tell me what information Condi Rice had that no one else did that contradicted the what was known at the time? Please enlighten us to what secrete information W Bush had that he was intentionally holding back in order to do what he wanted to do. You can not say WMD because EVERYONE had the same information. Now Tell me who changed the CIA talking points to read “YouTube and Spontaneous” to explain the MURDER of Stevens? WHO? That is your liar, that is the difference between the two Rices. And just for fun Did not Obama go out and use those same LIES to protect himself from his failures before the election? Obama knew or should have known that “YouTube and Spontaneous” are not what happened to Stevens, he should have known that an hour into the ATTACK, not “protest” yet two weeks later Obama is spreading those lies to the UN.

  8. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    @Harleyquinn

    “…….Please tell me what information Condi Rice had that no one else did that contradicted the what was known at the time?”
    .
    What was known at the time was that there were no WMD as determined by U.N. inspector Hans Blix and others. so they lied, fabricated, and drew false conclusions on skimpy and non-existent information. Many in the Administration, including Colin Powell, jumped on the Administration’s fabrications that they left little choice in Congress but to support invasion. Many at the time, including me, suspected lies, lies, lies.
    .
    As for Benghazi, a lot was going on in that part of the world at the time, including demonstrations against an anti-Muslim video. It takes time to sort out complex issues. To complicate, there were probably clandestine operations going on. Obama the next day in the Rose Garden mentioned the possibility of terrorism.
    .
    The ugly truth is that the Right is trying to manufacture a scandal to at least match some of Bush’s boondoggles, and they are failing miserably.

  9. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    bs

  10. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    .17 A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, “then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war”.18
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

    So W Bush was going on false CIA report that everyone had and you call HIM a liar. But Obama and crew had the correct information before the rewrites. Obama and crew make a the YouTube Video the reason and call it spontaneous when we KNEW while it was going on that this was not the case.
    but in your mind W is a Liar for following the same information everyone had and sighting the UN resolutions that were either broken or not be followed. and you call him a Liar. Obama on the other hand knew the proper information but even two weeks after the fact he is found lying to the UN, keeping the talking pionts of a YouTube Video that had been proven False but mentioning it numerous times in his speech to the UN. And Obama is not a liar?

  11. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8 Obama the next day in the Rose Garden mentioned the possibility of terrorism.

    ..
    Obama said the next day the attack was an act of terrorism."
    -
    Let’s put this to rest once and for all.
    Obama NEVER, not once, ever in the Rose Garden speech said, “The Benghazi attack was an act of terrorism.” THAT would be calling the attack an act of terrorism. He never said, “This attack was done by terrorists.”
    .
    I’ll prove he didn’t say it by directly quoting him.
    .
    First he said
    .
    “Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi.”
    .
    Nothing here about terrorists or terrorism, just killed in “an attack”
    .
    “The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack.”
    .
    This time he goes so far as to say it’s an “outrageous” and “shocking” attack, but can’t say “terrorist”
    .
    “…we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people”
    Note how he uses the term “killers” ? Still can’t call them terrorists. And still “attacked"
    .
    “…this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya”
    .
    Still just an “attack” not “terrorist attack”
    .
    But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence
    .
    Now it’s “senseless violence,” not “terrorism”
    .
    “The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.”
    .
    Now they are “brutal acts”
    .
    Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers
    .
    STILL just “attackers” not “terrorists”
    .
    Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks.
    .
    Look! He can’t even call 9/11 an act of terrorism. They were just “attacks.”
    .
    And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.
    .
    After all these words, and still, it’s just an “’attack’ in Benghazi”
    .
    Okay, now I’m going to copy and paste the paragraph where he briefly mentions the word “terror”
    .
    No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act.
    .
    Do you see what His Slipperyness has done there?
    He merely said the word “terror” without attaching it to anyone or anything in Benghazi. He just said the word, unattached to any specific act.
    .
    However, he labeled the attacks with ALL sorts of adjectives – senseless, violent, outrageous, shocking, brutal – throughout his entire speech. But not one, ever, even once was one of them “terrorist.” And he called the people who attacked us “killers” and “attackers” but NEVER “terrorists.
    .
    He never, not once, ever directly called Benghazi a terrorist attack done by terrorists. And, just to make sure he didn’t leave us with a false impression, right after saying the word terror, he quickly reverts in the same paragraph to again call it a “terrible act” – he did not and could not and would not link “terrorism” to Benghazi.
    .
    He didn’t even say, “This act of terror” or “The Benghazi act of terror” or even “An act of terror in Benghazi”
    .
    Basically all he said was “an attack was done” and “we won’t tolerate terrorism.”
    .
    BUT, lets hear what he said about the religious video. Early in his speech, before he had his nanosecond of gravitas by merely mentioning the word “terror,” he said this:
    .
    Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.
    .
    See, he makes a reference to the video, which “denigrated the religious beliefs” of Muslims. THIS is what he wants us to believe, at this particular point in time. He thinks he can make this stick because his adoring media will do whatever he wants and all the low information voters will attack Fox for trying to get the truth out.
    .
    After the fact he tried to have it both ways. But words mean things.

    And if you still believe he said it was an act of terror, why did Susan Rice go out on 5 Sunday news shows and say it was a video, AFTER the Rose Garden speech. And why did Jay Carney refuse to answer what it was when asked for many days? And why was Obama out campaigning for a couple weeks, after the Rose Garden speech, saying it was the video?
    .
    Your argument does not hold up.

  12. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    “So you’re saying that Bush and company were both gullible and stupid.”

    If he was then tell me how many democrats went along with it. Just saying with your logic of what it was that we knew then to be true like you Said was benghazi. Except we did know the truth of what had happened as it was going o. And Unlike The WMD we knew the truth but Obama said the opposite of what he KNEW was the truth. Why? It did not fit his narrative.
    Oh and what about those killers Obama said he would bring to justice? The Guy who did the YouTube Video is safe in jail and cannot do it again. I mean it isn’t like there are a 1000 other YouTube Videos that insult everything from Muhammad to Jesus to cats but hey that guy was brought to justice! Of course on a side note the real person who risked life is still in Jail for helping us get Bin la Din, How that for justice?

  13. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    @Harleyquinn

    “……A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, “then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war”.”
    .
    So you’re saying that Bush and company were both gullible and stupid.
    .
    You go to great lengths to describe how unequivocally Obama condemns the Benghazi killings, which is good. Then you go to great lengths to decry the insufficient use of the word “terrorism.” Tell me, are you deader if killed by a killer or an attacker, or deader if killed by a terrorist? Perhaps the right answer is, “Four Americans were killed, what difference at this point does it make?”

  14. TJDestry

    TJDestry GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    I was going to leave a comment, but I see we’ve already gotten to the point in the discussion where everybody is typing and nobody is reading.

  15. Refresh Comments.