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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 01:49 AM Oct 2015

Jake Tapper stuns Jeb Bush: If your brother is blameless for 9/11 why is Hillary Clinton responsible

Benghazi?

This is such an obvious question, and if Democratic politicians had any spine, they would have asked this a hell of a long time ago, and some variation of it well before Benghazi.

This one question and a couple of aggressive follow up ones, could drive a stake in the heart of any GOP claim to "tough" on defense, and should kill them as a party.

They are not tough on defense. They are "tough" on killing people in other countries to get what they're corporate masters want.

And if their masters are happy with how a country does business with them, why they will look the other way (or worse), just as they did with the Saudi government involvement in 9/11.

That Democrats in and running for political office don't pursue this shows it's just one other area where they don't want any daylight between themselves and the GOP.

But if they aren't on the right side when enough people aren't afraid to ask these questions out loud, they could end up with the GOP as a footnote in history.

TAPPER: Obviously Al Qaeda was responsible for the terrorist attack of 9/11, but how do you respond to critics who ask, if your brother and his administration bear no responsibility at all, how do you then make the jump that President Obama and Secretary Clinton are responsible for what happened at Benghazi?

JEB BUSH: Well I — the question on Benghazi which, is hopefully we’ll now finally get the truth to, is was the place secure? They had a responsibility, the Department of State, to have proper security. There were calls for security, it looks like they didn’t get it. And how was the response in the aftermath of the attack, was there a chance that these four American lives could have been saved? That’s what the investigation is about, it’s not a political issue. It’s not about the broad policy issue, is were we doing the job of protecting our embassies and our consulates and during the period, those hours after the attack started, could they have been saved?

TAPPER: Well that’s, that’s kind of proving the point of the critics I was just asking about, because you don’t want to have your brother bear responsibility for 9/11 and I understand that argument and Al Qaeda’s responsible, but why are the terrorists not the ones who are responsible for these attacks in Libya?

BUSH: They are, of course they are but — of course they are, but if the ambassador was asking for additional security and didn’t get it, that’s a proper point and if it’s proven that the security was adequate compared to other embassies, fine, we’ll move on.

http://www.cnn.com/video/api/embed.html#

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/19/jake_tapper_stuns_jeb_bush_if_your_brother_is_blameless_for_911_why_is_hillary_clinton_responsible_for_benghazi/
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jake Tapper stuns Jeb Bush: If your brother is blameless for 9/11 why is Hillary Clinton responsible (Original Post) yurbud Oct 2015 OP
Well done Tapper! Thanks for the post. It cheered me up. PatrickforO Oct 2015 #1
Good question! nt Live and Learn Oct 2015 #2
and the Republicans were the ones who cut the funding for increased security at embassies Samantha Oct 2015 #3
You've got it down, Sam. n/t SusanaMontana41 Oct 2015 #4
But Jeb It wasn't an embassy that was attacked... 4bucksagallon Oct 2015 #5
follow up question enid602 Oct 2015 #6
you can't waste money on something that doesn't hurt a Democrat yurbud Oct 2015 #7
If Tapper isn't fired, it may be a turning point like LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act yurbud Oct 2015 #8
Excellent question. Hope others follow up. oldandhappy Oct 2015 #9
--- forgot to mention the Republican Congress would not authorize additional Hoppy Oct 2015 #10

PatrickforO

(14,556 posts)
1. Well done Tapper! Thanks for the post. It cheered me up.
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 01:58 AM
Oct 2015

Of course Tapper might be fired by the corporate overlords because of it. If not now then later.

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
3. and the Republicans were the ones who cut the funding for increased security at embassies
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 03:39 AM
Oct 2015

so I guess Jeb would say Obama is responsible for that.

If something tragic happens under a Democratic administration, it is the Democratic President's fault. If it happens under a Republican President's administration, it is a situation above and beyond the control of the President. Right....

Sam

4bucksagallon

(975 posts)
5. But Jeb It wasn't an embassy that was attacked...
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 05:17 AM
Oct 2015

...."if it’s proven that the security was adequate compared to other embassies, fine, we’ll move on."

enid602

(8,587 posts)
6. follow up question
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 08:21 AM
Oct 2015

He should have asked Jeb? if 8 committees on Bengazi lasting eons was not overkill, given that the prospect of any meaningful investigation into 9/11 was scuttled.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
8. If Tapper isn't fired, it may be a turning point like LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 11:19 AM
Oct 2015

only instead of triggering a migration of white racists from the Democrats to the Republican Party, it would signal that the rich have just about given up on the GOP as their water boy of choice, not because they disagree with their goals but because their ability to win elections is declining. I think we're already seeing this at the presidential level and it will trickle down from there.

The big question is how long the Democrats can hold together as the party of both corporate tools and progressives and which faction will form a new party.

But the GOP can't expand to include Latinos and others and hold on to their base of xenophobes, know nothings, and those nostalgic for Jim Crow.

 

Hoppy

(3,595 posts)
10. --- forgot to mention the Republican Congress would not authorize additional
Wed Oct 21, 2015, 11:31 AM
Oct 2015

Spending for increased security at the embassies.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Jake Tapper stuns Jeb Bus...