Hillary Clinton:
I know what difference it makes. Do you? 
Knowing what we know now, interpret the utter stupidity and careless indifference in that remark.
Pardon me, but your slip is showing.
Do we get egg roll now?
Nice Gish Gallop.
You wrote:
Do you stand by that, or are you content to rapidly shift gears to avoid having to defend it?
Even WITH the context, you choose to see the “indifferent” interpretation. She’s asking what difference it makes as to WHY the attack happened. You’re interpreting it as what difference it makes that 4 people died.
That’s either deliberate lying or hopeless stupidity, and I’m calling it out, come mod or high water. I’m getting tired of playing the simpering dope for the good of some kind of false ‘civility’ while people like you and Magiver lie and twist and deliberately misinterpret FACTS that are being cited AND quoted to you. It’s a sucker’s game and I’m not playing it anymore.
I’m talking about Hillary Clinton in the context of Benghazi for Dummies. She is the biggest dummy of them all. Institutionalized dumbness led to 4 dead Americans on her watch.
That’s really all any dummy needs to know about this.
What are you talking about?
It makes a BIG difference WHY it happened, and apparently you don’t know it either.
I’m talking about the post of yours I quoted. The way you could tell was that I quoted the post, and asked a single question about it.
I’ll give you a hint JayJay: The reason it happened was not due to a video, spontaneous demonstration or some guys out for walk.
Stop quoting me. You’re making it difficult to focus on the substance of this debate. :rolleyes:
Uh huh. It’s fine for you to make accusations of debating via “fallacies and illogical thinking”, complete with a precious little counting game, but when challenged to back up your accusations, you’ve got nothing but bluster and misdirection. I figured as much.
Speaking of which let’s move that discussion here.
I’ll take some literary license until you fools learn a few facts.
Better typing skills would be nice too! 
Y’all up for it. Buds?
All right, after shouting four or five times that it is all Hillary’s fault, go ahead and explain why you think it is all her fault.
If you fail to provide minimally adequate security for your people, you have no business being in a position of leadership.
Gee, how did Rumsfeld stay in office for three years after the lack of armored Humvees and shortage of SAPI plates became front page news?
Bad analogy. Stevens and associates were on a diplomatic mission, not combatants in a war. Other rebuttals to the Rumsfeld matter are outside the scope of this discussion.
Seven.
Failing to back up an overbroad statement that you made.
Eight nine ten.
That’s it?
Really?
By the way, how do you explain Reagan staying in office after 241 Marines were killed while on a peacekeeping mission!
ELEVEN!! 11!!
Wow, you can count too? I’m impressed.
Better not go much further since it looks like you’re on your toes and will soon need to start over.