Wigger*, please. 
-
- See? I made a pun out of a common, but unspeakable, phrase, a nickname for white kids who pretend they are from the ghetto, the poster’s user name, and Donald Trump’s hair. Deucedly clever, I am. :rolleyes:
You’re projecting an excuse with no basis of fact. The WH was reluctant from day one to provide information. Transparency isn’t just a bullshit soundbite that Obama can throw out in a campaign. It’s the law. Politicians are answerable for their actions and Congress is entitled to the information. You can stamp your feet and call people names all you want.
And if not, there’s always the next one!
And since this is the first time an American president has not lived up to every promise made while campaigning, I guess it does make Obama the worst president ever.
Whatever it takes to get to the truth. At least there won’t be another Executive Privilege issued, as there was to quell the investigation into the Fast & Furious debacle. It doesn’t appear, currently, that the head of the Executive Branch was involved in any U.S. government decision or action involving the Benghazi attacks or the aftermath.
The issue is still under discussion in another thread. It doesn’t appear that there is a consensus among posters and no official ruling. You could submit your concerns for consideration and perhaps settle the issue of the use of teabagger/Repugs/Democrat party once and for all.
It’s confirmed that the Select Committee will be taking depositions and demanding readable documents.
I’m pretty sure Congress understands the need for redactions. Don’t get too excited.
It appears that a belated congratulations is in order. Your other thread has drawn the Cloward-Piven crowd like a moth to a flame. Now they have a chance to vent their growing frustration that they could not prevent a Congressional Select Committee from being formed to discuss all things Benghazi without cluttering this thread with their red herrings and misdirections. Thank you.
Oh Hell yes there is a consensus. People who pretend they’re not being insulting by misspelling a major party’s name are subject to scorn and ridicule. Use of Teabagger/repugs, on the other hand, is okay if offense is intended.
It is often used to express derision than cause offense as such, but I’ve never come across anyone who uses them denying the intent, coyly or otherwise.
The use of “Democrat Party” *can *be the result of simple massive ignorance instead, though.
Oh No. Not scorn and ridicule. :eek:
Did you have anything to add to Thread: With trepidation, Benghazi ?
That does not mean Executive Privilege would not apply.
I didn’t notice anyone venting frustration regarding their inability to prevent ol’ Trey’s ol’ Select Committee in that other thread. As far as I can tell, that other thread is pretty focused on the more narrow topic of a rather insipid manifestation of trolling and how it reflects upon those engaged in such trolling.
Damn straight. I use Teabagger to be as offensive as possible to the pathetic scum that these people are. I make no bones about it, I think Tea Partiers are an inflamed and fetid boil on the buttocks of society and I take every opportunity to be offensive to them. I believe this position is one of more honesty and integrity than feigning innocence while using the term “Democrat Party”.
And the Select Committee is still going to be seeking answers to all things Benghazi. You can call the participants anything you wish. The investigation proceeds.
If Obama wasn’t involved, how does Executive Privilege apply?
They could simply read the reports of all the *previous *committee investigations. 
In other Benghazi news, Hillary’s new book has a section on Benghazi, expect the right wing echo chamber to get all apoplectic about something.
So you concede that Obama didn’t do anything wrong. Well, that was easy.