Skip to comments.3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi
Posted on 01/24/2013 11:04:57 AM PST by SeekAndFind
During a long day of testifying before House and Senate panels, outgoing Secretary of State - and presumptive Democratic Party candidate for the presidency in 2016 - Hillary Clinton batted away contentious questions from Republicans like Ted Williams at a Little League game. She also soaked up extreme adulation from Democrats (including a a not-so-coded call to run for president by Sen. Barbara Boxer, who said, "You will be missed, but I for one hope for not too long").
The scene reminded me of nothing so much as Oliver North's appearance before a joint Congressional committee investigating Iran-Contra back in the 1980s. Not because of anything Clinton said but the way that she carried herself and the ease with which she wrapped herself in the flag and tragedy to obscure the simple fact that she wasn't going to answer anything. North famously showed up to testify in a military uniform that had nothing to do with his day job of subverting the U.S. Constitution from the basement of the Reagan White House. Clinton couldn't repeat that fashion statement but she was able to pound the table and choke up at all the right moments to evade serious discussion not simply of major screw-ups, but major screw-ups that will go unaccounted for.
Three major evasions from her appearances yesterday include:
1. "I take responsiblity."
From a Fox News report of the Senate hearing:
During the opening of the hearing, Clinton said she has "no higher priority" than the security of her department's staff, and that she is committed to making the department "safer, stronger and more secure."
"As I have said many times, I take responsibility, and nobody is more committed to getting this right," Clinton said, later choking up when describing how she greeted the families of the victims when the caskets were returned.
Taking responsibility is the classic dodge in Washington, where pols assume the mantle of leadership and them promptly do nothing to address the situation for which they are in hot water. What does it mean to take responsiblity for the absolute breakdown of security at a consulate where your ambassador gets murdered (along with three others)? Judging from Clinton's subsequent actions, nothing other than showing up when the dead are brought home. Worse still is Clinton's misting up over the tragedy. That makes her a little too much like the kid who kills his parents and then asks the court to take mercy on him because he's now an orphan.
2. "1.43 million cables come to my office."
ABC News reporting from the House hearings:
Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, asked Clinton this afternoon why her office had not responded to a notification from Stevens about potential dangers in Libya.
"Congressman, that cable did not come to my attention," Clinton calmly told the House Foreign Affairs Committee hours after her Senate testimony this morning. "I'm not aware of anyone within my office, within the secretary's office having seen that cable."
She added that "1.43 million cables come to my office. They're all addressed to me."
Come on, already. The question is plainly not whether Clinton is reading every goddamned communication addressed to her but whether she's got the right people in charge of assessing risk and making sure resources are apportioned accordingly. Tragically, the answer was no, especially given the fact that State had cut security in Benghazi despite attacks prior to the deadly 9/11 one! This just ain't no way to run things.
3. "What difference at this point does it make?"
From a CBS News account of a confrontation between Secretary Clinton and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.):
We were misled that there were supposedly protests and an assault spraying out of that and it was easily obtained that it was not the fact the American people could have known that within days and they didnt know that, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said.
The fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided theyd go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? Clinton responded.
Clinton's statement may set a new standard for politically motivated evasions of basic truth and decency. Seriously: What difference does it make? Just for low-stakes starters, there's a guy in California who was put in jail basically because the Obama administration said his stupid, irrelevant video trailer for "The Innocence of Muslims" was to blame for anti-Americanism in Libya and beyond. President Obama went to the United Nations and bitch-slapped free expression in front of a global audience on the premise that "Innocence" was the cause of the attack on Benghazi. Our own U.N. ambassador, Susan Rice, took to the talk shows to peddle a line that was either wilfully misleading or simply totally wrong (Rice was the admin's point person in early appearances about Benghazi partly because, as Clinton explained yesterday, she doesn't like doing Sunday morning shows!).
Contra Clinton, it makes a great deal of difference because understanding how this all happened is the first step to making sure it doesn't happen over and over and over again.
Congressional grillings of outgoing cabinet members are not the best forum to seek truth and justice and too many of the GOP inquisitors seem determined merely to score partisan points. Then again, the Obama adminstration, at least when it comes to Benghazi, hasn't done much to be the transparent change it says it wants in all areas of government. After a blistering Senate report on the situation found "systematic failures," essentially nothing happened (at least that we know about). Two minor staffers have been booted as a result of Clinton's taking of "responsibility."
Worse still: As Hillary Clinton leaves the high-stakes world of international intrigue, she's set to be replaced by John Kerry, who somehow manages to be an interventionist and supposedly informed by the nation's experience in Vietnam at the same time.
So things can - and likely will - only get worse.
The “difference”, Madam Secretary, is that unlike the White House, here in the Senate, the TRUTH is important.
Long after the TRUTH was known by the White House, this LIE about the video, continued to be publicly trumpeted as the basis for the attack that left 4 Americans DEAD.
So, we want to know the following:
WHO directed that the LIE continue AFTER the TRUTH was known?
What was the point of peddling that lie, 2 weeks after the TRUTH was known?
At a minimum YOU and the President KNEW it was a lie, and yet you BOTH continued to repeat it. So, WHY should anyone believe either of you from this point forward?
THAT Madame Secretary, is “THE DIFFERENCE IT MAKES”!!
All are free to use my Post #3 in preparing your letters to whomever.
“John Kerry, who somehow manages to be an interventionist and supposedly informed by the nation’s experience in Vietnam at the same time.”
Easily explained: Kerry only wants to intervene where there is no U.S. national interest, or where the intervention runs counter to U.S. interests. “Humanitarian” gestures, in places almost no one could find on a map, are good. Interventions in places that are not troubling U.S. interests, in order to install a regime that will trouble the U.S. (e.g. Lybia) are even better. Intervening where there are important national (or western-world) interests (e.g. Iran) is bad.
Does this make for a legal precedent? ‘Coz if I were to murder my ex (hypothetically speaking, of course) could I use it as my defense? “Your honor, gentremen und ladies of the jury, what difference does it make at this point in time?” (I could finally use the phrase ‘at this point in time’!)
The difference it makes is that I do not want that threatening whore to tax me of her face on TV and of my money, that’s the difference Hillary. The difference is in the adoption of the language of attack on the first amendment and condemnation of that language. The difference is that AlQaeda is laughing at us having to deal with you while they keep attacking us, setting a nice precedent for more. That’s the difference. But she does not care: what is it a few dead bodies on her abortive count, blood of innocent politics is all the rage, from Trayvon, to Newton and to this, they NEVER MOVE ON from crocodile tears and death emotional exploitation chosen instead of real life.
She has no repent and is a recidivist, obviously.
Congress critters of course cowered in fear or were lazy and did not prepare for her obvious confrontation borrowed from her husband of “Move On”. She can now keep prosecuting our free speech with the help of terrorists.
And by the tone of her voice, she is a most vulgar woman.
The thing of the matter is that such attack should make us review our policies, languages,postures and procedures in the mideast. But Hillary does not want to discuss that. She does not want to make sense, because if she did, then the true evil motives behind this would show in all their logicality.
They talk about coming out of the closet but they never do, whatever they keep doing, they want to keep doing it.
When any Rat says, “I take responsibility” it means that they have been assured that they will never face any consequences whatsoever.
Love it! LOL!
It’s fun and game for them right now, but ultimately it is hell to pay. They are going to play possum, and this is Hillary acting confused and playing possum cowardly on the whole issue.
She is incompetent and won’t admit it because she wants her bills paid, and that is it. She obviously want to keep “moving on” through her red carpet treatment and let no one more competent take her spotlight.
Yeah, a rat who pretends it goes on the cross and then comes down from it, it’s typical fake Jesus meme stuff. Muslims have that theory that Jesus was never really killed on the cross and God made Him come down from it.
Not the same hated Jesus I know, but go figure...
What went wrong is that she became spoiled and learned at the University that she could get away snitching on others and America, unlike she could when she was raised conservatively. That is what went wrong.
We cannot fix brains the way Pelosi tries to grossly fix her face and Hillary her legs.
Normal people taking responsibility means they personally will make things right - whether it be to pay for the damage to another’s vehicle in an accident or personally taking time to fix whatever is broken. We have 4 dead Americans - can’t fix that. Is she going to personally do anything to make things right? Never.
There are 133 ambassadors. If one of those people - top people, not someone at the bottom or some outsider asking for something - sends a message, there is no excuse for ignoring it.
Was she and those she had in place incompetent or intentional in their failures? Three a.m. phone call - she didn’t bother to answer it.
We know that she is lying to protect her communist a$$ and her boss’s. Nothing she says deserves to be listened to.
Colonel North subverted the Constitution? How so?
I can see the campaign ad now
0300. The phone rings, Hillary answers.
The voice on the other end says “Madam President, The North Koreans have launched multiple nuclear missles at the west coast.
Hillary responds sleepily. “ What difference, at this point, does it make?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.