Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Friday, October 23, 2015

The Benghazi Hearings (October 22, 2015)


According to the "journalists" at the Washington Post: GOP lands no solid punches while sparring with Clinton over Benghazi.

Today's New York Times has a similar take in the lead editorial of October 23, 2015.

Apparently, not only the Left wingers are opining as above: Even Conservatives Realize Hillary Clinton's Benghazi Committee Hearing Was Ridiculous: The 11 hours of questions were "a waste of time," one pundit wrote.

From Mediaite's Rep. Jim Jordan Goes After Hillary: ‘Where’d the False Narrative Start? It Started With You’ (emphases mine):
Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan took issue with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton‘s comment that protests had erupted in both Cairo, Egypt and Benghazi, Libya, citing evidence from the House Select Committee’s investigation stating that no protest of any kind had occurred in Benghazi. He then went on to quote from various State Department spokespersons who, in the weeks following the Sept. 11, 2012 attack, claimed that the incident in Benghazi was linked to the Cairo-based protest, which was a reaction to an offensive online video.

“Where’d the false narrative start? It started with you, Madame Secretary,” said Jordan,
adding that a statement released by Clinton the night of the attack suggests as much. “At 10:08, with no evidence. At 10:08, before the attack is over. At 10:08, when Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty are still on the roof of the annex fighting for their lives, the official statement of the State Department blames a video. Why?”

Clinton proceeded to emphasize her official statement’s use of the phrase “some have sought,” which described the efforts of a small group to use the video as a means of inciting anti-American sentiments in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere in the region. “I used those words deliberately. Not to ascribe a motive to every attacker, but as a warning to those across the region that there was no justification for further attacks.”

However, Jordan just couldn’t let the discrepancy go, citing additional emails and calls made to the Libyan president, the Egyptian prime minister and her own family. In all three messages, Clinton said that the State Department knew that “the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack — not a protest.”

When Clinton again reference her statement’s language, Jordan erupted.

“Calling it an attack is like saying the sky is blue. Of course it was an attack! We want to know the truth. The statement you sent out was a statement on Benghazi, and you say ‘vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material on the Internet.’ If that’s not pointing at its motive being the video, I don’t know what is. And that’s certainly how the American people saw it.”

“There was a lot of conflicting information that we were trying to make sense of,” said Clinton. “The situation was fluid. It was fast-moving.”

Jordan pressed on, repeating his previous comments and criticizing Clinton’s attempted answers to them. Two bantered back and forth for a few minutes, but when the congressman had to wrap up, he reiterated his main line of argument — that Clinton was able to “tell the truth” to her own family and foreign diplomats, but not the American people. When chairman Trey Gowdy asked Clinton whether or not she wanted to respond, she plugged her book.

“I wrote a whole chapter about this in my book, Hard Choices. I’d be glad to send it to you, congressman.”
More HERE, including video clips.

Yes, yes, there was a lot of speechifying yesterday, just as there was during the Watergate Hearings. And, yes, there is partisanship in play now, just as there was during the Watergate Hearings.


Was or was not the exchange between Rep. Jordan and Hillary Clinton a gotcha moment?

76 comments:

  1. There is only one jury played to in that "courtroom".
    The American People.
    And the jury slept.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True, Ed, but why does you suppose that is the case? Is anyone or anything to blame, or are we just no good as a people anymore?

      Do you have any remedies in mind? I wish I did, but the whole thing made me feel numb and helpless, frankly.

      Delete
    2. I'm beginning to despair.
      Too many peopole have too many distractions to take their focus off the offenses comitted against them.

      Delete
    3. Ed,
      What has happened to so many people?

      Collective ADD?

      Apathy?

      A sense of inevitability?

      Delete
    4. Here's what I've decided after many hours of fretful contemplation:

      H. Rodham Clinton continually gets away with "murder," only because she has been PROTECTED by the partisan Power Cartel who have succeeded in CONFUSING, BORING, and ENERVATING the ignorant, dimly-aware, improperly-informed American Public to the point where "We the People" now see those who have DARED to INVESTIGATE this Ultimate Power Chick as nothing more than a "POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED" NUISANCE guilty of WASTING MILLIONS of TAXPAYER'S DOLLARS on a DISHONEST, UNPRINCIPLED POLITICAL VENDETTA.

      Delete
    5. AOW,

      Good questions. I figured once the economic failures of Obama really started to bite, people would wake up, but he got reelected, and apparently many blue collar "Reagan democrats" simply stayed home because they couldn't stomach Romney.

      So long as government subsidizes stupidity and apathy, we will get more of it. People will move along, zombie-like until they become desperate, and we haven't reached that point yet.

      Delete
  2. Replies
    1. Ms. Rice is a clean, attractive, fairly articulate young Negress, who doesn't speak with a typical Negro accent. She landed a prominent job far above her pay grade for political reasons. She is duly grateful for her good fortune no doubt. That means she is likely to do or say anything her Sponsor-Masters or Mistresses TELL her to say.

      Need we say more?

      Delete
    2. Susan Rice is a foreign policy boob. Her record is one of serial failures, fumbles and tragic consequences, including Rwanda, Libya and the muslim invasion of Europe.

      She belongs in the Hall of Shame along with that NAZI prison guard, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

      Delete
  3. I started watching the Benghazi hearing in the evening. This is my perception:

    https://thelastenglishprince.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/hillary-clinton-benghazi-hearing/

    Ms. Clinton spent a lot of time eating up the clock - when any new ten minute window opened for a member of the panel to question her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Prince,
      You are correct that Hillary's testimony yesterday consisted of many streams of plausible deniability.

      She's a lawyer and a politician. Those two credentials make her a double plague upon the land!

      Delete
    2. Ready or not here's my analysis of this dismal affair:


      Everything is a matter of "perception." Truth is of no concern whatsoever. People tend to see only what they WANT to see according to their pre-conceived notions.

      To those who would denigrate and dismiss Trey Gowdy's Investigation as "worthless" I say this:

      A considerable number of indisputable FACTS unflattering to Mrs. Clinton's inept, uncaring, arrogantly self-serving performance as Secretary of State have come to light as a result of the Republican inquiries. The same is true of their attempt to hold the IRS accountable for flagrantly partisan skullduggery. Neither H. Rodham Clinton, Lois Lerner, –– nor the fatuous individual who heads the IRS –– should escape severe punishment for their outrageous behavior.

      HOWEVER, the Washington-Enemedia-Cartel, –– which INCLUDES the Establishment Republicans –– is so corrupt, so power-hungry, and so viciously determined to ward off any and all challenges to their ascendancy that TRUTH means NOTHING to them, UNLESS it just HAPPENS to serve THEIR [usually nefarious] purposes.


      And by the way, if H. Rodham Clinton did nothing wrong, and had nothing to hide, WHY did she do everything possible to DELAY turning over subpoenaed evidence –– a tactic that necessitated the extreme length, and often tediously redundant appearance of the Republican investigations?

      Even more outrageous was her wanton attempt to DESTROY the CONTENTS of her ILLEGAL, UNETHICAL PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER.

      She has been PROTECTED by the non-partisan Power Cartel who have succeeded in CONFUSING, BORING, and ENERVATING the ignorant, dimly-aware, improperly-informed American Public to the point where "We the People" now see those who have DARED to INVESTIGATE this Ultimate Power Chick as nothing more than a "POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED" NUISANCE guilty of WASTING MILLIONS of TAXPAYER'S DOLLARS on an UNPRINCIPLED POLITICAL VENDETTA.

      Delete
  4. Clinton's passing the buck off to her Diplomatic Security Service.....instead of bearing responsibility for a department under her leadership...says all one needs to know about how she would reign as POTUS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YUP! Frightening, ain't it, that we've been bamboozled and euchred by a cold-hearted tactician without heart, soul, conscience or the faintest trace of respect for Principle?

      The fault for that is not HERS, however. it is OURS for allowing ourselves to become so "dumbed down" that we could fall for anything so vile.

      Delete
    2. CI,
      The Clintons are coated with Teflon?

      Delete
    3. FT,
      The fault for that is not HERS, however. it is OURS for allowing ourselves to become so "dumbed down" that we could fall for anything so vile.

      Strongly agree!

      Delete
  5. I can't believe I sat through the whole thing. I thought I owed it to those who lost their lives, and anyway I had the time. She bobbed and weaved, and if one didn't know the story line, she came out well IMO. After all, what does truth have to do with the matter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bunkerville,
      How in the world did you stand to watch the entire thing? So much speechifying.

      Is Cummings on the Clinton payroll?

      Hillary did herself little damage as far as I can tell.

      Delete
  6. Time for hearings on Vince Foster.

    Couldn't make Repubs look any more foolish than they do now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no statute of limitations on murder, ducky.

      Delete
  7. The truth went under the bus a long time ago, and the most important audience, the American people, are uninterested in dry facts.

    I have watch for 20 years as the GOOPers throw their shoulders out trying to land a glove on the Clintons. It's pathetic. I'm shouting at the Benghazi panel through my computer screen: "Get to the f'ing smoking gun already!!!

    There is no smoking gun.

    The GOP has strengthened Hillary by their political malpractice. Gowdy need to stop wasting taxpayer money, pack up his lemonade stand and go home.

    Hillary withstood 11 hours of partisan badgering, and that will strengthen her in the general election. Her campaign will build ads on it, showing how strong, patient, compassionate, professional, etc she is in the face of ideological attacks by partisan pygmies.

    To paraphrase, Emerson...

    "If you're going to strike the queen, you had better kill her."

    They didn't.

    A corollary:

    "That which does not kill us makes us stronger."
    -- Friedrich Nietzsche

    GOOP losers lose again. They possess the amazing ability to consistently do more damage to themselves by trying to fight than if they would just sit down and shut up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're probably right, but it does little or no good to EMPHASIZE –– and thereby AGGRANDIZE the magnitude of –– "OUR" defeat.

      "THEY" would NEVER do that if that shoe were on the other foot, believe me. "They" always seem to find a way to transform defeat into VICTORY, probably because they have no principles and no respect for the Truth

      Delete
  8. Here is the saddest of sad facts: The GOOP's stumbling, bumbling farce of an "investigation" on Benghazi has distracted attention from the basic facts:

    * Obama, Hillary and her Girls Amateur Warlord Club tipped over Libya, burned it to the ground, and had no plan whatsoever for the aftermath. That puts them in the same category as Bush-Cheney.

    * The European refugee crisis is a direct result of Hillary's reckless incompetence in the foreign policy arena. She and Obama's other "advisors" had no foreign policy experience, and it shows. Libya was the conduit to Europe, and Gaddafi kept it shut. That was no secret. Now, millions are pouring through the breach and have smashed down the gates of European Civilization.

    * Ambassador Stevens asked for more security multiple times, and for whatever reason, Madame Secretary Clinton did not provide it. He and other Americans died as a result. Obama's only defense is that military assets were too far away. OK. Why? A tragic and criminal lack of forsight.

    * That night on September 11, Americans were begging for help, and Obama did not provide it.

    * Government records show, and spokesmouths have admitted that we wasted hundreds of millions on "good" Syrian terrorists, only to haplessly watch as they took arms, ammo, material and training Obama provided them and defected to ISIS, Nusra or other terrorist organizations.

    These verifiable facts are enough to damn Obama and Hillary and their galloping incompetence on the world stage.

    These facts alone are enought to disqualify Hillary Clinton from any future public office at any level.

    These facts, in the hands competent political practitioners would be a damaging fusillade to Battleship Hillary. Unfortunately for us, and fortunately for Hillary, the GOOPers can't even find their own asses with both hands.

    So, have fun listening to the Fox News panel drone on about how damaging this or that was, Jim Jordan can whine about how he did a gotcha, but the American people don't care.

    Hillary wins, GOOP loses, again.

    "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, CI.

      This is why I finally switched my party affiliation to Libertarian. It accomplishes nothing in the larger scheme of things, but at least it is verifiable proof in black and white that I am in no way affiliated with the dummschitt GOOPers...

      Delete
    2. It accomplishes nothing in the larger scheme of things.......

      Oh, but for everyone else with the same distaste for the GOOP.........of only they followed suit.

      Delete
    3. I severed my ties with the Republican Party when they went with the marketing strategy of "set your principles aside and vote for Romney anyway."

      Delete
    4. Beamish,

      They could have done much better, but I'm not as hard on them for the Romney debacle. The GOP is obviously the home of more than just hardcore conservatives. They're a political party, and they have to win elections.

      It wasn't Romney's squishy principles that did him in, it was the stupid stuff he said, but anyway we agree the GOOP is worthless at the national level, even as they dominate at the state level.

      Delete
    5. CORRECTION: It is the GOP ESTABLISHMENT that is worthless NOT the Freedom Caucus.

      Failure to give full support to the Freedom Caucus makes anyone who still thinks he's a Conservative-Libertarian as much a part of the problem as the dirty, stinkin' fatcat RINOS who don't give a rat's rump for anything but maintaining a comfy status quo for THEMSELVES.

      The RINOS act as de facto handmaidens to The Oligarchs.

      Delete
    6. Giving politicians just encourages them. They get jack from me.

      Delete
    7. Well, I set my principles aside. I won't help Republicans achieve anything until they run Mitt Romney supporters through tree mulchers. It's too late to ask me to have principles again. ;)

      Delete
    8. Beamish,
      Understood!

      Until this election cycle, I haven't bee as scorched earth as you are. Getting there now, though.

      I just don't say much along those lines in a public forum.

      Yet.

      Delete
  9. Just what her role and objectives were in the Libya fiasco were never discussed. True enough, Silverfiddle.

    Goudy and the others were too busy mugging it up for the rabies radio crowd and Faux Snooze. I'm sure Faux Snooze presented both sides.
    The media in this country are a major part of the problem and you'd have a tough time convincing me it wasn't the force setting the agenda for that group of mouth breathers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. THAT group of mouth breathers as opposed to Amy Goodman and YOUR group of mouth breathers, or the mouth breathers over at MSNBC?

      Let's ALL play "Spin the Narrative!"

      Delete
    2. Ducky,
      Our nation has suffered an unfortunate string of stupid politicians who are too stupid to even realize they don't know what they are doing.

      Add in a bread and circuses press that belongs to the same ruling elite, and our nation is in a slow death spiral.

      Delete
    3. Lost in all of this is whether or not the filmmaker blamed for the attack is still in jail. Or if Ducky is okay with jailing filmmakers if doing so fits the left's intellectually void narratives.

      Delete
    4. Filmmakers get jailed. Just ask Jafar Panahi.

      However, his jailing was obvious intimidation and censorship.

      The hack who made the Benghazi "film" was lugged for probation violations. The story behind his "film" is quite interesting as is his past rap sheet.

      You might want to familiarize yourself with Iranian cinema if you wish to see competent criticism of Islamic totalitarianism.

      Delete
    5. I thought that the "film" was stupid. Really stupid.

      Delete
    6. SF,
      Our nation has suffered an unfortunate string of stupid politicians who are too stupid to even realize they don't know what they are doing.

      Career politicians are a plague upon the land.

      The establishment of both parties are manipulating the process. Period.

      Delete
    7. Duck,
      I'm sure Faux Snooze presented both sides.

      An exception for me, I watched FNC last night. Sure, most of "the pundits" were decrying Hillary's testimony. But Dems were interviewed as well; a few of them looked rather pale.

      Delete
    8. And that's a yes. Ducky is okay with jailing filmmakers if it fits the left's intellectually void narratives.

      Delete
    9. No it isn't, Beamish.

      There is no reason he should have been immune to lawful arrest.
      Don't be a sophist.

      Delete
    10. The question isn't whether or not he should have been immune to arrest but whether they arrested him for parole violations (technically correct) or because he made the film. Would they have arrested him for using an alias and posting a puppet show on the internet ?

      Delete
    11. Finntann,
      The question isn't whether or not he should have been immune to arrest but whether they arrested him for parole violations (technically correct) or because he made the film.

      The man's name is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, and he was arrested in late September 2012. He was sentenced in early November 2012.

      The NYT article (November 7, 2012):

      Man Behind Anti-Islam Video Gets Prison Term

      LOS ANGELES — A federal judge on Wednesday sentenced the man behind “Innocence of Muslims,” the anti-Islam YouTube video that ignited bloody protests in the Muslim world, to one year in prison for violating parole.

      The man, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who is also known as Mark Basseley Youssef, a name he legally adopted in 2002, appeared in Federal District Court here and pleaded guilty to four charges of violating a probation sentence imposed on him in 2010 after a bank fraud conviction. Each of his guilty pleas, worked out with prosecutors in advance, was related to his maintenance of the two identities.

      In turn, the government agreed to drop four more probation violation charges, all of which pertained to Mr. Nakoula’s work on the “Innocence of Muslims.” Prosecutors had maintained that Mr. Nakoula lied to the police about the extent of his involvement in the project.


      In accordance with the sentencing request by Robert Dugdale, the assistant United States attorney who prosecuted the case, Judge Christina A. Snyder ruled that Mr. Nakoula would serve one year in prison followed by four years of probation. She rejected a request for home confinement in lieu of prison from Mr. Nakoula’s lawyer, Steve Seiden, telling Mr. Nakoula that he had already “struck a deal far more favorable than he might have otherwise suffered.”

      Although Mr. Dugdale did not pursue the probation violation charges that were directly related to “Innocence of Muslims,” he spoke about Mr. Nakoula’s film project — and the deceitful manner in which he carried it out — as part of his sentencing argument.

      Mr. Dugdale said Mr. Nakoula had used the alias Sam Bacile, among others, to make the movie and had tricked the cast into thinking it was making a sword-and-sandal epic about a murderous tribal leader named George. Later, using crude dubbing techniques, Mr. Nakoula secretly turned that character into the Prophet Muhammad, Mr. Dugdale said. “That’s a substantial fraud,” Mr. Dugdale said.

      It was the depiction of the Prophet Muhammad as a bloodthirsty thug that sparked violence from Egypt to Pakistan in September. Cast members, at least one of whom is now suing Mr. Nakoula, have received death threats and are having trouble finding work as a result of his dubbing, Mr. Dugdale said.

      “His deception actually caused real harm to people,” he said.

      Reporters were barred from the courtroom but were allowed to watch the proceedings on three video monitors from a separate court facility. Seen on the video monitors, Mr. Nakoula, wearing his white protective custody prison smock, sat slouched between Mr. Seiden and an Arabic interpreter.

      Judge Snyder noted at the start of the hearing that Mr. Nakoula had recently sent her a letter in Arabic but that she had not read it because she had been looking for the “appropriate procedure to fund a translator.” Asked if he would like to speak about the contents of the letter in court, Mr. Nakoula declined.

      Mr. Nakoula was arrested in September and was ordered held without bail. Out of concern for his safety, he has been kept in protective custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center here. A string of Muslim religious leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan have offered bounties for the killing of the film’s maker.

      Delete
    12. For what it's worth, Here is an October 2013 essay about Nakoula:

      The Benghazi Patsy. Excerpt:

      ... After Benghazi, the administration was evidently filled with a fierce resolve — to bring Nakoula Basseley Nakoula to justice. Charles Woods, the father of a Navy SEAL killed in Benghazi, said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told him when his son’s body returned to Andrews Air Force Base: “We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.”

      Lo and behold, Nakoula was brought in for questioning by five Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies at midnight, eventually arrested and held without bond, and finally thrown into jail for a year. He sits in La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Texas right now, even as the deceptive spin that blamed his video for the Benghazi attack looks more egregious by the day.

      [...]

      A violation of probation, though, usually produces a court summons and doesn’t typically lead to more jail time unless it involves an offense that would be worth prosecuting in its own right under federal standards. Not for Nakoula....

      Delete
  10. Back in the day, I would've watched this fandango. Nowadays, I think horrific events will occur whether we watch or not, so why bother.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cube,
      Nowadays, I think horrific events will occur whether we watch or not, so why bother.

      Accurate assessment.

      Delete
  11. The Party of the Left –– aka the Democrats or Dictocrats rather –– claims to have "humanistic" aims behind all its pet projects. I suppose they soon will claim that anyone who opposes their agenda is NOT HUMAN. ;-)

    That beetle-shelled b-tch who spent eleven hours on the hot seat expressing nothing but fake "concern," and pseudo-empathy for the victims of her aloof incompetence, and cold contempt for those who dared to question the motives for her activities as Secretary of State has been proclaimed a "winner" simply because she is so frigid, and so calculating she is incapable of feeling empathy, remorse, contrition or concern for anyone or anything but her lifelong determination to become The Most Powerful Woman in the World.

    If such behavior and such a temperament can inspire applause, admiration, and widespread support, you KNOW we are so far gone we may NEVER be able to reclaim our rightful heritage.

    Yesterday's hearing on Benghazi was a HORROR SHOW. It's tragic that we've become so acclimated to daily doses of outrage and incessant insults to our intelligence as The New Norm, that few-if-any recognized what they saw for what it truly was.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FT,
      Love that paragraph about the beetle-shelled b-tch!

      Yet, she's on her way to the White House. The mainstream media are her biggest water carriers.

      Delete
  12. From day one of my eligibility, I have been registered as an Independent.

    It is my view that aligning with a political party simply because is it one's "party of choice" is outside the spirit of the Constitution.

    Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  13. SF,
    I'm shouting at the Benghazi panel through my computer screen: "Get to the f'ing smoking gun already!!!

    NO KIDDING!

    There is no smoking gun.

    I think that there is a smoking gun -- in a sense.

    It seems clear that the-film-cause-the-attack-on-Benghazi narrative was cooked up to cover up something.

    I am wary of WND as a source, but yesterday before the hearings started, I read this:

    Obama and Hillary Tried To Blame Benghazi on "God Vs. Allah" Video Before "Innocence of Muslims", which could be true. Judicial Watch isn't nearly as discredited an WND.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you really want to keep on with this?

      Think about it. The committee managed to make Hillary Clinton a sympathetic candidate. That's without even considering she may well have come out of this as the winner.

      Hear the voices? That's your corner men yelling, "Stay down, stay down."

      Delete
    2. Duck
      Do you really want to keep on with this?

      I am not keeping on (as you put it). I'm posting about what interests me.

      I'm also providing a catalog of the devolution of America. You know how I make my living, so I'm ever the teacher -- even in the face of hopelessness.

      Delete
    3. The American people are over-saturated with political corruption, allegations, investigations, it's the cry wolf syndrome, the people have become desensitized to it.

      Delete
    4. Finntann,
      Yes, desensitization is involved.

      Delete
  14. "Was or was not the exchange between Rep. Jordan and Hillary Clinton a gotcha moment?"

    I would say that is a matter of perception. Those seeking the truth will say YES. Those suffering from the illusion that this fraud has any credibility will say NO. That said, if SUBTERFUGE is a new and desirable criterion for POTUS, she is a shoo-in!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jon,
      The American people are snoozing. So much for the Information Age!

      Delete
  15. From the Huff Po's Sister Of Glen Doherty: Hillary Told My Family Over His Casket We Should Feel Sorry For ‘Poor, Uneducated’ Libyan Protesters Behind Attack:

    “She spoke to my family about how sad we should feel for the Libyan people because they are uneducated, and that breeds fear, which breeds violence and leads to protest,” Quigley recalled on Thursday. She added that she thought “it was very strange” for Clinton to mention that. “When I think back now to that day and what she knew, you know, it shows me a lot about her character that she would choose, in that moment, to basically perpetuate what she knew was untrue.”

    ReplyDelete
  16. ANITA posted this at my blog. I think it's worth repeating:

    The Hillary Clinton So Called Benghazi Testimony!

    Why didn’t they ask Donald Trump if Obama and Hillary Clinton had Kept our Diplomats Safe?

    I read where one poster, said than Richard Nixon’s Editing of Tapes was worse than Hillary’s “ private server” kit and caboodle, pack of lies about her emails! Don’t’ you just love it when these Liberal’s dig up stories from the dead! Or Blame either the previous administration or the already dead!

    Well as they say, lets look at the video tape!

    For those who want a taste of what the questioning will looks like, here is a interpretation of what it will be like, So What Differences Will It make?”

    In spite of Kevin McCarthy’s inopportune, and stupid remark that the Committee had Hillary Clinton’s candidacy in mind, and said the whole thig was purely political. Lets not forget that the attack could have been anticipated and could have been avoided.

    While I feel that I already know what happened in Benghazi, it is unlikely that the public will ever know the full truth and the participants who were as guilty as sin will be found to be NOT guilty However, already knowing this as an American citizen here are some of the questions I would like to be answered!

    Who concocted, conceived, and put-out the concocted “video” story and why was that narrative necessary when the truth was readily available?

    Why was there an attempt to cover-up or obscure the actual activities related to the Benghazi attack?

    Were documents that were to be made available to the Accountability Review Board inspected prior to their transfer to the Review Board and were any of those documents withheld from the Board?

    Who was involved in inspecting these documents and making decisions on what documents that were to be withheld?

    Who told the Accountability Review Board that the Secretary of State and others were not to be questioned and on what basis was that decision made?

    Why was the Department of State not forthcoming on providing information to this Congressional Committee and explaining that the requested principal’s emails were contained on devices beyond control of the Department of State and could not be made available in a timely manner?

    And most importantly, WHY did Hillary and UN Secretary Susan Rice’s claim to the press, and the American public that the attack on the Benghazi compound killing Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans was due to an anti-Muslim youtube video after already KNOWING it was a complete lie?


    So Mr. Liberal, PLEASE, don’t tell me about Nixon’s tape when the Benghazi Scandal Is “Obama's, and Hillary’s Watergate” But Only Worse! Watergate didn’t Murder 4 American’s! And don’t anybody tell me that Hillary Clinton would make “an excellent president.” Because I am NOT buying that for one second!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FT,
      WHY did Hillary and UN Secretary Susan Rice’s claim to the press, and the American public that the attack on the Benghazi compound killing Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans was due to an anti-Muslim youtube video after already KNOWING it was a complete lie?

      The missing piece of the puzzle!

      I could speculate, but I can't even begin to support those speculations with evidence of any kind.

      It doesn't make sense, though, that the cover up was all about the November 2012 Election. After all, the Benghazi consulate was in a dangerous place, so an attack thereon wasn't surprising per se.

      Delete
  17. STARBOARD posted this at my blog. I think it's worth repeating here (edited by me).


    Now you know why [Hillary] demanded this hearing be open to the public. All the others that have been deposed were in private. She ... needed the theatrics because that is what they sell –– theater.

    Of course, immediately after, the media [pundits] told us how [wonderfully well] she did! Finally, knowing she lied to the families of the victims as well as the public about the video, didn´t even make it [through] the fog of nonsense.

    My hope now is that when she touts her accomplishments we can at least hear how it seemed [no issues of substance ever] came to her for decisions, so how competent [could] she be?

    And yet, the Femocrats and media will [continue to] support the old gal. Like Obama, she has the ability to do or say anything regardless of the content or consequences, and will receive a pass. I thought there for a moment that the old battle axe was in trouble. My mistake. I see now that this hearing has rejuvenated her.

    Biden´s decision cleared the way and she is on a roll. God help us! We will have to witness another farcical narrative driven by a dishonest media proclaiming her nomination in the bag, the winning brilliance of her campaign, and the certain defeat of any opponent.

    The drumbeat starts now. Her campaign will be built on the bodies of four dead Americans and the proven lie she told to their families and [to us]. Gird your loins, Hillary [seems slated] to be the final nail in the coffin of this nation barring divine intervention.

    Hillary and pretty much this entire administration and the Democrat Party are incompetent and destructive because their socialistic ideology is inherently wrong-headed and unworkable. When they ... fail to do what is right [to] protect America and Americans, they scramble to produce an excuse or blame someone else. Hillary and Barack are very good at making excuses, terrible and producing anything worthwhile.

    Hillary has been caught red-handed failing to protect our ambassador and then lying about it to save face. She [has failed at her job], just like President Obama, yet [both]will continue to believe they have done nothing wrong. Their arrogance and high opinion of [themselves] is stunning. They [apparently] believe they are superior [to the rest of us] and [that] we are [stupid] for not trusting them.

    The Benghazi hearings [were] a failure, but what really happened is a liar continued to tell her lies and was able to convince herself and her blind followers that she was victorious. Barack does the same thing.

    Very few people had a change of mind about her. Even when they know she is lying, they will forgive her and cast their vote for her because they share her [political orientation, and apparent belief that winning is the only thing of importance], [so they] actually feel empathy for her.


    [Democrats] are the most ignorant people on earth; ignorant because they are being played like fiddles by a party that [has no respect for] truth and has [bought their loyalty by promising an endless stream of "free stuff" at the expense of "the rich," whom they have demonized, even as they cynically draw sustenance from that very class.

    They have used the public treasury to distribute monthly government checks and subsidies, which s[future generations] will have to pay back.

    They have legalized and [advocated self-destructive behaviors holding no one accountable for his or her misdeeds. Those enthralled by the policies generated by Democrats are literally giving away their rights and freedoms to a party that will use the power gained to enslave the rest of us.]

    [If these machinations are not strictly illegal, by all that holy they ought to be.]

    ReplyDelete
  18. I just made this comment over at FT's site, and might as well say the same thing here at my own site....

    I've been puzzled as to why the Obama administration's insistence on blaming Benghazi on a "film."

    Clearly, the film was not the cause of the attack on Benghazi.

    And I have found it impossible to believe that the cover story was created to guarantee Obama's re-election in 2012.

    But it's not realistic to think that the cover-up was engineered for Election 2012, IMO. After all, Libya was -- and is -- a dangerous place. Therefore, an attack on our consulate there should not have come as a surprise in the first place.

    What is reasonable: the cover-up was engineered to guarantee Hillary a run at the White House in 2016.

    And those 600 requests for additional security being denied? Same principle! If Hillary's State Department had deployed more security, word would have gotten out that "Hillary's War" was ill-conceived.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ms. Clinton is a beetle-shelled B-tch. But to further clarify, she is a dung beetle rolling the ball of excrement along with her nose.

    It matters not how enormous the ball of sh-t . Her adoring fans always await her.


    The Last English Prince

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And...if I had the gift of creating graphics, I'd create one to go along with your comment, Prince.

      Delete
    2. I have contacted one of my friends with the expertise to create the graphic. **wink**

      Delete
  20. @Prince,

    "Her adoring fans" are a clear and dangerous threat to the entire Country; including themselves. Your "dung beetle" analogy is SPOT-ON !

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Dung beetles play a remarkable role in agriculture. By burying and consuming dung, they improve nutrient recycling and soil structure.[17] They also protect livestock, such as cattle, by removing the dung which, if left, could provide habitat for pests such as flies. Therefore, many countries have introduced the creatures for the benefit of animal husbandry. In developing countries, the beetles are especially important as an adjunct for improving standards of hygiene. The American Institute of Biological Sciences reports that dung beetles save the United States cattle industry an estimated US$380 million annually through burying above-ground livestock feces"

    On second thought, Dung Beetles actually have redeeming qualities unlike the Fraud In A Pantsuit; who has NONE! As a result the comparison is an affront to Dung Beetles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jon,
      I know! But think of the possibilities of such a graphic! LOL.

      Delete
    2. I can't wait to see the graphic.

      Delete
    3. Jon,
      It'll be a while, I think. Everybody has crazy schedules.

      Delete
  23. It's just not news, it's all talk and nothing new. Everyone knows that the Clinton's and Obama's are a bunch of low life lying scum that look to fill their pockets and those of their sycophants.

    The sad part is those that would vote for them knowing the truth while invoking nostrums to rationalize their duplicity (voters included), i.e. "who can know the truth", "all politicians are dirty", "it's Bushes fault, he lied about WMDs"...and on...and on.

    You can't spout crap without having a mouthful!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Warren,
      It really is madness. There is no way to reason with voters who rationalize to the extent that these fools do. I've given up on that score.

      Delete
  24. The hildebeast clearly perjured herself/itself. Come on repubblekins, go get it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kid,
      How often are politicians held accountable for perjury?

      But, of course, you're right: Hildebeast did commit perjury.

      Delete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective