Skip to comments.Hillary Does Not Take Responsibility for Benghazi Attack. Transcript
Posted on 10/16/2012 10:35:03 AM PDT by xzins
Reporter Question: You say you dont want to play a blame game, but certainly theres a blame game going on in Washington. In fact, during the presidential debate, Vice President Biden said We didnt know. White House officials calling around saying Hey, this is a state department function. Are they throwing you under the bus?
Oh, of course not, you know -- look I take responsibility.
Im in charge of the state department 60,000+ people all over the world, 275 posts.
Uhh..the president and the vice-president , uh, certainly wouldnt be uhh knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals.
Theyre the ones that weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision.
Reporter Question: The intelligence community initially called it a protest. The state department never did. And you never did. This is where it now stands and as you know republicans are charging that this was a cover up (Hillary laughs) Was this a rush to judgment or was it bad intelligence as Vice President Biden suggests?
You know, Alise, I take a very different view of this. I have now for 20 years been very much in, uhh, the administration decision making, first with my husband, then after 9/11 working with President Bush, now, of course, in President Obamas cabinet.
In the wake of an attack like this, in the fog of war, theres always going to be confusion, and I think it is absolutely fair to say that everyone had the same intelligence.
Everyone who spoke (Reporter interjects: bad intelligence?) Well everyone who spoke tried to give the information that they had. As time has gone on, new information has changed, weve gotten more detail, but thats not surprising. That always happens.
(transcript can be checked against a number of videos, for example, http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hillary+clinton+i+take+responsibility+youtube&mid=3C2A1661E5026AA8E2D33C2A1661E5026AA8E2D3&view=detail&FORM=VIRE6
1a. Hillary answers the "under the bus comment" directly with her "of course not."
1b. The blame game part is then addressed "I take responsibility."
1c. To the part about Biden's "we didn't know", Hillary says that's the realm of "security professionals.... Theyre the ones that weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."
1d. Hillary has just laid this on the back of "security professionals."
2. The next question has to do with the quality of intelligence that was provided.
2a. Hillary says that in chaotic events information is foggy and gets adjusted.
So, in all of this, where does she take responsibility for "the attack?"
As an aside and a different discussion: Has Hillary Clinton just attempted a public emasculation of Barack Obama?
Your brain may be fogged up, but WE see clearly.
The fog of war timeline would be interesting, given that there’s little, if any, fog.
Everyone seems to have known, at least by the following morning, that this was a deliberate attack.
A wide range of officials then began the “mohammed video” scam that lasted days and days.
As I recall, Hillary herself alluded to the video in one of her public statements.
“Reporter Question: The intelligence community initially called it a protest. The state department never did. And you never did.”
Excuse me, did she not say it was a protest over a video? She did and continued to say this.
What’s going on here? Sounds like the reporter was bought off with pre arranged questions.
Tonight's debate has everything to do with what's happened with HRC yesterday and Rice today. Obama will deflect any questions. Candy Crowley, according to some sources has already screened the questions and may have decided not to allow Benghazigate tonight (according to Carole Simpson ABC News). If this is true, Romney will have to find an opening in another question to bring the issue up.
Unlike you, evidently, very few in the media actually read or listened to what Hillary’s precise words were .... what she actually said ... or more importantly, what she DIDN’T say.
I think Hillary made life more difficult, not less, for Obama and the campaign/administration.
I have now for 20 years been very much in, uhh, the administration decision making, first with my husband, then after 9/11 working with President Bush, now, of course, in President Obamas cabinet.
Gee:I never knew Hillary had worked with George Bush after 911. I bet George Bush didn’t know it either.
to be fair ( although why I am being fair to Hitlery I don’t know)
what she is taking responsibility for is the lack of security at the consulate. NOT the reported reasons for the attack
Juat like 0dumbo and ol Joe threw Hitlery under the bus for lack of secuirity she is throwing the intel community under the bus saying they said it was a protest.
ALL of it is BS
I can’t wait until the Intel community responds
She does not want to face an incumbent Romney in 2016, so she MUST support Obama’s reelection. Until Benghazi, she had managed to stay below the radar, not really doing anything bad or good. She even avoided overtly supporting Obama’s disastrous policies, staying mostly silent & out of the country.
A Clinton/Obama public disagreement over Benghazi would doom Obama’s reelection, & HRC knows any moron but Obama could turn around the economy & earn another 4 years, making her too old for 2020.
What she is doing, as is Obama, is avoiding the hard questions & stalling this thing for 3 more weeks, after which she can resign as she had previously announced.
No, she blames the security decisions on “security professionals.” Hillary takes NO BLAME for anything. Responsibility without accountability is a crock.
I don’t even see her taking responsibility for the security. She puts that off on “security professionals.”
I see her taking responsibility for the “blame game”, and in the 2nd question we discover what she means. She’s taking responsibility for “foggy communications.”
And, not even that really, because “that always happens.”
I remember when Janet Reno “took responsibility” for something or other. It had no practical implications, as if I took responsibility for World War II.
I can safely assume every freeper knew it was an attack the same day. I know I did. Come on, it was September 11th. There was no fog. Just an out in the open attack.
She did say it. So did Obama. Yet for some reason the press has only pinned it on this Rice person. I don’t get it.
As for “the intelligence community,” I don’t know. Maybe they said it. But of course if we ask for proof it’ll be classified and a few years from now somebody’ll leak it and we’ll then know they said just the opposite.
By the way, how come what the intelligence community says didn’t matter when Bush was president but now is impenetrable armour for the white house?
She "takes responsibility" in name only. "Taking responsibility" means accepting the consequences, and in typical Clinton fashion, she tries to do the former without doing the latter, hoping she gets away with it. I can't honestly say whether or not she gets away with it...Clintons always seem to get away with it....
Resign Hillary. That's how you take responsibility.
In the absence of an offer to step down the “I take full responsibility”trope is meaningless. Indeed it is less than meaningless since it is uttered for the sole purpose of stopping nagging questions.
From the minute it started the six-hour long attack on the consulate was known about in real time by hundreds of people in listening posts all over the world - including at the White House. There was no fog of war - they had real-time video from the consulate itself.
For six hours the White House and State watched and did nothing. They set up the consulate to fall and for the Ambassador to die - for their own reasons. However the end was delayed for hours by the intervention of two brave SEALs.
These men were the only US military assets who were able to intervene that night. No part of the vast US panoply of war received any orders from their cringing and unworthy CIC - so the SEALs acted without orders. They came over from another part of Benghazi and got over a score of people out. Their bravery cost them their lives.
'New information has changed'? They do continue to change their new information, don't they. She really means that "We make up the stories to suit the situation we're in. You know that, get used to it. Print it, the rubes will believe it".
I don't think obama can be emasculated, publicly or otherwise. He is already as effete, infantile and weak as any politician I have seen in my lifetime.
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.