Posted on 10/25/2015 9:50:10 AM PDT by Republicanprofessor
I have been thinking about Thursday’s Benghazi hearing a great deal. I listened to most of it, and I have been reading a great deal of commentary about it. Yes, Hillary behaved herself very well. But we need to look behind her smiling façade to critically think about what we heard during the hearings. This is deeper than a simple “win” or “lose” pronouncement.
1) Deadly poor communication. Hillary admitted that her “friend” Ambassador Chris Stevens had no method of getting in touch with her directly: no email, no cell phone, no FAX number, not even a street address. Then who was responsible for responding to the 600 emails Stevens’ sent asking for more security? At the hearing, Clinton laughed at his request to use the barricades (which the Brits had abandoned) to reinforce security at the Benghazi consulate. I don’t think his death is a laughing matter. In addition, another question I have: were the former SEALS held up at the annex because of an inability to communicate with whomever was in charge to okay their rescue of Stevens, Sean Smith and others? I do feel that Stevens and Smith could have been rescued from that smoke-filled room if the SEALS had left when they were ready to. But instead they were forced to wait until “Bob” gave the go ahead. (See the book 13 hours in Benghazi for more about this.)
2) Inadequate response to the attack: “How, during an 8-hour attack, does she speak with the president only once and not speak with the secretary of defense or the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at all, yet claim there was nothing the military could have done? I can be in London in six hours, yet in the first hour of the attack can she determine not a single military asset would get to Benghazi in time in a region marinating in our military assets? She can say these things only because she knows they won’t be fact-checked. “I don’t think she acted out of malice. I think she was following orders. Those orders would have come from President Obama. The complete lack of immediate action tells me they were both overwhelmed. Two novices at the levers of power in times of high stress didn’t perform well. No surprise there.” http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2015/10/25/if-we-had-an-honest-media-n2070643 The Counterterrorism Task Force was not even convened during this attack.
3) Video lies. So, instead of actually helping our military respond to the Benghazi attacks, Hillary figures out a video lie to tell. However, she was able to notify Chelsea Clinton, and the prime minister of Egypt, on the night of the Benghazi attacks, that it was an Al Quaeda group that was responsible. Then she moved forward to figure what lie to spin about the video while our men were still under fire, making no effort to rescue them. Then she continued the video lies for another 10 days after the attack. The only reason do to so was to enhance the re-election chances of Obama, whose line was that “Al Quaeda was on the run.” My question is this: what other lies are being spun during this election cycle so that she can be president?
4) Law breaker: Not only did Clinton break email security laws, by sending classified material through her own server while Secretary of State, but she also broke the 1998 law about secretaries of state being responsible for security at all embassies, consulates, etc. Will she be held accountable? The sad thing is that she may be elected president instead. This video succinctly, and sadly, shows why she may not be held accountable, especially if the electorate refuses to educate itself about these issues. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvEhSkRG9f8
5) Can any liberals tell us what Clinton’s accomplishments are that entitle her to the presidency? The Middle East has fallen apart (and the arms shipments out of Benghazi to the Syrian rebels may have facilitated this). She is incapable of using secure communications systems, and this scares me in terms of her presidency and what hackers and despots around the world will learn through her incompetence. Since she and her husband left the White House, “broke” she says, she now has four mansions and is worth $21 million. What influence was peddled when she was Secretary of State? And how does the “charity” of the Clinton Foundation get away with only 3% of their revenue actually being used for charity?
If Clinton was a Republican, can you imagine how she would be treated by the Democrats and by the press?
6) So, for something completely different: another side of the Benghazi hearings: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/trey-gowdy-just-elected-hillary-clinton-president-20151023 My favorite quote from this Rolling Stone article is this:
“But there is one overriding principle that does animate and define the Clinton campaign, and that's keeping Republicans out of office. For years, this has been the Democratic Party's stock answer for every sordid legislative compromise, every shameless capitulation to expediency, every insulting line of two-faced stump rhetoric offered to get over: We have to do this to beat the Republicans.
“I never bought that argument, for a lot of reasons, but Trey Gowdy made it look pretty good Thursday. Those idiots represent everything that is wrong not just with the Republican Party, but with modern politics in general. It's hard to imagine a political compromise that wouldn't be justified if its true aim would be to keep people like those jackasses out of power.”
My final comment: it is most unfortunate that American politics has come to this: a horse race where our “leaders” use every sleazy tactic to win, including vile insults, instead of actually discussing and debating policies and their ramifications during an election cycle.
Yes, Hillary behaved herself very well.
Did she really?? We saw the spectacle of Hillary going into full blown cackle mode when asked about where she was the night of the attack, with full display of horse teeth.
We also saw numerous displays of Hillary leaning her head on her hand or chin on hand, displaying body language to indicate that she didn’t take these proceedings seriously.
But, yes, I know, the media concluded that Hillary came out on top and comported herself well.
The actual difference will show a year later. You can use the clips of Hillary cackling about a dead man.
Her brazen and obvious lies were disgraceful. Gowdy’s treating them with respect was even worse.
Benghazi ping.
Let Republicanprofessor know if you want on or off this ping list.
If she skates, I think Trump will investigate assuming he is elected.
“the media concluded that Hillary came out on top and comported herself well.”
It wasn’t Hillary Clinton who came out on top, it was her charade and debacle of lies that came out on top. Imagine how proud she must be that it worked so well for her.
What were the private security contractors doing in Libya in the first place?
From all accounts I've read, these men weren't even assigned to guard the embassy. Security at U.S. embassies is the responsibility of the U.S. Marine Corps, not a private security detachment comprised of former Navy SEALS.
Great question! So many questions....I hope we eventually find all the answers.
About those "classified" emails. She testified when asked who were the people that chose to pick which emails to release. Was it all the Attorneys sitting behind you? YES was her answer.
How are they allowed to SEE even one of those emails, and make a determination of any kind. All emails going to SOS are by common sense thinkers "Classified".
I am sure this was not lost on the Committee. I think Jordan was the one asking her on this. He is sharp as a tack and don't miss a beat, so glad he acknowledged "all" those attorneys sitting behind her, and they saw Claffied information? OOPS.
Here’s the problem... democrats like liars and thugs... they march in favor of killers. They march FOR liars.
If we prove Hillary’s a cheat - a liar - an untrustworthy person she becomes the Queen of Lowlifes... Who do you think props up the white liberal elites who run the democrat party?
What were the private security contractors doing in Libya in the first place?
___
In a nutshell, Hitlery’s State Department, in conjunction with the CIA, was illegally funneling arms from Benghazi through Turkey to the rebels in Syria. An effective security detail would have drawn unwanted attention to their unauthorized activities. Those individuals involved, including Ambassador Stevens, I believe, were fully cognizant of the dangers involved as well as the illegality of it. However, the people involved didn’t deserve to be abandoned when it all fell apart.
Look at the timeline.
Hillary and Obama were desperately searching for a lie about the REASON the enemy attacked us BEFORE the attack on the CIA facility.
When Hillary and Obama were cooking up that lie, the only thing anyone knew was that the facility where the Ambassador was had been attacked.
They didn’t have to coverup the CIA facility or operation when they were desperately concocting and putting out the lie about the video.
The timeline convicts them.
They weren’t trying to coverup for the government, they were lying to coverup for themselves.
She’s done.
Any discussion of the hearing has to be prefaced by a mention of Kevin McCarthy’s sabatoge and sinking of the entire Bengazi hearing effort. I have my suspicions about both the timing and the content of the statement. I don’t think it was a gaff, he was paying someone off. Was it for good treatment under a Democratic Presidency and Congress.
The liberal narrative is that Hillary has not been convicted of anything. That is why you have to take a step back and look at Hillary’s pattern of compulsive lying her entire public life. Her obnoxious cackle/laugh response to serious questions should demonstrate to any sane person she is unfit to protect the USA.
“we” will. The rest of America won’t.
I’ve tried more than enough cases to know that perception is EVERYTHING. Gowdy and his clown car blew it.
“””Hillary admitted that her “friend” Ambassador Chris Stevens had no method of getting in touch with her directly: no email, no cell phone, no FAX number, not even a street address.”””
Not to defend Hillary, but do any of the Ambassadors have a method of getting in touch with Hillary directly?
It seems there would be one or several under-Secretaries of State who are the contact person for the many Ambassadors.
I thought the most important news from the hearing was the fact Hillary had told many people that the video had nothing to do with the attack while at the same time was lying to the American public and saying the video was the cause.
The only thing I have ever read about the attack in Bengazi that made any sense was the plot to have Amb Stevens kidnapped in order to exchange him for the blind Sheik. All the background narratives make no sense without that. Why Stevens could not get protection, why the CIA as deliberately delayed. What went wrong was the fire that killed Stevens, so the muzzies just finished off the rest of them. There has been a lot more of the background on how the video got made in the first place. Sorry I can’t recall all of it and I didn’t save it, but there were connections that were never addressed by the Committee because they probably don’t know about it. Wish I could remember where I got that from. It made sense of the whole affair.
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.