Maybe They Threatened to Kidnap Huma This Time!

Reaganite Republican ^ | October 16, 2012 | Reaganite Republican

[Reaganite Republican]

Or: since when does a Clinton take the fall for anybody...?

Just as the Obama regime and Hillary's rudderless State Department were slipping into all-out war over who's to blame for serial incompetence in Libya (and after Axelrod was raked-over-the coals on Fox News Sunday re. Administration stonewalling on Benghazigate and the incompatible accounts of Susan Rice, Hillary, Biden, and Obama), suddenly it appears Hillary has attempted to take the fall while speaking to reporters in Peru... but why?

Isn't she the one that proclaimed unambiguously in the 2008 debates that 'the buck stops in the Oval Office'? And aren't both her and her husband about the most self-serving people on the planet?  After first saying that the White House fairy-tale about a 'protest' being behind the Benghazi attack was never the State Department's assessment, NOW she says the buck stops
with her- huh?

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton most certainly does bear considerable responsibility for the death of four Americans and a damaging intelligence loss, and it's refreshing to see anybody in this vile regime take responsibility for anything. But that's not the same as wanting us to think that the White House didn't turn down repeated requests for additional security at the Benghazi consulate or Obama didn't intentionally mislead us all as to the cause of the 9/11/2012 attack for weeks.

Hillary also covered for UN Ambassador Susan Rice's BS version of events, blaming her blatantly misleading prior statements on 'the fog of war'... even though it's known that both Clintons bear a considerable grudge against Rice due to early support for Obama '08 (she served in the Clinton Administration).

Alas, recall that rumor where Team Obama supposedly threatened Chelsea Clinton's life in order to keep Bubba quiet in 2008 re. Obama's eligibility -or lack thereof- after he let it slip-out he 'knows' that Obama is 'not qualified' to be president?

Yesterday's abrupt, unexpected 180° indeed evokes memories of Hillary's surprising withdrawal from those 2008 Dem primaries ('surprising' unless you were already aware that recalcitrant Hillary delegates -particularly blacks- were threatened right on the Convention floor in Denver if they didn't switch their support from to Obama, and quick... while bad things (like a dirt nap) happened to some of those who didn't, for example
Stephanie Tubbs-Jones).

Anybody seen Huma around lately?

Smitty @ The Other McCain:

Stunned. Still nothing at HillBuzz. Wow. I mean, Hillary permitted herself to be set on a shelf in 2008, and now this? 

One can only speculate on the nature of the dirt #OccupyResoluteDesk has on her, to twist out that kind of
mea culpa from Hillary...

As for Hill's accounting of her own motivations, she says she's trying to 'avoid any game of political gotcha'... when just a few days ago her State Department directly contradicted WH lies and forced Obama to drop the farcical 'movie caused it' bit right then and there...

Doug Ross @Journal:

"Political gotcha"?  An Ambassador is dead and the administration trotted out a series of lies from the outset.

And the key questions remain unanswered:

• Who ordered security removed from Ambassador Stevens when he and other personnel were requesting more security?

• Who made up the story about the video and the non-protest in Libya?

• And why were the false stories promoted for weeks on end?

Four Americans are dead and more than a month has elapsed during which the administration has lied, evaded and misdirected.

Perhaps a few of these questions will be asked in in the remaining presidential debates.
Dare to dream.

Considering that tonight's debate concerns foreign policy, this topic surely warrants further discussion,  and soon...
wouldn't you say, Mitt?

Maggie's Notebook   The Other McCain   Western Journalism   Weekly Standard

DougRoss@Journal   BadBlue    Politico   FreakingNews   USA Today   ObamaFile

[Reaganite Republican]

*** PING ***

[tired&retired]

There is nothing that Obama could offer Hillary to fall on the sword so it must be blackmail....

Could be Huma

Could be her thesis at Welsley

Could be... any one of the deaths in her past..Vince Foster.....

[Internet Walnut]

Obama stash payoff.

[jimbo123]

Huma and Hussein set up Hillary to take the fall.

Huma and Hussein are allies.

Their goal has always been to resurrect the caliphate and eliminate Israel.

Huma used Hillary and was willing to munch carpet for overa a decade to advance the caliphate.

[SERKIT]

The promise of Hillary in the White House in 2016?

[Reaganite Republican]

There is nothing that Obama could offer Hillary to fall on the sword so it must be blackmail....

Could be Huma

Could be her thesis at Welsley

Could be... any one of the deaths in her past..Vince Foster.....

---

Exactly, she has ZERO loyalty -nor reason to have it- at this point, so it’s either THREATS or BLACKMAIL

The Clintons were probably proud to think of how ruthless they were until the Chicago Crew came around lol

[SERKIT]

The promise of Hillary in the White House in 2016?

[Jimmy Valentine]

This is so very reminicent of Janet "Flames" Reno murdering the Davidians at Waco.

She took responsibility too and there was no further action taken. News dropped it off the radar, and that was that.

Same thing will happen here. Clintons already have the "crack whore" media lined up to provide cover.

[Reaganite Republican]

“The promise of Hillary in the White House in 2016?”

____________________________________________________

Obama appears unable to secure it for himself, what credibility would a 2016 offer to Hillary have?

Also Hillary knows how short the expiration date is on an Obama promise, even if he could deliver

[Mercat]

I think Bill and Hillary cooked this up to make O look like a fool. The Clintons did not do this for O, they did it for themselves. Very Machiavellian.

[fortheDeclaration]

Exactly! What are the consequences of 'taking responsibilty'?

Why isn't she being asked to resign?

This is simply cover for Obama and costs her nothing.

But Americans know who is ultimately responsible.

[livius]

Hillary wouldn’t do this without the permission of or even pressure from Bill. If Obama has something on somebody, it’s Bill Clinton. The question is what he could possibly have that would be bad enough to interrupt Bill’s fantastically lucrative speaking career.

The other possibility is that Obama has offered something to Bill Clinton if Obama gets reelected that Bill really wants. Having Hillary throw herself under the bus appears to them to be the only way to protect Obama, so she was sacrificed for the cause. But again, what might Bill want? Ambassador to the UN, perhaps? Something that would give him more international clout?

Obama is relying very heavily on Bill’s support and in fact in the last debate, he cited Clinton so often you would have thought he was Bill’s VP candidate. So Hillary’s pointless act had to have had Bill’s approval and may even have been his idea.

I say pointless because everybody knows that she doesn’t create any policy herself, but is a mouthpiece for Obama, who is a mouthpiece in turn for Jarrett and the other radicals. This is such a transparent set up that it makes Obama look even worse, and I think Bill may have miscalculated this time.

[nuconvert]

She’ll take responsibility up to a point.
She’s leaving her job anyway, so why not?

[Former Proud Canadian]

Silly citizen. Do you think that anybody under 40 knows who Vince Foster was, or how he died?

[tired&retired]

I respectfully disagree as Hillary wears the pants in that marriage.

[Cowboy Bob]

When I watched Hillary declare that it was her responsibility, the first thing I thought of was Harry Truman: "The Buck Stops Here."

Hillary is showing "leadership" by accepting blame. This contrasts with Obama who will never accept responsibility.

Hillary: Leadership
Obama: NO Leadership

[arthurus]

Given the extreme felonies implicit in this situation, consider the fate of the nation should the kenyan still be President in February, And consider the lengths he could go to in order to ensure that he is, indeed, still the ruler in February. The only reason I can see that he might not be is that perhaps he does not yet have sufficient control of the military.

[phockthis]

sfl

[arthurus]

Huma used Hillary and was willing to munch carpet for overa a decade to advance the caliphate.

I think so. To think we had a choice of the kenyan or the clintons in 2008. McCain was never a possibility. Either he didn't want it or he got the word about the safety of him and his if he didn't take a dive. This election either marks the crucial node in the existence of the Republic or it is just the rulers beginning to fight among themselves before they have made de facto into de jure.