Soon to be ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared before Senate and House committees today to answer questions about the Benghazi debacle. As might be expected, virtually nothing was forthcoming from Mrs. Clinton and virtually nothing was learned by the public.
“The secretary battled tough criticism from lawmakers throughout the day. In one of the final jabs of the session, Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., told her, ‘Madame Secretary, you let the consulate become a death trap.”
Mrs. Clinton, of course, denied ever seeing any correspondence begging for security reinforcements. Fox continued:
“The biggest flash point Wednesday came during morning testimony.
Republican Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson claimed the department could have ‘easily’ determined what happened that night by interviewing staffers who were evacuated. He was referring to the administration’s initial claim that the attack sprung out of a protest. It was later determined there was no protest on the ground in Benghazi. Diplomatic security agents said as much to the FBI during interviews on Sept. 14, despite administration claims to the contrary two days later.
‘We were misled that there were supposedly protests and something sprang out of that,’ Johnson said. ‘The American people could have known that (there was no protest) within days, and they didn’t know that.’
At that point, Clinton began to raise her voice.
‘With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,’ she said.
‘I understand,’ Johnson said.
Clinton continued to speak, raising her voice and gesturing: ‘Was it because of a protest or is it because of guys out for a walk one night and they decide they go kill some Americans?
What difference, at this point, does it make?’
Clinton, lowering her voice, then said it is the administration’s job to ‘figure out what happened’ and prevent it from happening again.’
It might be difficult to provide a more stark and obvious example of the utter contempt with which the Obama Administration holds not only the Congress, but particularly the American people. Mrs. Clinton’s performance–and it was a performance–was not that of a dedicated public servant, a person who understands that the American people are their employers, but of an arrogant bureaucrat who considers themselves not only smarter and more moral than the people, but very much above the law and utterly untouchable.
Mrs. Clinton played the sympathy card, choking up when she threw in the faces of her Congressional questioners that she met survivors of those killed at Benghazi when their caskets arrived in America. One might be forgiven for thinking the experience might be just a bit more difficult and more meaningful for the survivors, to say nothing of those murdered by terrorists due to Clinton’s incompetence and malfeasance.
Notice Mrs. Clinton wrapping herself in the shrouds of “four dead Americans,” following up that observation by demanding to know “what difference, at this point, does it make?” She was referring to whether their deaths were the result of a spontaneous protest over a video trailer virtually no one ever saw–a lie the Obama Administration pushed for weeks–or a planned terrorist attack–the truth.
What difference does it make?
(1) Our employees, the President, the Secretary of State, the UN Ambassador, the President’s Press Secretary, and innumerable other administration officials lied, blatantly and repeatedly about a supposed spontaneous protest. They lied for weeks. There was never a protest of any kind.
(2) To this day, the President and his Administration continue to stonewall and lie about what happened in every way possible.
(3) Mrs. Clinton would have us believe that no one hesitated to provide help to our embattled heroes in Behghazi despite voluminous and entirely credible evidence to the contrary, including the fact that help was never given to them and they died.
(4) It is entirely likely that they were denied help because Mr. Obama wanted to retain the fiction that his Libya policy–whatever it was and/or is–was a success, and Al Qaeda is essentially defeated and out of business. Lives were cynically traded for political fiction.
(5) Mrs. Clinton claims to take responsibility, but responsibility requires not only accepting praise, but punishment. There is no possibility of punishment for Mrs. Clinton; by mouthing the word “responsibility,” she does quite the opposite, secure in the knowledge she will never face the slightest sanction for her incompetence and political gamesmanship while others paid with their lives.
(6) The American people, the employers of everyone in the federal government, have every right to know precisely who said what when, who did what when and who failed to do what when. This is not a hard concept. In the real world, it is a simple matter to find out who did what, when it was done and why. Mrs. Clinton is an integral part of a conspiracy of silence to cover up not only the politically shameful, but likely, the criminal.
(7) No woman who would allow honorable Americans to die for political expediency should remain free, and she certainly should never be a candidate for president. About this, we must be certain; we must know the whole truth. Either she and Mr. Obama authorized every possible resource to immediately come to the aid of those fighting for their lives, or they did not. It’s not a difficult concept.
It matters because honorable Americans are dead, and because it is highly likely that Mrs. Clinton is in part directly responsible for their deaths. Remember that she told at least one of those survivors over the casket of their loved one that she would get the unfortunate video maker whose efforts had nothing at all to do with the attacks–and there seems no question she had to know it even as she cruelly lied to those she pretends to cry over.
But above all, it matters because unless people like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are forced to tell the truth, it will happen again, and again, and again.
There is nothing to figure out. Mrs. Ciinton and President Obama know exactly what happened and who said and did what. That’s the real problem. That’s why they continue to stonewall. That’s why Mrs. Clinton pretends to be emotional and outraged. That’s why the woman in charge of the State Department is willing to say she knows nothing; it’s better to appear to be so incompetent others died because of it than to admit the truth.
Stately McDaniel Manor 
Mike, thank you for this entry. You said what needs to be said. We have entered an age where the highest officials in this current administration believe that they are not only above the law, but that they have no responsibility to be truthful to the American public. Obama has reached the level of Julius Cesear.
While watching Hillary yesterday, I was reminded of those infamous words, uttered by Hillary herself, that her testimony “requires the willing suspension of disbelief.”
The scandal behind Benghazi is so much more than just the deaths of four dedicated Americans (and I am not trivalizing their deaths). The scandal is the entire Libyan operation itself. Hillary testified that the “host” nation is responsible for security for our embassies. Well, that’s fine and dandy in Vienna, or London, or even in Berlin. But Benghazi was the hottest of Middle Eastern hotspots and belied the narrative of Libyan success that the Obama administration had been spewing for months. Although we have Marines guarding the embassy in Vienna, Obama and Hillary decided to outsource the security in Benghazi, hiring a Welsh firm, Blue Mountain, to handle Benghazi security. Blue Mountain, in turn, hired the infamous February 17th Martyr’s Brigade.
To any rational thinking person whenever you have the term “Martyr” in the name of an Islamic organization, you can bet money that it is not celebrating democracy. In fact, the Feb. 17th Martyr’s Brigade is quite infamous on its own, having been named after the attack on the Italian embassy on Feb. 17, 2011 and is a spin-off of AQIM and Ansar al Sharia is a spin-off of the Feb. 17th Martyr’s Brigade. Nevermind that it was Benghazi that gave the biggest supply of “freedom” fighters against U.S. forces in Iraq. We are now reading reports how the same “group” that attacked the U.S. compound in Benghazi are now relocating, with U.S. supplied weapons, to Syria.
And while Hillary tried to dump the responsibility of the pathetic security in Benghazi, which was comprised of four Feb. 1th jihadists, on lack of funding, it was the Obama administration that sublet the security contract to the Welsh for a whopping $387,413.00. You see, this administration had better things to do with the State Departments money. Things like $7.9 billion for Obama’s Global Heath Initiative; $2.9 billion for international debt relief; $2.2 to strengthen democratic institutions in Pakistan and of course, the ever popular Mosque renovation program rebuilding mosques all across the Middle East.
So, the real scandal is the fact that Chris Stevens, and the other three Americans, were made nothing more than ducks in a shooting gallery and when the smoke clears and the truth is known, we will learn that we, the U.S. was providing the guns for the jihadists to slaughter those brave Americans.
Good article, Mike.
I would add, however, that Sec. Clinton’s “what difference does it make” moment was not capitalized on by those questioning her. Her script specifically outlined two separate scenarios, i.e. a video protest or people walking around, yet neither of those are the truth. This was a planned attack and that is the difference that it makes. Someone should have called her on it and detailed exactly why it may not make a difference now politically, but certainly made a difference, then. They should have also called her out on her obvious intentional disregard for those inquring about the reality of that day and her apparent obtuseness about the stakes of that attack, the planning that went into carrying it out and the lack of a forthright response from the top of our military and political command structure when they learned of the attack in the first place.
This was all political theater at its worst. It could, and should, have been used to highlight this administration’s, and Clinton’s, ineptitude on foreigh policy.
Dear justincaselawgic:
There’s a reason Republicans are widely called “the stupid party.” I’m always amazed and disgusted when people don’t ask the most obvious, elementary questions or followup questions. Truly an inept performance by the Republicans in the House and the Senate, and don’t get me started on John McCain…
I’m right there with you, brother.