Congratulations to Hillary Clinton!

[Rustic]

Hillary stood on point for a full 11 hour interview by the Benghazi committee, being the only witness being questioned. She stood calm, confident, and professional the entire time.

Nothing new came up at all in the Benghazi committee, lots of political theatre and partisan showdowns, but really there isn't anything that I'm aware of that could be used in this interview that could put Clinton into the negative.

I have to say that was quite an endurance test and Hillary came through on top. Congratulations on her well deserved win.

Amazing performance by Hillary

11 hours of "gotcha" and Republicans and they came up blank

Hillary once again showed she was the only adult in the room

One loopy bitch...

Hillary demonstrated to all that she is a fucking smart bitch taking on the best the GOP has to offer

The Republicans on the panel have been preparing for months to finally get Hillary. Hillary took them all on and calmly and professionally put them in their place

She came across as an loopy bitch to me, but then again anyone in a relationship with slick willy has to be touched in the head...

 

[whitehall]

People died and she blamed subordinates and the only thing sycophantic clintonites can say is "she stood calm confident and professional"? Is the freaking world still upside down to lefties?

 

[Nyvin]

"This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing do to with.”

-Hillary Clinton, September 14, 2012, at the Transfer of Remains Ceremony to Honor Those Lost in Attacks in Benghazi, Libya


Yeah, that's a fail.

There were attacks on 5 other US embassies directly resulting from protests over The Innocence of Muslims.

Correct, five other US embassies. No protests at the consulate in Benghazi, no mention of a video, just a planned terrorist attack. Remember, the consulate had been attacked numerous other times before the video ever surfaced. That alone says that the video had nothing whatsoever to do with it, and that this was the plan all along.

You know that even if they said it was a terrorist attack the next day it would change nothing....the four Americans would still be dead.

 

[TemplarKormac]

"This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing do to with.”

-Hillary Clinton, September 14, 2012, at the Transfer of Remains Ceremony to Honor Those Lost in Attacks in Benghazi, Libya


Yeah, that's a fail.

There were attacks on 5 other US embassies directly resulting from protests over The Innocence of Muslims.

Correct, five other US embassies. No protests at the consulate in Benghazi, no mention of a video, just a planned terrorist attack. Remember, the consulate had been attacked numerous other times before the video ever surfaced. That alone says that the video had nothing whatsoever to do with it, and that this was the plan all along.

You know that even if they said it was a terrorist attack the next day it would change nothing....the four Americans would still be dead.

Is there a point you're trying to make here?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Actually two revelations came to light.

1) She told the Egyptians hours after the attack that it was terrorism, she told Chelsea that it "was done by an Al-Qaeda like group", but then spent the next few days, including the casket ceremony of the four dead men blaming the attacks on a video.

Those two claims - that the video was in part a cause in the attack, and that it was "done by an al-qaeda-like group" are not mutually exclusive, and in fact both true.

2) The consulate sent 600 separate requests to the State Department for extra security, and none of them ever reached Clinton's desk.

Sorry.

Correct. Because diplomatic security requests aren't supposed go to the SoS's desk, they're supposed to go to the Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security's desk.

1) There were no protests in Benghazi that night over a video. None. It was a pre-planned, premeditated terrorist attack. So the former of your statement is false.

2) Under 22 USC 4865 or SECCA, she responsible for, or at least capable of, making security decisions for consulates like the one in Benghazi, especially decisions regarding the FEST teams. She was not allowed to delegate those duties to anyone else.

22 U.S.C. § 4865 (2)(B)(ii)(I) and (6)(A)

(2)Site selection

(B) Waiver authority

(i) In general

Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary of State may waive subparagraph (A) if the Secretary, together with the head of each agency employing personnel that would not be located at the site, determine that security considerations permit and it is in the national interest of the United States.

(ii) Chancery or consulate building

(I) Authority not delegable
The Secretary may not delegate the waiver authority under clause (i) with respect to a chancery or consulate building.

and

(6) State Department support

(A) Foreign Emergency Support Team

The Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) of the Department of State shall receive sufficient support from the Department, including—

(i) conducting routine training exercises of the FEST;

(ii) providing personnel identified to serve on the FEST as a collateral duty;

(iii) providing personnel to assist in activities such as security, medical relief, public affairs, engineering, and building safety; and

(iv) providing such additional support as may be necessary to enable the FEST to provide support in a post-crisis environment involving mass casualties and physical damage.

1. The leader of the attack disagrees with you, since that's apparently what he said as the attack was happening according to multiple eyewitnesses.

2. Nothing in that section of code says that the Secretary of State "cannot delegate" overseeing embassy security - and Hillary Clinton did not create the office of the Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, it's been a State Department office since 1985.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Hillary contacts Egypts Prime Minister shortly after the attacks and tells him we know this was a pre planned attack it was not about a video then she and the administration tells the public for weeks after that it was about a video. I'm not sure very many would consider that as a win.

Not "shortly after" - 24 hours after her first press conference on the matter (the one where she supposedly "blamed it on a video").

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

Everything.

Be specific.

 

[blackhawk]

Hillary contacts Egypts Prime Minister shortly after the attacks and tells him we know this was a pre planned attack it was not about a video then she and the administration tells the public for weeks after that it was about a video. I'm not sure very many would consider that as a win.

Not "shortly after" - 24 hours after her first press conference on the matter (the one where she supposedly "blamed it on a video").

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

If you don't know what the scandal is then you simply don't want to know saying we don't know would have changed the fact that she was saying one thing privately and another pubically especially given the public statement puts out a story that would be helpful to the administration in an election year where the private one would not and could have possibily hurt them.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

"This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing do to with.”

-Hillary Clinton, September 14, 2012, at the Transfer of Remains Ceremony to Honor Those Lost in Attacks in Benghazi, Libya


Yeah, that's a fail.

There were attacks on 5 other US embassies directly resulting from protests over The Innocence of Muslims.

Correct, five other US embassies. No protests at the consulate in Benghazi, no mention of a video, just a planned terrorist attack. Remember, the consulate had been attacked numerous other times before the video ever surfaced. That alone says that the video had nothing whatsoever to do with it, and that this was the plan all along.

Go back and re-read that quote from Hillary Clinton.

Perhaps it's a little weasley, but it's also clear that she's referring to separate events in the last week - the attack on Benghazi, and then "rage and violence directed at American embassies".

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Hillary contacts Egypts Prime Minister shortly after the attacks and tells him we know this was a pre planned attack it was not about a video then she and the administration tells the public for weeks after that it was about a video. I'm not sure very many would consider that as a win.

Not "shortly after" - 24 hours after her first press conference on the matter (the one where she supposedly "blamed it on a video").

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

If you don't know what the scandal is then you simply don't want to know saying we don't know would have changed the fact that she was saying one thing privately and another pubically especially given the public statement puts out a story that would be helpful to the administration in an election year where the private one would not and could have possibily hurt them.

There is no political advantage that could have been gained by misidentifying the cause of the attacks as an online video. It doesn't make any sense.

 

[bedowin62]

Actually two revelations came to light.

1) She told the Egyptians hours after the attack that it was terrorism, she told Chelsea that it "was done by an Al-Qaeda like group", but then spent the next few days, including the casket ceremony of the four dead men blaming the attacks on a video.

Those two claims - that the video was in part a cause in the attack, and that it was "done by an al-qaeda-like group" are not mutually exclusive, and in fact both true.

2) The consulate sent 600 separate requests to the State Department for extra security, and none of them ever reached Clinton's desk.

Sorry.

Correct. Because diplomatic security requests aren't supposed go to the SoS's desk, they're supposed to go to the Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security's desk.

1) There were no protests in Benghazi that night over a video. None. It was a pre-planned, premeditated terrorist attack. So the former of your statement is false.

2) Under 22 USC 4865 or SECCA, she responsible for, or at least capable of, making security decisions for consulates like the one in Benghazi, especially decisions regarding the FEST teams. She was not allowed to delegate those duties to anyone else.

22 U.S.C. § 4865 (2)(B)(ii)(I) and (6)(A)

(2)Site selection

(B) Waiver authority

(i) In general

Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary of State may waive subparagraph (A) if the Secretary, together with the head of each agency employing personnel that would not be located at the site, determine that security considerations permit and it is in the national interest of the United States.

(ii) Chancery or consulate building

(I) Authority not delegable
The Secretary may not delegate the waiver authority under clause (i) with respect to a chancery or consulate building.

and

(6) State Department support

(A) Foreign Emergency Support Team

The Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) of the Department of State shall receive sufficient support from the Department, including—

(i) conducting routine training exercises of the FEST;

(ii) providing personnel identified to serve on the FEST as a collateral duty;

(iii) providing personnel to assist in activities such as security, medical relief, public affairs, engineering, and building safety; and

(iv) providing such additional support as may be necessary to enable the FEST to provide support in a post-crisis environment involving mass casualties and physical damage.

1. The leader of the attack disagrees with you, since that's apparently what he said as the attack was happening according to multiple eyewitnesses.

2. Nothing in that section of code says that the Secretary of State "cannot delegate" overseeing embassy security - and Hillary Clinton did not create the office of the Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, it's been a State Department office since 1985.

Obama's own officials, (and the murdered Ambassador's own top deputy) disagrees with the "leader of the attack" too; saying the video was a "non-event" as a cause of the Benghazi attack

 

[Hossfly]

Hillary contacts Egypts Prime Minister shortly after the attacks and tells him we know this was a pre planned attack it was not about a video then she and the administration tells the public for weeks after that it was about a video. I'm not sure very many would consider that as a win.

Not "shortly after" - 24 hours after her first press conference on the matter (the one where she supposedly "blamed it on a video").

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

If you don't know what the scandal is then you simply don't want to know saying we don't know would have changed the fact that she was saying one thing privately and another pubically especially given the public statement puts out a story that would be helpful to the administration in an election year where the private one would not and could have possibily hurt them.

The Benghazi debacle became a big issue at the time because the Libs didn't want it to hamper Oshithead's re-election.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

"This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing do to with.”

-Hillary Clinton, September 14, 2012, at the Transfer of Remains Ceremony to Honor Those Lost in Attacks in Benghazi, Libya


Yeah, that's a fail.

There were attacks on 5 other US embassies directly resulting from protests over The Innocence of Muslims.

Correct, five other US embassies. No protests at the consulate in Benghazi, no mention of a video, just a planned terrorist attack. Remember, the consulate had been attacked numerous other times before the video ever surfaced. That alone says that the video had nothing whatsoever to do with it, and that this was the plan all along.

You know that even if they said it was a terrorist attack the next day it would change nothing....the four Americans would still be dead.

Is there a point you're trying to make here?

I think he's trying to point out that all of this has no purpose other than to trash Hillary Clinton.

 

[bedowin62]

Hillary contacts Egypts Prime Minister shortly after the attacks and tells him we know this was a pre planned attack it was not about a video then she and the administration tells the public for weeks after that it was about a video. I'm not sure very many would consider that as a win.

Not "shortly after" - 24 hours after her first press conference on the matter (the one where she supposedly "blamed it on a video").

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

If you don't know what the scandal is then you simply don't want to know saying we don't know would have changed the fact that she was saying one thing privately and another pubically especially given the public statement puts out a story that would be helpful to the administration in an election year where the private one would not and could have possibily hurt them.

There is no political advantage that could have been gained by misidentifying the cause of the attacks as an online video. It doesn't make any sense.

simply moronic denial. the attack was a clear contradiction of the Obama re-election theme that "terrorists are on the run"

 

[bedowin62]

"This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing do to with.”

-Hillary Clinton, September 14, 2012, at the Transfer of Remains Ceremony to Honor Those Lost in Attacks in Benghazi, Libya


Yeah, that's a fail.

There were attacks on 5 other US embassies directly resulting from protests over The Innocence of Muslims.

Correct, five other US embassies. No protests at the consulate in Benghazi, no mention of a video, just a planned terrorist attack. Remember, the consulate had been attacked numerous other times before the video ever surfaced. That alone says that the video had nothing whatsoever to do with it, and that this was the plan all along.

You know that even if they said it was a terrorist attack the next day it would change nothing....the four Americans would still be dead.

Is there a point you're trying to make here?

I think he's trying to point out that all of this has no purpose other than to trash Hillary Clinton.

except that Hillary herself didn't believe it was related to the video and said so

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Actually two revelations came to light.

1) She told the Egyptians hours after the attack that it was terrorism, she told Chelsea that it "was done by an Al-Qaeda like group", but then spent the next few days, including the casket ceremony of the four dead men blaming the attacks on a video.

Those two claims - that the video was in part a cause in the attack, and that it was "done by an al-qaeda-like group" are not mutually exclusive, and in fact both true.

2) The consulate sent 600 separate requests to the State Department for extra security, and none of them ever reached Clinton's desk.

Sorry.

Correct. Because diplomatic security requests aren't supposed go to the SoS's desk, they're supposed to go to the Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security's desk.

1) There were no protests in Benghazi that night over a video. None. It was a pre-planned, premeditated terrorist attack. So the former of your statement is false.

2) Under 22 USC 4865 or SECCA, she responsible for, or at least capable of, making security decisions for consulates like the one in Benghazi, especially decisions regarding the FEST teams. She was not allowed to delegate those duties to anyone else.

22 U.S.C. § 4865 (2)(B)(ii)(I) and (6)(A)

(2)Site selection

(B) Waiver authority

(i) In general

Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary of State may waive subparagraph (A) if the Secretary, together with the head of each agency employing personnel that would not be located at the site, determine that security considerations permit and it is in the national interest of the United States.

(ii) Chancery or consulate building

(I) Authority not delegable
The Secretary may not delegate the waiver authority under clause (i) with respect to a chancery or consulate building.

and

(6) State Department support

(A) Foreign Emergency Support Team

The Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) of the Department of State shall receive sufficient support from the Department, including—

(i) conducting routine training exercises of the FEST;

(ii) providing personnel identified to serve on the FEST as a collateral duty;

(iii) providing personnel to assist in activities such as security, medical relief, public affairs, engineering, and building safety; and

(iv) providing such additional support as may be necessary to enable the FEST to provide support in a post-crisis environment involving mass casualties and physical damage.

1. The leader of the attack disagrees with you, since that's apparently what he said as the attack was happening according to multiple eyewitnesses.

2. Nothing in that section of code says that the Secretary of State "cannot delegate" overseeing embassy security - and Hillary Clinton did not create the office of the Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, it's been a State Department office since 1985.

Obama's own officials, (and the murdered Ambassador's own top deputy) disagrees with the "leader of the attack" too; saying the video was a "non-event" as a cause of the Benghazi attack

Ok. I have no doubt that many people have differing views of what happened.

I'd say that the most likely situation is that the local al-qaeda wannabe group took advantage of the unrest over the video to attack a secret CIA base.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Not "shortly after" - 24 hours after her first press conference on the matter (the one where she supposedly "blamed it on a video").

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

If you don't know what the scandal is then you simply don't want to know saying we don't know would have changed the fact that she was saying one thing privately and another pubically especially given the public statement puts out a story that would be helpful to the administration in an election year where the private one would not and could have possibily hurt them.

There is no political advantage that could have been gained by misidentifying the cause of the attacks as an online video. It doesn't make any sense.

simply moronic denial. the attack was a clear contradiction of the Obama re-election theme that "terrorists are on the run"

There was no such "Obama re-election theme".

 

[bodecea]

You have a stupid avatar....it matches your stupid comments

Wow...what an amazing retort....are you a GOP staffer for that committee? Sounds like it.

 

[Lakhota]

Hillary was a rock star today - among 7 angry NaziCons.

 

[charwin95]

Hillary did a very good job. The republican committee members all look like clowns trying to make dramatic and sensationalize. And that pencil dick look alike Gowdy face was dripping with pomade.

 

[bedowin62]

Here's a thought if you don't know who was behind the attacks or the motive behind them simply say we don't have enough information right now to answer those questions doing this would have avoided the current situation. It's amazing how many problems could be avoided if politicans and I mean all of them Democrat and Republican didn't automatically go into bullshit the people mode as soon as something that could be a problem for them comes up.

Stipulated. But so fucking what?

What's the fucking scandal? Her comments on that day were specifically noncommittal. Perhaps you're right, and it would have been better PR for her to say "We don't know anything yet" - but what would that change, in the end?

If you don't know what the scandal is then you simply don't want to know saying we don't know would have changed the fact that she was saying one thing privately and another pubically especially given the public statement puts out a story that would be helpful to the administration in an election year where the private one would not and could have possibily hurt them.

There is no political advantage that could have been gained by misidentifying the cause of the attacks as an online video. It doesn't make any sense.

simply moronic denial. the attack was a clear contradiction of the Obama re-election theme that "terrorists are on the run"

There was no such "Obama re-election theme".

YAWN

oh really?'

stand-by