Congratulations to Hillary Clinton!

[PredFan]

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.

That's because you aren't aware of anything much....ever.

 

[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 also 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.

I'm not a kawyer, but i don't think thay says what you seem to think it does

Yeah, that part of the law is discussing choosing the location of new embassy facilities, not about embassy security.

 

[Misty]

The best Republicans have to offer against Hillary

Guess who won

No one won. People died.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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.

So you're telling me that all those intelligence sources, plus Hillary were lying when they said the video wasn't the cause of the attack?

I didn't say that the video was the "cause" of the attack. But that doesn't mean it wasn't involved.

You're looking at this in a comically black and white way.

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

 

[ogibillm]

The best Republicans have to offer against Hillary

Guess who won

No one won. People died.

That's a seperate event that has nothing to do with the circus gowdy is ringmaster of

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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.

So you're telling me that all those intelligence sources, plus Hillary were lying when they said the video wasn't the cause of the attack?

I didn't say that the video was the "cause" of the attack. But that doesn't mean it wasn't involved.

You're looking at this in a comically black and white way.

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

 

[PredFan]

Proof she lied about the video and she was a complete incompetent. Good Day!!

This is it. This is what is important and why the committee needed to grill her. They needed to show her gross incompetence, and expose her lies. They also needed to find out if there were any more lies, or cover ups. If they don't find anything else then fine. She's simply a liar and incompetent. Job done.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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 also 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.

I'm not a kawyer, but i don't think thay says what you seem to think it does

Yeah, that part of the law is discussing choosing the location of new embassy facilities, not about embassy security.

Read the entire law then. She had the power, didn't use it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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.

So you're telling me that all those intelligence sources, plus Hillary were lying when they said the video wasn't the cause of the attack?

I didn't say that the video was the "cause" of the attack. But that doesn't mean it wasn't involved.

You're looking at this in a comically black and white way.

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

Isn't "influence" the same as "cause"?

 

[Misty]

What's so funny Hillary?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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.

So you're telling me that all those intelligence sources, plus Hillary were lying when they said the video wasn't the cause of the attack?

I didn't say that the video was the "cause" of the attack. But that doesn't mean it wasn't involved.

You're looking at this in a comically black and white way.

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

Isn't "influence" the same as "cause"?

Umm. No.

 

[Rustic]

That's what happens when an loopy bitch is appointed to Secretary of State, dead people and broken lives. Sh!t happens

Embrace the suck

 

[CowboyTed]

Thanks lads....

Clinton has just shown she can stand up to 11 hours of pretty intense questioning...

Going through everyone's mind is how long would G W Bush last...

It simple the Republicans have made Clinton Presidential material. Big time....

Democrats now know they have a dog that can fight...

Again thanks...

 

[TemplarKormac]

So you're telling me that all those intelligence sources, plus Hillary were lying when they said the video wasn't the cause of the attack?

I didn't say that the video was the "cause" of the attack. But that doesn't mean it wasn't involved.

You're looking at this in a comically black and white way.

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

Isn't "influence" the same as "cause"?

Umm. No.

Then I beg to differ. Either it was an influence or a cause, it can't be both.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I didn't say that the video was the "cause" of the attack. But that doesn't mean it wasn't involved.

You're looking at this in a comically black and white way.

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

Isn't "influence" the same as "cause"?

Umm. No.

Then I beg to differ. Either it was an influence or a cause, it cant be both.

What?

You were claiming that "influence" and "cause" mean the same thing. Now you seem to be saying something else. I am lost as to what you are trying to say.

As for the difference between "influence" and "cause" - every vote in an election influences the results, even if they don't each individually cause them.

 

[Rustic]

Thanks lads....

Clinton has just shown she can stand up to 11 hours of pretty intense questioning...

Going through everyone's mind is how long would G W Bush last...

It simple the Republicans have made Clinton Presidential material. Big time....

Democrats now know they have a dog that can fight...

Again thanks...

More koolaid??

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

After three years Republicans still have nothing

Does this mean they will finally give up?

Those rabid neoconservatives partisan assholes will not cease until the first week of November 2016!

 

[TemplarKormac]

And trying to look for the gray area doesn't serve you well. It either was or was not an influence in the attacks.

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

Isn't "influence" the same as "cause"?

Umm. No.

Then I beg to differ. Either it was an influence or a cause, it cant be both.

What?

You were claiming that "influence" and "cause" mean the same thing. Now you seem to be saying something else. I am lost as to what you are trying to say.

As for the difference between "influence" and "cause" - every vote in an election influences the results, even if they don't each individually cause them.

You were first insinuating the video was the cause. Then just now it was an influence. So which one is it?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Today was a huge victory for Hillary. The republicans on the Benghazi committee looked like a bunch of petulant children throwing a tantrum in front of their mother. Trey Gowdy looked like a total mess by the end of it. I'm surprised he didn't start screaming out f-bombs when Rep. Sanchez kept pointing out his rule breaking near the end!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It can be an influence in the attacks without being the cause of the attacks, though. Which is the point that you don't seem to be getting.

Isn't "influence" the same as "cause"?

Umm. No.

Then I beg to differ. Either it was an influence or a cause, it cant be both.

What?

You were claiming that "influence" and "cause" mean the same thing. Now you seem to be saying something else. I am lost as to what you are trying to say.

As for the difference between "influence" and "cause" - every vote in an election influences the results, even if they don't each individually cause them.

You were first insinuating the video was the cause. Then just now it was an influence. So which one is it?

I never "insinuated" that the video was the cause of the attack.