Home > General > Hillary goes to the hill

Hillary goes to the hill

January 24th, 2013

There were 2 hearings today regarding  Benghazi.  Out-going Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the only witness.Some of the GOP thought they were going to take a big piece out of Hillary Clinton today. Many had probably been wanting to for at least 2 decades. It simply didn’t happen.

To set the scene–In the morning Hillary testified before the Senate Committee. Afternoon was the House committee. Its truly amazing to see the narcissism with some of those people. The grandstanding was as expected.

There were several outstanding jerks.

From Politico:

Sen. Ron Johnson on Wednesday knocked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for dodging his questions with “theatrics” during their tense exchange at today’s Benghazi hearing.

“I wasn’t trying to get under her skin, I was just trying to get a relatively simple question answered, which she didn’t really want to answer,” the Wisconsin Republican told Milwaukee radio host Charlie Sykes shortly after the hearing ended.

Basically, Hillary ate his lunch.

Most of the men felt they had every right to interrupt her or talk over her. Are we surprised?

Rep. Duncan was also one of the nastier people.  He told her she left those killed in a death trap and strongly implied that Hillary was responsible for their deaths.

 

 

Rand Paul was charming. He told her he would fire her if he were her superior. Well Rand Paul, that isn’t really going to happen, now is it?

John McCain didn’t miss a golden opportunity to be disrespectful either.

After watching all day, I asked myself why the rudeness was necessary. I haven’t figured that out yet. Were those men showing off? Did they think they would break Hillary Clinton? It made no sense to me whatsoever.

Categories: General Tags:
  1. Morris Davis
    January 24th, 2013 at 07:09 | #1

    Now that the Repugnants had a full day to try to kick Hillary Clinton for alleged dereliction of duty that let 4 people die overseas perhaps they could devote a little time to their own dereliction of duty that lets 4 people get shot to death here in their districts every 3.5 hours (if you count suicides and accidents 4 Americans die of gunshots every hour here in the most exceptional country in the world).

  2. Starryflights
    January 24th, 2013 at 07:28 | #2

    Let’s hope the people of Kentucky fire Rand Paul in a few.

  3. Pat.Herve
    January 24th, 2013 at 07:31 | #3

    Rand Paul was a real AH – why do the R’s want us to jump the gun and label everything an act performed by terrorists? Before the facts are known, it is not a good thing to just label everything an act by a terrorist – it does change the way we investigate and persecute the individuals involved. If they even read the transcripts of what Rice said, at every tv talk show, she said that the FBI investigation was on going, and that they did not know who was behind the attacks. I think McCain disappoints me the most – he knows what a fast moving frantic situation is like, how hard it is the get the facts and timeline in place – yet, he expected definitive answers in record time. If he wants answers – he should go to Iraq and finally find the weapons he has talked about for 20 years. Why did Romney not bring up Bengazi in the third debate?? I think, it is because he was privy to some information that made him think twice about discussing the issue.

    I really do not like pointing fingers – but when it was the Shoe Bomber, and a Bin Laden tape – the Bush administration decided to lay low on the stories – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/29/bush-waited-nine-days-to_n_406307.html – I guess that it was ok then.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 10:27 | #4

      Of course. Right this minute John McAin is sitting right beside Hillary during the Kerry confirmation hearings. If I were Hillary I would refuse to sit next to McCain.

      From Mediaite.com:

      “It’s wonderful to see you in good health and as combative as ever,” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) greeted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the Senate hearing on the Benghazi attack on Wednesday. Citing questions he still had, the senator noted that Clinton’s answers were inadequate.

      “There are many questions that are unanswered, and the answers that you’ve given this morning are not satisfactory to me,” McCain said, particularly pointing to the security at the U.S. consulate. “The American people deserve to know answers. And they certainly don’t deserve false answers.”

      And what UN Ambassador Susan Rice said following the attack was false information, he said, further questioning why “the administration still refuses to provide the full text of the e-mails regarding the deletion of references to Al Qaeda and terrorism in the talking points.”

      “You ought to have your facts straight,” McCain told Clinton. “Here we are, four months later, and we still don’t have the basic information.”

  4. Elena
    January 24th, 2013 at 07:57 | #5

    Hillary was faulous, her class and intelligence only amplified the lack of character in Rand Paul.

  5. January 24th, 2013 at 08:03 | #6

    @Pat.Herve
    Laying low on the stories is different that lying about something after the news has already reached the public. In this case, blaming terrorism was right. And it was blamed AFTER the news came out that the State Dept. knew about it. And then it was discovered that they knew about it immediately.

    She is incompetent.

    And yet, I don’t want her fired. Its her boss that gave her direction. Benghazi’s coverup is HIS fault.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 10:32 | #7

      Cargo, you just lost your credibility. Hillary Clinton is probably the *least* incompetent person I have ever met.

      You aren’t privy to any special information.

  6. blue
    January 24th, 2013 at 09:17 | #8

    @Cargosquid

    I mean really what difference does it make now;

    that security was denied
    that rescue was denied
    that military support was turned back
    that host country security withdrew
    that men died disobeying that rescue order
    that there was an election in the way
    That Sate Dept. political narratives might come ito question
    that Rice’s career was shot to hell
    that it had nothing to do with any film
    that the CIA narrative was fixed
    that 2016 was and is stil on the line
    or
    that the responses were clearly practiced.

    I still don’t beleive that Bill had sex with that woman.

  7. Starryflights
    January 24th, 2013 at 09:40 | #9

    @blue
    There was no rescue “denied”. That is an outright LIE!

  8. blue
    January 24th, 2013 at 09:43 | #10

    @Starryflights

    Starry, You really need to turn the dial off of MSNBC and clear your head.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 10:38 | #11

      Oh yes. by all means he should turn on faux news immediately so he beomes informed like you, Blue. :roll:

  9. Elena
    January 24th, 2013 at 10:05 | #12

    No Blue, you need to stop being brainwashed by Faux News.

  10. January 24th, 2013 at 11:33 | #13

    Hillary did a great job! She answered nothing! There was nothing but delay, redirect, and lying. She couldn’t have done better than if she had been a trained intel agent in avoiding answers.

    She wasn’t bullied. She was treated the same as any other politician/appointee. She was before an oversight committee to explain a disaster. She didn’t explain why her story is completely at odds to Sec. Lamb’s story. She was obviously coached to evade questions.

    Blue is absolutely right. There were elements within one hour’s flight time. And permission to use it was not given. And that news does not come from Fox.

    Hillary will not answer these questions because she can’t without revealing that she or her boss is at fault. She will delay and avoid all answers. Hillary has political ambitions…so she can’t be at fault. It’s all “her responsibility…but… it’s no one’s fault.”

    What difference does it make? She and the President lied to the American people for weeks after the attack. She avoided answering that question.

    But..never mind. She’s a Democrat and a woman…so I expect her apologists to be out in full force. She’s a “victim.”

    • January 24th, 2013 at 11:51 | #14

      Cargo, do you realize how paranoid you sound?

      Do you really think that Benghazi had any impact on the election, one way or another?

      No, she wasn’t bullied because Hillary refused to allow herself to be bullied. It would take more than those little POSs to bully Hillary. They did try. The most pathetic was Rand Paul. Hillary missed so many great one-liners…and I am sure it took great determination on her part not to smart ass him right back.

      Cargo, you live in some sort of world that doesn’t even make sense. We need to think up a name for folks who believe that the entire bedrock of our political system rests on an outpost consulate in a town most people have never heard of in Libya.

      You are right in one respect, you don’t need faux news. You have all sorts of right wing sites you go to to feed that political paranoia.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 11:56 | #15

      I remember how hard you challenged us on that Egyptian dirt-bag filmaker before the Benghazi murders even took place. It isn’t the film! It isn’t the film! First amendment rights!

      That should have been a dead giveaway that some sort of conspiracy theory was coming our way. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn Terry Jones was involved.

  11. January 24th, 2013 at 12:13 | #16

    What conspiracy theory? The Benghazi attack had nothing to do with the film, but the President and Clinton pushed that it was for two weeks after they knew different. So, what’s your point?

    And the film argument is about 1st amendment rights. You don’t apologize for those.

    Of course it above doesn’t make sense to you, because you think that she answered the questions. She didn’t. She avoided answering questions. She deflected, evaded, created straw arguments, and lied.

    Yes. The Benghazi situation had the possibility of affecting the election. Unfortunately, the GOP failed to use it and the press actively, willfully, ignored it.

    I love how you discount any sources that might be “right wing.” So…mainstream political hacks in the press are the only valid source then?

    As I said, the apologists will be out in force.

    Yeah… she ate their lunch. If you call avoiding your responsibilities to answer questions a win.

  12. Starryflights
    January 24th, 2013 at 16:09 | #17

    The independent accountability review board which investigated the incident concluded that there were no denials of requests for assistance on the part of the Administration or the military. That is an outright LIE spread by right wingnut hacks and parroted by cargo and blue like a couple of gossipping magpies.

  13. Pat.Herve
    January 24th, 2013 at 16:45 | #18

    security was denied, rescue was denied – all figments of hannity’s wild imagination.

    Political hay – that is what this is all about. Did Rand Paul even ask a question? He then went on hannity to say that questions were not answered – if they took the time to ask a question, rather than create a sound bite, maybe it would be answered. Romney did not bring it up at the 3rd debate (you know, the one on foreign policy) – I think because he became privy to the facts.

    Look at any fast moving chaotic scene, and see how long it takes to get the story straight. It has been 50 years and we are still talking about the grassy knoll.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 17:12 | #19

      Hell, historians are still at loggerheads over Pearl Harbor and D-Day and Gettysburg.

  14. January 24th, 2013 at 16:46 | #20

    http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf

    Here ya go Starry. The report says no such thing. It doesn’t mention requests except in a general way.

    My question is why there were no orders for rescue or air strike/flyby from Italy or Sicily? The President is the only one to issue cross border authority to do so. And he did not do it. He relied on the Libyans, as the report shows. There is a record of requests for assistance, which never came.

    And since this is such a muddled affair…. its necessary for the Sec. of State to come clean and stop avoiding hard answers.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 17:32 | #21

      The report clearly says that military assistance would not have made a difference with saving the lives of those who were killed.

      It is standard operating procedure to rely on the host country for protection.

      You have been finger pointing and trying to assign blame since before it was announced that the ambassodor had been killed.

      It didn’t affect the outcome of the election, regardless.

      What still isn’t being talked about it the fact that this compound was really a CIA mission.

      I agree with Mrs. Clinton. At what point do we decide that the objective is to make sure it doesn’t happen again. She has accepted all recommendations from independent investigation. She as said she assumes full responsibility.

      What else is it that you want? Please tell us.

  15. Pat.Herve
    January 24th, 2013 at 16:49 | #22

    and maybe if the CIA operatives had held tight in the bunker, there would have been less loss of life – ie, was the bunker location revealed because of the actions of the operatives? We will not know that answer for a few years.

  16. January 24th, 2013 at 16:59 | #23

    The report states that there was no time…but the attacks went on for HOURS. Flight time from Italy by jet is about 1 hour. They used a CHARTER plane to transport the “rescue” of seven people. Everything that was IN Libya already seemed to be the resource limitation.

    Whitewash.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 17:37 | #24

      Since you were there, how about telling us what really happened.

      mooooo…..bull crap…..moooooo

  17. January 24th, 2013 at 17:00 | #25

    @Pat.Herve
    The attack on the annex came after the operatives from Tripoli arrived by charter flight. Apparently they were being tracked.

  18. January 24th, 2013 at 19:07 | #26

    @Moon-howler
    I took that info from the report. So, yes, I AM telling you what happened. You, on the other hand, refuse to accept the possibility that Clinton will avoid questions and responsibility and that Obama is incompetent. No criticism is ever valid in your eyes. Not once have you ever criticized anything with the name Clinton or Obama.

    And you wonder why I call you a liberal?

    • January 24th, 2013 at 20:55 | #27

      I know why you call me a liberal. The fact that I don’t wear one of those pointy hats and white sheets is probably the first clue.

      But I would far rather be a liberal than one of those flip lipped jackasses I saw braying at Hillary.

      I think you need to read and listen more carefully. Hillary Clinton has accepted responsibility for the entire incident. She was secretary of state. If you say otherwise, I will have to call you a liar because of what I have seen and heard with my own ears.

      You fail to see the partisanship …no you see it. You just don’t want to admit it.

      What is it that you want her to say and do? You have not answered that question. Exactly what is it that you want her to say?

  19. January 24th, 2013 at 19:36 | #28

    I absolutely agree with this.
    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/01/23/the-day-accountability-died/?singlepage=true

    except that I think accountability died much earlier during Fast and Furious.

    • January 24th, 2013 at 22:15 | #29

      I found it offensive. The author believes rudeness is the answer? Typical. Rubio wasn’t rude so he isn’t a leader?

      Cargo, you can find something on anything on the internet. (and you usually do)

      For the record, the Prez called the attack on the consulate an act of terrorism like day 2. The details were still absent.

      Your attempts to discredit Hillary now are all for naught.

      Actually, it is just making the attack dogs look bad. They looked like whining bullies.

  20. January 24th, 2013 at 22:34 | #30

    So asking hard questions and not fawning over the appointee is rudeness.
    Ok, then. Of course you found it offensive. The Clintons and Obama can do no wrong in your eyes. He has lied to your face and you don’t care.

    The President made an off hand remark that the attacks on the embassies across the world would be considered terrorism…but he did not single out the attack on Benghazi as a result of terrorists. He continued to blame a non-existent mob that was supposedly upset over a stupid 15 minute movie. He did this in multiple countries over two weeks. Even Sec. Lamb did it.

    I’m not “attempting” to discredit Clinton. She’s done that to herself. But thanks for fulfilling my prediction.

  21. Pat.Herve
    January 25th, 2013 at 06:14 | #31

    asking hard questions – that is the point, I do not think Rand Paul asked one questions – he used his question time as a Pulpit in order to score points with his followers. I can imagine his back room banter – grand standing for sound bites. Did they treat Petreaus in this manner when he testified? He was in charge of the CIA and its response – 2 of the people that died were his people. Why wasn’t the CIA bunker more secure and fortified – that is not Dept of State, yet Hillary is getting the blame for that too – and I am not Hillary’s best supporter, but her vast right wing conspiracy theory is getting louder and louder every day.

    • January 25th, 2013 at 07:52 | #32

      No kidding. Great observations, Pat.

      I do remember how much Hillary was laughed at over the Great Right Wing Conspiracy remark. I thought at the time how right she was. She was dead right.

  22. January 25th, 2013 at 11:32 | #33

    Right wing conspiracy? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

    you mean, as opposed to politics as usual.

    What claptrap.

    • January 25th, 2013 at 11:51 | #34

      You are apparently too young to remember the war on Clinton that started before he even took office. It even included his surgeon general.

  23. Censored bybvbl
    January 25th, 2013 at 13:29 | #35

    Too young or too wrapped up in promoting the conspiracy…

  24. January 25th, 2013 at 13:55 | #36

    @Moon-howler
    Oh, no…. I know all about it.

    Its still funny. And claptrap.

  25. January 26th, 2013 at 13:09 | #37

    @Cargo, you were probably part of it. Hillary was absolutely right about the right wing conspiracy. I had been watching it unfold before Clinton even took office.

  26. January 26th, 2013 at 13:12 | #38

    Senator Ron Johnson who was one of the nasty boys last week during the Benghazi Hearings made a real ass of himself by speculating about Hillary’s emotion–he said she was emotional to avoid facing the music.

    He walked that one back real fast the next day, saying he was wrong to speculate.

    Ya think? That was right up there with Benghazi fever that several others on Faux News suggested. It just makes one feel stupid when its announced that the person who is supposedly malingering has a blood clot near her brain.

  27. January 26th, 2013 at 13:25 | #39

    @Cargosquid

    Actually Clinton has never lied to my face and I have never been face to face with Obama so I dont know what you are talking about.

    So you not understand there is considerable distance between being rude and fawning over someone like the Samoan congressman did. That’s a problem. The GOP coming across like bullies is a huge reason for the lack of appeal to women. Does it take a brick up side the head to make some of you all realize this?

    Having bad manners isn’t a sign of strength. Pardon my bluntness. Its the sign of being an A-hole. The right pressing question delivered correctly is far more potent than harranging and fist banging.

    Pat made a very interesting and accurate point. We sure didn’t see David Petraus treated that rudely and 2 of those people were his peeps. But that’s ok to blame Hillary. Petraus was just out there being a dude…probably text messaging or emailing while Rome burned.

  28. middleman
    January 26th, 2013 at 16:43 | #40

    The sad thing is that these “hearings” are pure political theater and no real information ever comes out of them. In this one Hillary clearly played her part better than the other side and “won” the event. I have no idea what purpose they’re supposed to serve, other than to score points with the few members of the public that are watching.

    Hillary’s approval rating went up after the hearings last week…

  29. January 27th, 2013 at 19:44 | #41

    @Moon-howler
    Apparently, then, you didn’t watch her when she blamed Benghazi on the “film.”

Comments are closed.