AND: From Amy Davidson in The New Yorker:
Clinton has been immersed in politics for decades, and yet the panel managed to make the contrast between her manner and the ways of Washington look stark. She appeared to be a sensible outsider. At 7:15 P.M., nine hours after the hearings began, Martha Roby, of Alabama, asked Clinton about her movements when she went home on the night of the attack. “Were you alone?” she asked. Yes, Clinton said. “The whole night?” Clinton started to laugh once more. “I don’t see why that’s funny,” Roby said. Not funny, perhaps, but, like the Benghazi committee itself, absurd.
पोस्ट्स
८५ टिप्पण्या:
That would be similar to paraphrasing the entire bible as: God locks Satan out of house over spat.
Her cackle suggested a manic person.
This whole thing didn't move the needle one way or the other. The people who think Clinton is great will continue to think that, and the people who think she's a lying liar will continue to think that as well.
Where was Bill?
Why didn't he help her that night? He was Commander-in-Chief and supposedly knows this stuff.
Still don't understand why Obama didn't send jets from Italy. Smart power.
And did you know Hillary wants to force the military to make jet fuel from corn?
They don't call Republicans the stupid party without cause.
"This whole thing didn't move the needle one way or the other."
Yup but this is the new era. As Peggy Noonan says, "There’s a sense we in the West have entered a new screwball phase. "
Huckabee put it well. Stevens sends 600 requests for security from a country that Hillary collapsed (for no good reason) and she doesn't see a single one. But she's reading and printing Sid's gossip.
I still blame the video, that darn video.
If Benghazi had occurred under a Republican president who was running for reelection, The New Yorker would have featured a 25,000-word essay on the scandal, written by Jane Mayer or Sy Hersh or James Suriwiecki.
Guaranteed.
She lied about the video but we knew that months ago.
She claims not to have had a computer in her office but she had two Blackberrys. She had computers in her purse.
At the end of the 11 hour Clinton appearance before the committee "investigation" can any interested person say they now know and understand what did happen in Benghazi?
And poor Chris Stevens assumed the risk of being in Libya. The dead man was also negligent in not pulling the right levers at State to give him adequate security. Too bad he can't respond.
Lawyer David Kendall came up with those themes.
Thank you Yale Law School.
That is the role of an accomplished defense attorney. DEFEND.
Nothing out of order there.
David Begley said...
Huckabee put it well. Stevens sends 600 requests for security from a country that Hillary collapsed (for no good reason) and she doesn't see a single one. But she's reading and printing Sid's gossip.
I don't know if it's new or not, but to see that this is entirely ok with Democrats is unbelievable.
Move along...nothing to see here...
If Hillary is elected, she'll be our shortest President since...hmm...Benjamin Harrison, who, like Hillary, was 5'7".
Mr. Cool prosecutor Gowdy blew it.
Aided and abetted.
Quite disappointing. This was not Watergate redux.
If there is any hope, perhaps a future investigative historian will reveal the truth.
This Special House Committee acting in these highly politically polarized times won't.
Queen Hillary Rodham will sit on her throne of pathological prevarication.
It's up to the FBI now. Will they act or will the Director resign ?
We'll see.
There were hints about the weapons. The real reason Stevens was there. Why did HRC maintain distance from her good "friend"? Its not over.
Cackle Cackle
She slipped the punches. She looked agile enough, but, at the same time, she looked slippery........Her "security experts" were none too expert. She was none too expert in hiring and firing said "security experts". For any failure, she is responsible but not to blame.
I should launch a marketing seminar for Republicans. They desperately need it. They are terrible at selling ideas and themselves.
I was impressed with the old bitch and I don't like her.
The headline could have just as easily been written as:
11 hour Clinton Benghazi testimony uncovers no additional truths for media to ignore...
Eleven hours?
That HRC, who seems suitable for running nothing larger than the Ladies' Gardening Club, is the presumptive Democratic nominee & that, after all this time, the Republican committee members can come up with so little against a clearly incompetent & corrupt ex-Secretary of State is a sad testament to the cluelessness of our betters.
That that many people can sit around & jabber for eleven hours about anything & not come up with anything new is proof of how dysfunctional the whole political process is. What a waste!
I learned that Hillary barely knew Sid Blumenthal, and that she knew it was AQ privately, while selling the video publicly.
Hillary told us it was the result of a youtube video. She told her daughter that it was an Al Queda attack. Hillary is a liar. I knew that already.
She told the families of the fallen that they would get the youtube videographer...in front of their flag draped coffins. Hillary is despicable. I knew that already.
Hillary never spoke to Ambassador Stevens after being sworn in---her good friend. He didn't have her email and she didn't have a State Department email, although Sidney did have her email. Ambassador Stevens wasn't her "good friend". She hardly knew him and didn't lift a finger to help him. Hillary is massively incompetent. But I knew that already.
She lied, and the media and her progressive creed don't care. God help us if she gets elected.
"I should launch a marketing seminar for Republicans. They desperately need it. They are terrible at selling ideas and themselves."
Yes, it should be clear by now that speaking the truth simply does not work in modern American politics.
Hate to say this, but HRC was very impressive in the hearings. I don't think she was posing or acting. It seemed to be that she got herself in the right state of mind (respectful, patient) and had the discipline and stamina to stay in that state for the many hours of questions. I didn't see any signs of anger, contemptuous exasperation or shrillness. It helped that she spoke slowly. Whoever coached her for the hearings deserved their fee.
If anything, the hearing was an indictment of Republicans as unfit to govern.
8+ hours with a sec state under questioning, years of her e-mails at hand, a dead ambassadaor from a terrorism attack after 600+ requests for additional security, no one found or held accountable afterwards, the premises were not secured afterwards, no one sent to help during or in the immediate aftermath.
No one fired, no high level official to blame. This wasn't some random terror attack - this was a de-stabilized country on a critical anniversary with an Ambassador begging for security.
If Republicans can't hold a high level official accountable for that - and rightfully so - then they are unfit to hold investigations anyway.
Did Chelsea Clinton have a security clearance? How was she being briefed on this stuff?
I thought that the EMails showing indisputably that Clinton, Zero and Rice knew for sure it was an Al Q attack and immediately conspired to deceive the American public for political gain were new. Also the 600 requests for more security that were ignored.
What is the bottom line message to The Vagina: Just get elected and you can lie every day and the MSM will cover for you.
Nothing new was revealed. Sure. What has already been revealed couldn't be supported by anyone with a soul. She is still a hideous monster. Anyone who supports her knows what she did and doesn't care.
Carthage must be destroyed.
It would be interesting to chronicle all of the various Congressional hearings throughout the last few decades involving oversight of the aexecutive branch where there was potential malfeasance and/or incompetence, to see exactly when the partisanship became so endemic that the members of the same party as the Executive branch started acting as apologists (if not defense attorneys) for the witnesses.
The only reason the hearing went on for 11 hours is that the Democrats on the committee, instead of asking questions, spent their time condemning the committee they sit on and giving helpful advice to Secretary Clinton.
Well..msome new additions to the laugh track. This really needs updating
I won't assume she wasn't given a chance to state her case, which she was, in spite of the democrats portrayal of the committee as a set up. But she wasn't able to clear up some items that will be used against her.
I'm glad democrats feel good about her. She's all you got, a dishonest person, a poor leader.
Its not over. Cackle Cackle
Obama administration said NO to Hillary’s request to get Sidney Blumenthol on the payroll. She did it anyway. Her own payroll.
Private Server.
Private Payroll.
Is this appropriate? Would the left be howling if an R did this?
"Did Chelsea Clinton have a security clearance? How was she being briefed on this stuff?"
That was "Diane Reynolds"
Apparently the fundraising needle has been moved. Listen and you can hear that laugh.
This is simply an illustration of how the media are Democrats with bylines. And it's also why, if you want to pretend to be moderate, you should always vote for Republicans. Republicans will have their feet held to the fire. If Hillary were a Republican the headlines this morning would be twisting words and blaring memes that would have her being put into Prison and dropping her Presidential campaign immediately.
Instead, the media who refuses to report on this now reports that nothing new is learned. Get that? All this stuff you heard yesterday we have already told you, on page 12, on a Wed, right after the comics section.
I didn't know she lied about the attack until this morning. I didn't realize she had sent those emails to her family while simultaneously telling the public it was the video. This is pretty damning.
But, when you're a Democrat, it doesn't look all that bad. Because instead of a headline saying, "Hillary tells family one thing in private and we the people something else!" Which is the headline you'd see if her name was Bush, instead we see headlines, "Nothing new. Old news. Move along."
The Republic won't last much longer when the media is in the pocket of one political party.
I wish a Presidential candidate with some balls would step forward and say, "We can see, by looking at Hillary Clinton's popularity in the polls, that the American Public doesn't have any interest in government officials conducting government business on private servers. Since this is the case, if you elect me, our administration will do all of our business on private servers, and if subpoenas are issued later, we promise to be as transparent and truthful as Clinton has been."
Of course Hillary was alone the whole night -- she's married to Bill Clinton.
Kevin McCarthy and Sean Hannity gave Hillary a gift. Sad that the R party is so stupid.The evil party must be defeated.
Turns out Sidney Blumenthol had money to make in Libya. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
She slipped the punches. She looked agile enough, but, at the same time, she looked slippery
John Gotti slipped punches, too. Doesn't mean I'd want him in the Oval Office.
"The Repubs do not know how to handle her lies. It's that simple."
Well, when Joe Wilson *absolutely accurately* called Obama out on a lie a few years ago, we were treated to weeks of Civility Bullshit Theater by the MSM.
While I have no love for Boehner and his ilk, let's face it, the Republicans aren't the true problem. The media is. Even if we had strong, tough and capable Republicans in office, what can they possibly do in the face of a media that sees evidence of Hillary having told both Chelsea and the Egyptian PM the (classified?) truth the day of the attack, something I sure didn't know and I don't think was common knowledge, and tells us "Nothing new was learned"?
I think Hillary probably suffers from a form of mental illness:
Pathological lying (also called pseudologia fantastica and mythomania) and closely related to compulsive lying, is a behavior of habitual or compulsive lying.[1][2] It was first described in the medical literature in 1891 by Anton Delbrueck.[2] Although it is a controversial topic,[2] pathological lying has been defined as "falsification entirely disproportionate to any discernible end in view, may be extensive and very complicated, and may manifest over a period of years or even a lifetime".[1] The individual may be aware they are lying, or may believe they are telling the truth, being unaware that they are relating fantasies.
Defining characteristics of pathological lying include:
The stories told are usually dazzling or fantastical, but never breach the limits of plausibility, which is key to the pathological liar's tact. The tales are not a manifestation of delusion or some broader type of psychosis; upon confrontation, the teller can admit them to be untrue, even if unwillingly.
The fabricative tendency is chronic; it is not provoked by the immediate situation or social pressure so much as it is an innate trait of the personality. There is some element of dyscontrol present.
A definitely internal, not an external, motive for the behavior can be discerned clinically: e.g., long-lasting extortion or habitual spousal battery might cause a person to lie repeatedly, without the lying being a pathological symptom.[2]
The stories told tend toward presenting the liar favorably. The liar "decorates their own person"[3] by telling stories that present them as the hero or the victim. For example, the person might be presented as being fantastically brave, as knowing or being related to many famous people, or as having great power, position, or wealth.
Pathological lying may also present as false memory syndrome, where the sufferer genuinely believes that fictitious (imagined) events have taken place. The sufferer may believe that he or she has accomplished superhuman feats or awe-inspiring acts of altruism and love — or has committed equally grandiose acts of diabolical evil, for which the sufferer must atone, or indeed has already atoned in her/his fantasies.
Actually, I think she did a lot of lying, and if Obama decides to let the DoJ prosecute whatever the FBI has put together by then, it will all be used against her.
Of course, if not, it won't.
Qwinn - Indeed. The democrat media industrial complex knows how to manipulate for their cause.
The media dutifully pedaled the "It was the youtube video" lie, too. Funny how incurious the media are on a consistent basis when it comes to democrat cover-ups and lies.
Anyone who thought we'd see a Perry Masonesque witness-stand tearful confession, much less an "Aha!" moment, was kidding themselves. They also would have been underestimating the strength of the MSM's deflector shields.
I'm actually glad the MSM have been forced to break cover this early in the the election cycle. They don't get to wait 'til the Second Debate (when they'd carry more throw-weight) to pull a Candy Crowley. The NYT reporter who showed his ignorance of C-SPAN call-in shows was particularly priceless.
A court case is not a Congressional photo op.
I'm determined to get this right... ack.
When it comes to giving Hillary plenty of time to figure out a way out of her lies --(She layers more lies on top of her old ones - Hey she didn't even use a computer! Amazing!) Hillary bests anyone.
She is excellent at lying. Remember her fake head injury? Stall tactic. The Repubs do not know how to handle her lies. It's that simple.
sS yes - nothing new. Hillary lies. No matter how many hours spent in an attempt to expose her lies, she will dance. She will put on the show. She's had plenty of time to rehearse. It's all useless. She is above the law, and as a good sociopath, she will stay that way.
Perhaps I should have said .... make the DoJ .... rather than .... let ....
Why not make the 11 hour grilling by Congress a standard part of running for President for all candidates, or at least for party nominees. Congressional oversight responsibility can reasonably be interpreted to extend to candidates running for President, not just those who are elected.
I keep seeing these headlines and comments that Republicans questioned Hillary for hours and hours on end.
From what I saw and heard, there were few questions asked at all. If there had been some questioned asked, then we would be hearing today a lot of sound clips of Hillary saying outrageous things about this and lying about that. Instead, what we have are the clips of a bunch of buffoon Republicans yammering on and on and on.
...Benghazi Hearing Didn't Reveal Anything New.
Whoever thought it would. Hillary could respond to questions by reading aloud recipes for oatmeal cookies, and the main stream media would ignore it.
Democrats and their news media propaganda arm always turn out to be more vile, more dishonest, and more despicable than one first imagines.
It's not possible to be a morally decent, patriotic American and support Hillary.
Gowdy was a prosecutor. He wasn't acting in that role as head of the committee, but it would not surprise me in the least if he (or someone else) asked her questions they already know the answers to, to see if she would lie. We know for a fact she has lied about some of this stuff. Gowdy may have learned nothing new, but he may well know things we don't. If he was head of a committee questioning me, I'd be very, very wary. I know a lot of people think he's an idiot, but I think he's quite the opposite. If she lied yesterday and he has the goods on her (big if), rather than calling her on the lie, he could be waiting to totally blindside her and ask the DOJ to prosecute her for lying to Congress (or perjury, whichever is appropriate in this case). This DOJ, you say? Don't be so sure that Obama wouldn't sic Lynch on her. I get the sense he's waiting for the right moment to twist the knife. Then.....JOE!
""I should launch a marketing seminar for Republicans. They desperately need it. They are terrible at selling ideas and themselves."
Yes, it should be clear by now that speaking the truth simply does not work in modern American politics."
I have never lied as an advertising professional in my work, not because of some high ethical standard, but because it flat-out doesn't work.
A thoroughly beaten-looking Gowdy in front of cameras at the end basically mind-numbed and tapped, trying to answer questions from the media is the clip you'll see lately.
It's not about truth vs. lies. It's the strategy and packaging. Gowdy should NOT have answered any questions after the sessions when he was not at his best nor prepared to give soundbites out.
It was a wonder to behold. She did an excellent job. She looked very Presidential while she withstood the abuse and made them look like fools. Republicans just had to have that one last hearing....
Run, Althouse Hillbillies, RUN!
Former prosecutor Gowdy looked like a beaten dog. He was perspiring more than Rubio. His angst was undisguised and embarrassing.
Hillary did the rope-a-dope better then the master Ali.
It is impossible to control egos. Instead of an organized and carefully rehearsed set of questions, for which the answers should have been anticipated, we heard the usual tedious speech making; pseudo emotions; self glorification; attempts at stealing the spotlight by a group of mediocre partisan pols. Pathetic.
I was under the impression lawyers knew better. I fault Trey for not spending time training his lions. The interrogators were all roar and no cat.
We are all the losers for this sham "interview"..regardless of your party affiliation.
I found the nature of the questions interesting. I have been in many a deposition and noticed that the Rep. lawyers were asking the very convoluted questions that you get a few months before trial. That way, you are on record as there is no way to answer those questions without perjury. I have seen other political hearings and don't recall this form of questioning. They are usually much less aggressive. Hillary did not fair very well as I could see, but I feel that she is the worst individual on earth. What was gleaned was that she lied about the nature of the attack to shape political opinion before an election. She did nothing to help those that she put in harms way. And, she has zero remorse. Her efforts at emotions are laughable.
Ah...so that explains the laughing.
So Clintonian..
..depends what the meaning of some is.
I did not have contradictory statements with that those people...
I had no sense that the GOP reps had game planned for the hearing at all. The questions often seemed both stupid and repetitive, and they often went floating off into the weeds. Did the reps not sit down beforehand and develop a strategy? You damn well know SHE did! I realize they got a few TV soundbites for campaign ads, but my impression was that the whole thing was a Party of Stupid production from the getgo.
After you've read Taranto in the WSJ, why don't you skip over to Kimberly Strassel's column. There's this:
"Here’s what the Benghazi committee found in Thursday’s hearing. Two hours into Mrs. Clinton’s testimony, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan referred to an email Mrs. Clinton sent to her daughter, Chelsea, at 11:12 the night of the attack, or 45 minutes after the secretary of state had issued a statement blaming YouTube-inflamed mobs. Her email reads: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group.” Mrs. Clinton doesn’t hedge in the email; no “it seems” or “it appears.” She tells her daughter that on the anniversary of 9/11 an al Qaeda group assassinated four Americans.
That same evening, Mrs. Clinton spoke on the phone with Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf, around 8 p.m. The notes from that conversation, in a State Department email, describe her as saying: “We have asked for the Libyan government to provide additional security to the compound immediately as there is a gun battle ongoing, which I understand Ansar as Sharia [sic] is claiming responsibility for.” Ansar al Sharia is al Qaeda’s affiliate on the Arabian Peninsula. So several hours into the attack, Mrs. Clinton already believed that al Qaeda was attacking U.S. facilities.
The next afternoon, Mrs. Clinton had a call with the Egyptian Prime Minister Hesham Kandil. The notes from it are absolutely damning. The secretary of state tells him: “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest.” And yet Mrs. Clinton, and Ms. Rice and Mr. Obama for days and days continued to spin the video lie."
Hillary is caught lying, only because of emails newly discovered on the server she tried to erase. and Althouse comes away with this: "She appeared to be a sensible outsider."
LOL! Vote for Hillary, the outsider. She'll change the way things are done in Washington! Absurd is the word, alright. But it should be used to describe the "Emperor's New Clothes" response of Clinton fans to news which should be cause for alarm. The president, the secretary of state, and the entire Obama administration is again revealed to have conspired to perpetrate a lie designed to deceive the American public. This isn't some partisan fantasy. This isn't some Bush lied, people died baseless accusation. It's right there in black and white. The damning evidence is right before you and the reaction is: I like the way she comports herself. That is absurd! Aren't you a lawyer, Althouse? I hope they never make you a judge...
"Did Chelsea Clinton have a security clearance? How was she being briefed on this stuff?"
-- Probably not. Through secret servers using pseudonyms. You know, perfectly on the up and up.
Thing I learned: That the ambassador who was murdered contemplated buying security features from another closed down embassy. Hillary, instead of seeing this as a sign he was damn serious about getting security, thought it was joke.
Now he's dead. And she's laughing.
We'll find that Benghazi Pony soon.
Blogger Matthew Sablan said...
Thing I learned: That the ambassador who was murdered contemplated buying security features from another closed down embassy. Hillary, instead of seeing this as a sign he was damn serious about getting security, thought it was joke.
You know if she were Republican, they would have her on every show and play the clip and ask, is the Ambassadors death funny? With straight, serious faces.
Blogger garage mahal said...
We'll find that Benghazi Pony soon.
Those with eyes to see have already found it. Privately admitting it was a terror attack and then selling the country on a pack of "it was the video!" Lies is a Benghazi Horse, not a pony.
But you're too blind to see you're stepping in the horse crap.
Can you imagine that idiot, George W. Bush, answering questions about 9-11 for ten hours or so? Gosh, "W" refused to answer any questions from a federal commission investigating 9-11 unless Dick Cheney was in the room with him!
Holy fuck! An administration official went on a Sunday talk show right after a car bomb when off in Libya? and said something not accurate? Muslims would NEVER EVER set off a bomb over a video or a cartoon denigrating their prophet. Preposterous. Craziest fucking excuse ever!
None are so blind as those who will not see.
There is a long game in play here, though, at least for the GOP. They have a transcript. They can compare the transcript to her other statements and use those against her in media buys before the election. They can use the supposed "joke." Hillary may think she's done with this but it's not done with her. Not as long as she's running.
Spiros Pappas: ".."W" refused to answer any questions from a federal commission investigating 9-11 unless Dick Cheney was in the room with him!"
Bill Clinton refused to answer any questions from a duly appointed Federal Grand Jury investigating his misuse of government power in trying to cover up his relations with his girlfriend unless his lawyer was in the room with him!
garage: "Muslims would NEVER EVER set off a bomb over a video or a cartoon denigrating their prophet. Preposterous. Craziest fucking excuse ever! "
Why are you calling Hillary a liar?
averagejoe: "None are so blind as those who will not see."
I don't think you understand.
Everyone knows Hillary is lying.
That's precisely what the lefties love about it.
Blogger Matthew Sablan: "Thing I learned: That the ambassador who was murdered contemplated buying security features from another closed down embassy. Hillary, instead of seeing this as a sign he was damn serious about getting security, thought it was joke."
Well, if you, like Hillary, had a long history of courageously dodging snipers in Bosnia, these types of requests would strike you as amusing as well.
Think of Hillary's courage under fire as almost, almost, as courageous as garage having a "blacky" friend one time, way back, somewhere, for awhile.
EMD: "There is a long game in play here, though, at least for the GOP. They have a transcript. They can compare the transcript to her other statements and use those against her in media buys before the election."
Again, no one seems to understand this.
The dems have imported an entire nations worth of illiterate 3rd world socialist mentalities.
The dems no longer have to worry about the very things you describe because they have built an almost impregnable national election wall (see what I did there?) thru which almost no republican can win (I can't quite say "no republican" yet....yet).
This is the simple reality.
It's why they are doing the motor-voter auto-registration of anyone coming into the DMV's in CA right after they approved all the illegals coming into the DMV's for cards while at the same time continuing their push for direct national elections.
It's coming one way or the other.
There was never any immutable law of the universe which said the American Republic was going to continue forever.
Is there still a chance this can be avoided? Perhaps. I suppose so. History sometimes assumes interesting and unpredictable trajectories.
"Gosh, "W" refused to answer any questions from a federal commission investigating 9-11 unless Dick Cheney was in the room with him!"
So, you think there was a conspiracy ?
No surprise.
Drago said...
averagejoe: "None are so blind as those who will not see."
I don't think you understand.
Everyone knows Hillary is lying.
That's precisely what the lefties love about it.
10/23/15, 8:28 PM
Yes, they do delight in giving America the middle finger.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा