LIAR

By 13 Comments 2,037 views

hillary liar 2

 

“GOP lands no clear punches” wails the Washington Post.

Nine hours after it began, a House committee’s questioning of Hillary Rodham Clinton has provided few new details about the 2012 attacks on American installations in Benghazi, Libya – and, so far, no clear victory for Republicans seeking to trap Clinton in an admission of bad judgment.

I beg to differ. There were a few really important events. Here’s what I found significant about the Hillary Clinton Benghazi hearing today.

 

Hillary Clinton is a proven liar.

hillary email to family

 

On the might of the attack Clinton sent an email to her family notifying them that an Al Qaeda affiliate attacked the compound in Benghazi.

On the night of the attack she called the Egyptian Prime Minister:

The night of the attack, Clinton also called the prime minister of Libya, explaining that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility. And in a call with Egyptian prime minister Hisham Kandil, Clinton deliberately rejected the video idea. “We know the attack had nothing to do with the film,” she says. “It was a planned attack, not a protest . . . Based on the information we saw today, we believe that the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al-Qaeda.”

“It was a planned attack, not a protest…”

Despite that, she and the rest of the Obama regime went out and for weeks insisted the attack was instigated by a video. Then later Clinton had the audacity to assert that everyone else is underestimating  the video that had nothing to do with the attack on the consulate.

The other thing I found really telling was that Clinton’s good friend Chris Stevens did not have her personal email while Sid Blumenthal did. Even Joe Wilson had Clinton’s personal email. But not Chris Stevens.

Clinton claimed to have spoken to Stevens but she had no idea when that might have happened.

“Did you ever talk to Ambassador Stevens when all of this was going on in the hotbed of Libya?” Indiana Rep. Susan Brooks asked. “That is a yes or no question, Madam Secretary. Did you ever personally speak to [Ambassador Stevens] after you swore him in in May [2012]? Yes or no, please.”

“Yes, I believe I did,” Clinton said.

“And when was that?” asked Brooks.

“I don’t recall,” Clinton responded.

Not even on the night of the attack. I guess he didn’t have her phone number either. Her good friend in a hot zone, having requested additional security and having it denied, could not reach Hillary Clinton- her boss.

Despite that, Clinton clearly is of the opinion she’s done nothing wrong.

These are not inconsequential details. They speak to a dishonest and untrustworthy person. She was willing to go out and stand by the lie this execrable regime was promoting. Had she been willing to admit the truth and refuse to join in the lie, she would have been a folk hero- but no.

When it comes to integrity, Clinton and Obama are four quarts short of a gallon.

UPDATE

I waited for it but no one asked. Hopefully it will be campaign fodder.

Why did you choose to go along with the lie being foisted on the American people?

Also

Clinton testified: “I still believe the video played a role.”

Yet as noted above she told the Egyptian Prime Minister “We know the attack had nothing to do with the film.”

So she got to lie directly to the committee and no one called her on it.

 

 

 

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

13 Responses to “LIAR”

  1. 1

    Pete

    A man went to prison as a scapegoat for a politically motivated lie 7 weeks before the 2012 election that Hillary’s emails prove she and the Obama regime KNEW was false.

    Watch the left – the same unprincipled propagandists that still push the falsehood that Bush lied about the intelligence about Saddam’s WMD efforts – try to twist and divert away from this egregious, despicable PROVEN liar.

    Hillary and Obama should be in prison.

  2. 3

    Nanny G

    Judicial Watch has now filed 40 FOIA requests, a Mandatory Declassification Review, and at least 12 lawsuits against the Obama administration relating to the Benghazi terrorist attack.
    Judicial Watch is the only non-governmental organization in the nation litigating in federal court to uncover information withheld by the Obama administration about the events that transpired before, during, and following the Benghazi massacre.
    So, what has Judicial Watch found as regards ”blaming it it all on a video?”

    Documents detail that only three hours after the initial attack on U.S. personnel in Benghazi, the White House contacted YouTube in an apparent effort to initially blame the assault on an obscure “Pastor John video,” rather than filmmaker Nakoula “Mark” Basseley Nakoula. The administration falsely claimed that Nakoula’s video, “Innocence of Muslims,” provoked the attack.

    The ”Pastor John video,” is titled God versus Allah, had few hits and tried to explain the Book of Kings as it relates to today.
    Only after realizing that video was NEVER translated into Arabic, nor even viewed by anyone in the affected area did the White House decide on poor Nakoula “Mark” Basseley Nakoula’s video.
    Hillary’s only promise to the families of the four who died in Benghazi was that she would ”get” Nakoula “Mark” Basseley Nakoula, the maker of the video.

  3. 4

    Bill

    To those such as Greg who have been diligently (if ineffectively) defending the administrations narrative of the attack and failure, I pose this:

    Even if you give Hillary a gigantic benefit of tremendous amounts of legitimate and justified doubt and assume she simply made a mistake, do you REALLY want her or anyone that would accept that mistake to be President of the United States? If they will not openly admit to what the mistakes were and how they would do everything in their power to prevent such “mistakes” from happening again, why would you support such a person of President?

    But, of course, this is all hypothetical. Clearly, “mistakes” was not the problem, but ineptitude and political corruption was.

  4. 5

    John

    2 weeks after BENGAZZI!!! The CIA assassinated the leader of the militia that was responsible
    Apparently you all believe that they should have warned him by saying that we knew who was really responsible
    The video was the story the CIA. Wanted to put out to protect its sources and to not forewarn the target

  5. 7

    David

    In my estimation, the biggest take away from Hillary’s testimony was her callous indifference of what happened in Benghazi. She would like us to believe she was more upset than any of us could ever know. She would like us to believe that she accepted responsibility for what happened. Yet, she did the exact opposite. She opted to hide an unsecured, private email system through which she conducted all of her official business. An unsecured, private email system is different from using a personal email account like one has with GMail.

    If she was that upset, she would have exposed the lie the administration was using regarding the video. About responsibility, a true leader takes all the blame and none of the credit. If she was a true leader, she would have exposed the administration’s cover-up of Benghazi and let the chips fall where they may.

    Her indifference is not knowing, not wanting to know, the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi specifically, and Libya in general. Her line of saying balancing the risks with rewards wasn’t easy, that was gratuitous lip service. Foreign service officers are not the best judges of security matters. DSS wanted more of their security personnel in Libya, and with military support, but those requests were always denied before being ignored. Ignoring is the short step before from indifference.

    The bottom line, Hillary is unfit to be president, much like the current one. Both are quite opposite of GWB. Love him, hate him, you knew where GWB stood and where you stood with him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *