Well, with ‘Slow Joe’ Biden having now made it official, this past Wednesday, that he will not being running for president of the United States in 2016 I think it’s become pretty much of a foregone conclusion that those in our state-controlled media will now be spending much of their time worshiping at the altar of one Hitlery Clinton. And I think we can all safely agree that there will now be no effort left unexpended as they will certainly go about bending themselves into pretzels, desperate to exhaust any opportunity to defend the lying bitch, especially when it comes to her pathetically dishonest Benghazi testimony. But do they really have any choice? Hitlery must now be protected at all costs, which means covering up for her long list of lies, her calculated obfuscations, and her charmless faux-gravity.
And thanks to that moron Kevin McCarthy, it has been made considerably easier for those who are so determined to defend this lying bitch to first establish and then to advance a narrative that is really nothing more than a work of the purest form of fiction. Hitlery, or so we are told, was a victim of a political Benghazi committee dedicated to her destruction. Let’s be real, every Congressional committee in history has entailed some form of political motivation. Would anyone argue that the Watergate investigations were completely apolitical? Our state-controlled media myopically focused on the idiotic comments of Mr. McCarthy before Hitlery’s testimony, crafting the story of her victimization before it had even taken place. Today’s media is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party.
Hitlery, as always, is portrayed as being the poor, put-upon victim of that ever-mysterious, and shrouded in the shadows, vast right-wing conspiracy. And yet it was she alone who set up a private email serve, she who deleted relevant emails from it for purely political reasons, she who pressed for a pointless invasion of Libya for political reasons, she who chortled at its conquest for political reasons, she who watched it descend into chaos while doing nothing, again for political reasons, she who then allowed her ambassador to twist in the Libyan tornado without proper security also for political reasons, and finally she who covered up that disaster by repeatedly lying about its causes for political reasons. But those who dare to ask questions about such matters are accused of being partisan politician hacks.
As Charles Krauthammer rightly observed on Thursday evening, “We’re not going to get the facts, we’re not going to get the real story underlying it. We’re living in an age where what you say and its relation with the facts is completely irrelevant.” There is just something more than a little creepy about someone like Hitlery, and Barry as well, who can look the American people in the eye and lie with such ease. And even after 11 hours of lying, which is only slightly longer than the number of hours that Hitlery and her boss’ administration did virtually nothing as Americans died under fire in Benghazi, Hitlery made it clear that she had plenty of lies left and could very likely have gone on even longer. But with that said, let’s examine 13 of the most shocking revelations that came out of the hearing.
1. It was Hitlery who originated the false narrative about a YouTube video protest — Using Hitlery's emails and calls as proof, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, accused her of lying to the American people, telling them that the incident in Benghazi was a protest that got out of hand, instead of what it really was: a terrorist attack.
Jordan said, "So if there's no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start? It started with you, Madam Secretary." He went on to say, "Here's what you said at 11 o'clock that night, approximately one hour after you told the American people it was a video, you say to your family, 'Two officers were killed today in Benghazi by an al-Qaida- like group.' You tell — you tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story. Also on the night of the attack, you had a call with the president of Libya. Here's what you said to him: 'Ansar al-Sharia is claiming responsibility.' It's interesting; Mr. Khattala, one of the guys arrested in charge actually belonged to that group. And finally, most significantly, the next day, within 24 hours, you had a conversation with the Egyptian prime minister. You told him this: 'We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.'"
2. Hitlery avoided taking any responsibility for Amb. Stevens' death and it was during her testimony that Hitlery said, "I was responsible for sending Chris Stevens to Libya. I was responsible for supporting a temporary facility in Benghazi." She went on to say, "I was not responsible for specific security requests and decisions," saying that some of the Benghazi outfit's security requests were granted after departmental review, while others were not.
Hitlery said, "Chris Stevens had an opportunity to reach me anytime he thought there was something of importance," adding that Stevens and his team in Benghazi "very well understood the dangers that they were confronting. They did the best they could under the circumstances that they were confronting." And let’s not forget, the last time this country lost one of its ambassadors, it was in 1979 and it was due to the incompetence of another Democrat.
3. Hitlery likely never spoke to Stevens — Asked by Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, if she'd ever spoken to Stevens between his swearing-in in May 2012 and before his death on Sept. 11, 2012, Hitlery responded "Yes, I believe I did. I don't recall." In turn, Brooks responded, "Had you talked to him in July, he would have told you that he had asked to keep the security in Libya that he had. He was told no by your State Department."
4. Stevens didn't have Hitlery's email address — "I do not believe he had my personal email . . . He had the direct line to people he had worked with for years," Hitlery admitted to the Benghazi committee.
5. Hitlery said she "knew and admired" Chris Stevens, but called him "Chris Smith" on night of his death — Hitlery claimed she "knew and admired" Stevens during her opening statement, and later told the congressional panel she'd "lost more sleep than all of you put together" over the terrorist attack that killed him. Recently disclosed emails show, however, that she didn't get his name right on the night of the attack. In an email to her top aides, she called him "Chris Smith," possibly conflating Chris Stevens and diplomat Sean Smith, who was also killed that night.
6. Hitlery knew "nothing" about Stevens’ meeting with al-Qaida affiliate — "Were you aware that our folks were either wittingly or unwittingly meeting on the ground with members of al-Qaida hours before the attack?" Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, asked Hitlery. To which she responded, "I know nothing about this, Congressman."
7. Sidney Blumenthal had direct access to Hitlery, Amb. Stevens did not. It was Rep. Mike Pompeo who asked Hitlery, "A man who was a friend of yours, who had never been to Libya, didn't know much about it, at least that was his testimony, didn't know much about it, every one of those reports that he sent on to you that had to do with situations on the ground in Libya, those made it to your desk." He added, "You asked for more of them. You read them. You corresponded with him. And yet the folks that worked for you didn't have the same courtesy."
8. Blumenthal was Hitlery's "most prolific emailer on Libya" and it was committee chairman Trey Gowdy who asked Hitlery, "The documents show he was your most prolific emailer on Libya and Benghazi, and my question to you is did the president, the same White House that said you can’t hire him, did he know that he was advising you?" Hitlery answered the question saying, "He was not advising me, and I have no reason to have ever mentioned that or know that the president knew that."
9. Barry's White House didn't know Blumenthal was emailing Hitlery. And again it was Gowdy who asked Hitlery, "What was he doing when you hired him when the White House rejected him?" Hitlery said, "He was, in fact, working for my husband." Gowdy clarified, asking, "So he was working for The Clinton Foundation?" Hitlery responded, "Yes, that's right, Mr. Chairman." In the year following the 2012 Benghazi attacks, the William J. Clinton Foundation was renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
10. Blumenthal's emails weren't entirely unsolicited — Hitlery denied during the hearing that Sidney Blumenthal advised her on Libya, but admitted she responded to his emails "Thanks and please keep them coming," "Greetings from Kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming, any other info about it?" and "What are you hearing now?" She also said she frequently forwarded his intelligence to colleagues, oftentimes redacting his name so they wouldn't know the source.
11. Hitlery says she didn't know where Blumenthal's intel was coming from — "I don’t know where he got the information," Hitlery said of Sidney Bluementhal, who'd never been to Libya himself. "I did learn later that he was talking to . . . former American intelligence officials."
12. The committee doesn't have all of Stevens' emails — "I might add for the record: we do not, still, to this day, have all of Chris Stevens' emails," Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, said to Hitlery. She went on to say, "We received 1,300 more this week, we received most of them last week. We don't have the universe, yet, of Ambassador Stevens' emails."
13. Hitlery expected us to believe that Amb. Stevens was joking about security. And it was in speaking about one of Stevens’ December emails that Hitlery said, "One of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor. And I just see him smiling as he’s typing this [email], because it is clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few 'fire sale' items from the Brits." Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, did not think Hitlery's suggestion was at all funny. She told Hitlery, "Those 'fire sale' items, by the way, are barricades. They are additional requests for security for the compound."
Hitlery was largely responsible for a pointless invasion of Libya which, shortly thereafter, turned into what would become a terrorist-run hellhole. She was, as Secretary of State was responsible for the security of her diplomats in Libya, but she chose not provide for it. And while she had no correspondence with those diplomats on the ground she seemed to have plenty of time to speak with sleaze bag, Sidney Blumenthal. And when those diplomats and those who ran to help them were killed, she chose to blame a YouTube video. And finally, she used her jerry-rigged email server to selectively edit the material the public would see. But don’t worry—Hitlery’s the victim, Republicans are the perpetrators, and Chris Stevens is just one more bump in the road on her journey to the White House.
But look, in all likelihood this attempt to get Hitlery to accept at least some level of responsibility will be for naught. The stonewalling has gone on for so long now that despite the fact she’s viewed as a liar by a majority of Americans, she’s going to end up getting away with allowing four Americans to be butchered. Your average Democrat doesn’t give a squat that she’s is a liar or about those four Americans. And dare I say that there is really very little she could ever do or say that would keep Democrats from voting for her. Because Democrats have one overriding priority, that being of course, to make sure that there is a continuation of all the ‘free’ taxpayer funded goodies that they get. So I suppose the more important question to ask would is, do enough Independents care that Hitlery is a pathological liar?
But ya know, at the end of the day if Hitlery does turn out to be the kind of person that a majority of the American people truly want to be representing them for the next 4 years, then none of her blatant dishonesty nor her pathological tendencies is going to matter, and she will most assuredly be elected as our next president. And I must admit that, as much as it pains me to say it, I have now gotten to the point where I have very little faith in the ability of the American people to do right thing simply because most Americans don’t possess even the slightest interest in salvaging what’s left of our country. Frankly, they seem very content with saddling future generations with what has become an astronomical amount of debt brought about because of their own selfish demands and complicit politicians.