easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,081
- 2,645
OPENING REMARKS - HILLARY CLINTON:
"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended the Muslim religion in her opening remarks at the House Benghazi Committee hearing Thursday. Clinton pointedly cited the existence of some signs at a rally in Libya after the Benghazi attack that read “Thugs don’t represent Islam” and “This is not the behavior of our Islam or our prophet.”
- Even NOW after the murder of 4 Americans Hillary, at the very start of the hearing, defends the Muslim religion and shows she is concerned about offending them rather than worrying about 4 dead Americans and offending their families and the American people.
"Clinton also acknowledged in her response that terrorism was responsible for the four Benghazi deaths"
"Cummings gave his best performance, railing about the political travesty which was this hearing. Both Cummings and Hillary mentioned the Accountability Review Board (ARB) as having found nothing."
- (Easy) ACTUALLY, the ARB found 4 State Department Employees 'at fault' in their final report; yet, those 4 employees were never held accountable - never received punishment of any kind.
(Easy) Gowdy Responded to Cummings' and Hillary's statements (accusations) by pointing out the following in his own opening remarks:
GOWDY:
“Secretary Clinton mentioned the ARB more than 70 times in her previous testimony before Congress. But when you hear about the ARB you should also know State Department leadership handpicked members of the ARB, the ARB never interviewed Secretary Clinton (Easy: ONE OF THE KEY PEOPLE INVOLVED WITH BENGHAZI), the ARB never reviewed her emails, and Secretary Clinton’s top advisor was allowed to review and suggest changes to the ARB report before the public ever saw it. There is no transcript of ARB interviews, so it is impossible to know whether all relevant questions were asked and answered. And because there is no transcript it is impossible to cite ARB interviews with any particularity at all. That is not independent. That is not accountability. That is not a serious investigation.”
GOWDY CONTINUED:
“You will hear there were previous congressional investigations into Benghazi. That is true. It should make you wonder why those previous investigations failed to interview so many witnesses and failed to access so many documents. If those previous congressional investigations really were serious and thorough, how did they miss Ambassador Stevens’ emails? If those investigations were serious and thorough, how did they miss Secretary Clinton’s emails? If those previous congressional investigations were serious and thorough, why did they fail to interview dozens of key State Department witnesses including agents on the ground, who experienced the terrorist attacks firsthand?”
(Easy) In his opening remarks Gowdy NAILS the Liberals while answering the question WHY another investigation is required by pointing how piss-poor, incompetent, and inept the ARB had been in what THEY called an 'investigation' (what should have been called a 'Whitewash')! Gowdy appropriately and accurately showed how the previous committee investigations were a JIKE, a complete sham, because they did not look at e-mails and did not even interview witnesses who were there on the ground. (NOTE: At the time the CIA and State Department reportedly would not ALLOW those witnesses to testify.)
10: 50 AM: Rep. Pete Roskam (R-IL) points out that Vice President Joe Biden disagreed with Clinton regarding military intervention in Libya. He says “our Libya policy couldn’t have happened without you because you were its chief architect.” He says Libya is a “disaster” because of Clinton.
- The Secretary of State is responsible for the Libyan Policy and the handling of that policy, to include the over-sight of Stevens and his protection. As Libya began to instable and disintegrate, as Stevens was reporting was happening, it was HER job to handle it. So, as Roskam seems to be pointing out, she was either so inept and failed so miserable that she got 4 Americans killed, OR she was completely ignorant about what was going on and entrusted someone else with dealing with it while she traveled around wining and dining with other dignitaries.
10: 56 AM: Cummings gives Clinton a chance to again defend the Accountability Review Board, which did not even ask for her emails or those of the late Chris Stevens.
- 4 of the 5 members of the ARB were HAND-PICKED BY CLINTON!
11: 00 AM: Clinton tries to absolve herself of any responsibility regarding rejecting Chris Stevens’s requests for more security. She claims she was not an expert on diplomatic security and had to rely on State Department experts that she would not “second-guess.” But she is being called out for “misleading.” "Clinton is misleading here. The requests for more security went up to her Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy. — Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) October 22, 2015
-- You don't have to be an expert to know what the MINIMUM Standard level of State Department protection for Ambassadors is. Not only was Stevens' request for additional security denied, but it was also reduced to a level BELOW State Department minimum standards. Those requests and actions were also brought to her Under-Secretary.
1115 AM
15 AM: Clinton refers to Chris Stevens’s mission in Libya as “expeditionary diplomacy” when asked if she was briefed about his security plans. Former U.N. Spokesman Richard Grenell calls out Clinton and Cummings’s questioning about her “stamp” on the cables and points out Clinton never saw relevant the cables because she had a private email account and could not access the cables without a State Department government email account:
- (R-I) Susan Brooks points out that Hillary was pretty clueless about what was going on in Benghazi (NOT receiving Intel cables) because she was using a personal e-mail account and the cables only went to her official State Dept acct.
11: 47 AM: (After talking about how many times Stevens had requested additional security, how his security detail was instead cut below State Department Standards) Clinton concedes Ambassador Stevens did not get “everything they requested” regarding security measures.
1117 AM: Rep. Susan Brooks (R-IN) says that Stevens was falling off of Clintons radar in 2012 when the situation was getting much worse. She says “there is not one e-mail to you or from you in 2012 when an explosive device went off in our compound in April.” “What kind of culture was created in the State Department where your folks couldn’t tell you in an email about a bomb in April of 2012?” Clinton says she did not conduct most of the country’s business on emails and says she made secure phone calls and had tons of meetings. “I did not do the vast majority of my work on emails,” Clinton claims. Clinton hypes up her White House meetings, but one of her emails that the State Department released showed she was once clueless about a meeting that was being held in the White House.
12: 05 PM: Clinton says the CIA had a “much bigger presence” than the State Department and stayed in Libya despite the overall decline in stability. (She seems to be now be passing the buck to the CIA.)
1205PM: Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (D-GA) asks Clinton how many major security instances would it have taken for Clinton to take extra security measures - Clinton did not answer the question.
- At least 50 incidents occurred in the last year before the attack on 9/11/12. A month earlier Stevens reported a gathering of approximately 1,000 Al Qaeida fighters in a square in Benghazi for a 'rally', Two terrorist attacks were conducted against Stevens' compound, the last one leaving a 4 foot hole in the compound wall, in the weeks leading up to 9/11/12.
"12: 35 PM: Jordan calls out Clinton for telling her family and world leaders one thing while falsely telling the American public another and insisting that the Benghazi attacks were a spontaneous response to a YouTube video."
- Clinton is reminded how the CIA testified they had informed the Secretary of State of the terrorist attack within the 1st hour of it beginning but how she had claimed in the very 1st committee hearing how she had no idea it was a terrorist attack.
"Jordan says he is troubled because he thinks Clinton knew the truth about the attacks (cites an email Clinton sent to her family about officers being killed by an Al Qaeda-like group and a phone call with the Libyan president claiming that that Ansar al-Sharia was claiming responsibility along with a call with the Egyptian Prime Minister in which Clinton claimed that she knew that it was a terrorist attack and had nothing to do with a video."
12: 32: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): "The False Narrative “Started with You, Madam Secretary.”
---------------------------
That is all that has been reported from within the hearing so far.....
LINK: ***Live Updates*** Hillary Testifies Before Benghazi Committee - Breitbart
"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended the Muslim religion in her opening remarks at the House Benghazi Committee hearing Thursday. Clinton pointedly cited the existence of some signs at a rally in Libya after the Benghazi attack that read “Thugs don’t represent Islam” and “This is not the behavior of our Islam or our prophet.”
- Even NOW after the murder of 4 Americans Hillary, at the very start of the hearing, defends the Muslim religion and shows she is concerned about offending them rather than worrying about 4 dead Americans and offending their families and the American people.
"Clinton also acknowledged in her response that terrorism was responsible for the four Benghazi deaths"
"Cummings gave his best performance, railing about the political travesty which was this hearing. Both Cummings and Hillary mentioned the Accountability Review Board (ARB) as having found nothing."
- (Easy) ACTUALLY, the ARB found 4 State Department Employees 'at fault' in their final report; yet, those 4 employees were never held accountable - never received punishment of any kind.
(Easy) Gowdy Responded to Cummings' and Hillary's statements (accusations) by pointing out the following in his own opening remarks:
GOWDY:
“Secretary Clinton mentioned the ARB more than 70 times in her previous testimony before Congress. But when you hear about the ARB you should also know State Department leadership handpicked members of the ARB, the ARB never interviewed Secretary Clinton (Easy: ONE OF THE KEY PEOPLE INVOLVED WITH BENGHAZI), the ARB never reviewed her emails, and Secretary Clinton’s top advisor was allowed to review and suggest changes to the ARB report before the public ever saw it. There is no transcript of ARB interviews, so it is impossible to know whether all relevant questions were asked and answered. And because there is no transcript it is impossible to cite ARB interviews with any particularity at all. That is not independent. That is not accountability. That is not a serious investigation.”
GOWDY CONTINUED:
“You will hear there were previous congressional investigations into Benghazi. That is true. It should make you wonder why those previous investigations failed to interview so many witnesses and failed to access so many documents. If those previous congressional investigations really were serious and thorough, how did they miss Ambassador Stevens’ emails? If those investigations were serious and thorough, how did they miss Secretary Clinton’s emails? If those previous congressional investigations were serious and thorough, why did they fail to interview dozens of key State Department witnesses including agents on the ground, who experienced the terrorist attacks firsthand?”
(Easy) In his opening remarks Gowdy NAILS the Liberals while answering the question WHY another investigation is required by pointing how piss-poor, incompetent, and inept the ARB had been in what THEY called an 'investigation' (what should have been called a 'Whitewash')! Gowdy appropriately and accurately showed how the previous committee investigations were a JIKE, a complete sham, because they did not look at e-mails and did not even interview witnesses who were there on the ground. (NOTE: At the time the CIA and State Department reportedly would not ALLOW those witnesses to testify.)
10: 50 AM: Rep. Pete Roskam (R-IL) points out that Vice President Joe Biden disagreed with Clinton regarding military intervention in Libya. He says “our Libya policy couldn’t have happened without you because you were its chief architect.” He says Libya is a “disaster” because of Clinton.
- The Secretary of State is responsible for the Libyan Policy and the handling of that policy, to include the over-sight of Stevens and his protection. As Libya began to instable and disintegrate, as Stevens was reporting was happening, it was HER job to handle it. So, as Roskam seems to be pointing out, she was either so inept and failed so miserable that she got 4 Americans killed, OR she was completely ignorant about what was going on and entrusted someone else with dealing with it while she traveled around wining and dining with other dignitaries.
10: 56 AM: Cummings gives Clinton a chance to again defend the Accountability Review Board, which did not even ask for her emails or those of the late Chris Stevens.
- 4 of the 5 members of the ARB were HAND-PICKED BY CLINTON!
11: 00 AM: Clinton tries to absolve herself of any responsibility regarding rejecting Chris Stevens’s requests for more security. She claims she was not an expert on diplomatic security and had to rely on State Department experts that she would not “second-guess.” But she is being called out for “misleading.” "Clinton is misleading here. The requests for more security went up to her Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy. — Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) October 22, 2015
-- You don't have to be an expert to know what the MINIMUM Standard level of State Department protection for Ambassadors is. Not only was Stevens' request for additional security denied, but it was also reduced to a level BELOW State Department minimum standards. Those requests and actions were also brought to her Under-Secretary.
1115 AM
15 AM: Clinton refers to Chris Stevens’s mission in Libya as “expeditionary diplomacy” when asked if she was briefed about his security plans. Former U.N. Spokesman Richard Grenell calls out Clinton and Cummings’s questioning about her “stamp” on the cables and points out Clinton never saw relevant the cables because she had a private email account and could not access the cables without a State Department government email account:- (R-I) Susan Brooks points out that Hillary was pretty clueless about what was going on in Benghazi (NOT receiving Intel cables) because she was using a personal e-mail account and the cables only went to her official State Dept acct.
11: 47 AM: (After talking about how many times Stevens had requested additional security, how his security detail was instead cut below State Department Standards) Clinton concedes Ambassador Stevens did not get “everything they requested” regarding security measures.
1117 AM: Rep. Susan Brooks (R-IN) says that Stevens was falling off of Clintons radar in 2012 when the situation was getting much worse. She says “there is not one e-mail to you or from you in 2012 when an explosive device went off in our compound in April.” “What kind of culture was created in the State Department where your folks couldn’t tell you in an email about a bomb in April of 2012?” Clinton says she did not conduct most of the country’s business on emails and says she made secure phone calls and had tons of meetings. “I did not do the vast majority of my work on emails,” Clinton claims. Clinton hypes up her White House meetings, but one of her emails that the State Department released showed she was once clueless about a meeting that was being held in the White House.
12: 05 PM: Clinton says the CIA had a “much bigger presence” than the State Department and stayed in Libya despite the overall decline in stability. (She seems to be now be passing the buck to the CIA.)
1205PM: Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (D-GA) asks Clinton how many major security instances would it have taken for Clinton to take extra security measures - Clinton did not answer the question.
- At least 50 incidents occurred in the last year before the attack on 9/11/12. A month earlier Stevens reported a gathering of approximately 1,000 Al Qaeida fighters in a square in Benghazi for a 'rally', Two terrorist attacks were conducted against Stevens' compound, the last one leaving a 4 foot hole in the compound wall, in the weeks leading up to 9/11/12.
"12: 35 PM: Jordan calls out Clinton for telling her family and world leaders one thing while falsely telling the American public another and insisting that the Benghazi attacks were a spontaneous response to a YouTube video."
- Clinton is reminded how the CIA testified they had informed the Secretary of State of the terrorist attack within the 1st hour of it beginning but how she had claimed in the very 1st committee hearing how she had no idea it was a terrorist attack.
"Jordan says he is troubled because he thinks Clinton knew the truth about the attacks (cites an email Clinton sent to her family about officers being killed by an Al Qaeda-like group and a phone call with the Libyan president claiming that that Ansar al-Sharia was claiming responsibility along with a call with the Egyptian Prime Minister in which Clinton claimed that she knew that it was a terrorist attack and had nothing to do with a video."
12: 32: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): "The False Narrative “Started with You, Madam Secretary.”
---------------------------
That is all that has been reported from within the hearing so far.....
LINK: ***Live Updates*** Hillary Testifies Before Benghazi Committee - Breitbart
