Webb Hubbell warns GOP not to make Hillary testify on Benghazi

[occupied]

She will be questioned by both the majority and minority council and she can be questioned in closed session. All her testimony will then be put to the test of other witnesses. Often in these types of inquiries there are other witnesses present or just before or after so that inconsistencies can be sorted out.

The questioning will be without the drama and the speechifying that we are used to in ordinary committee hearings. These are serious matters. Probably few people here were around for the Watergate hearings or the Army McCarthy hearings, but they are very well orchestrated, unlike the typical committee hearings we are used to.

There will always be an expert attorney sitting next to the Special Select Committee chair, and likewise the ranking member.

Republicans are not going to do anything UNLESS they can make big political hay over it, otherwise, what's the point? To get at the truth? LOL now there's a funny thought.

 

[bripat9643]

Webb Hubbell: Hillary Testifying on Benghazi Would Boomerang on GOP

The GOP is about the overreach again.

Why would any intelligent person listen to what that lying tub-of-lard convicted felon has to say?

 

[Zander]

Webb Hubbell....

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Webb Hubbell: Hillary Testifying on Benghazi Would Boomerang on GOP

The GOP is about the overreach again.

She already spanked them once. She might as well star in "Whoopass II, Now She's Actually Pissed!"

 

[rdean]

Mrs. Clinton: I told the Republicans that if they cut embassy security people could die. It was the SECOND time Republicans refused to listen to a Clinton warning. Worse, after they cut the budget and Benghazi happened, they raised embassy security by two billion. After they said it wasn't needed. Thank God they haven't tried to blame Iraq and Katrina on Obama. Oh wait.................

 

[Old Rocks]

Just gotta be reminded of all the victory high fives of the 'Conservatives' on 5Nov12. Then came 7Nov12.

 

[bodecea]

Webb Hubbell: Hillary Testifying on Benghazi Would Boomerang on GOP

The GOP is about the overreach again.

they should call her...more face time.

 

[Avatar4321]

Webb Hubbell: Hillary Testifying on Benghazi Would Boomerang on GOP

The GOP is about the overreach again.

please, if hillary testifying would hurt the GOP it would have happened before the 2012 election when she was originally scheduled to testify.

There is a reason she didn't then. And it wasnt because it would hurt the GOP.

But clearly since some random person say its going to hurt the GOP it's true.

 

[bripat9643]

It would be funny to watch them find just how counter productive it is to grill her in a show trial, oh excuse me, congressional hearing. That lady's kung fu is more powerful then theirs.

It takes incredible powers of self delusion to believe Hillary acquitted herself well when she testified about Benghazi. What she did is destroy any chance she may have had at become President.

 

[Erand7899]

She will be questioned by both the majority and minority council and she can be questioned in closed session. All her testimony will then be put to the test of other witnesses. Often in these types of inquiries there are other witnesses present or just before or after so that inconsistencies can be sorted out.

The questioning will be without the drama and the speechifying that we are used to in ordinary committee hearings. These are serious matters. Probably few people here were around for the Watergate hearings or the Army McCarthy hearings, but they are very well orchestrated, unlike the typical committee hearings we are used to.

There will always be an expert attorney sitting next to the Special Select Committee chair, and likewise the ranking member.

Republicans are not going to do anything UNLESS they can make big political hay over it, otherwise, what's the point? To get at the truth? LOL now there's a funny thought.

You are partially correct. Getting to the truth with this administration may be impossible. They tend to lie when there is not even a good reason to lie. They point fingers in all directions, and spread the shit so thin, across such a broad cast, that it is difficult to determine who did what, or when they did it.

However, I suspect that Hillary will have almost total memory lapse, just like she did in the Rose Law Firm hearings. She couldn't even remember what she had for breakfast.

And, there is little doubt that all of you loons will consider that a victory on her part. To hell with the truth. The American public can't handle the truth.

 

[occupied]

She will be questioned by both the majority and minority council and she can be questioned in closed session. All her testimony will then be put to the test of other witnesses. Often in these types of inquiries there are other witnesses present or just before or after so that inconsistencies can be sorted out.

The questioning will be without the drama and the speechifying that we are used to in ordinary committee hearings. These are serious matters. Probably few people here were around for the Watergate hearings or the Army McCarthy hearings, but they are very well orchestrated, unlike the typical committee hearings we are used to.

There will always be an expert attorney sitting next to the Special Select Committee chair, and likewise the ranking member.

Republicans are not going to do anything UNLESS they can make big political hay over it, otherwise, what's the point? To get at the truth? LOL now there's a funny thought.

You are partially correct. Getting to the truth with this administration may be impossible. They tend to lie when there is not even a good reason to lie. They point fingers in all directions, and spread the shit so thin, across such a broad cast, that it is difficult to determine who did what, or when they did it.

However, I suspect that Hillary will have almost total memory lapse, just like she did in the Rose Law Firm hearings. She couldn't even remember what she had for breakfast.

And, there is little doubt that all of you loons will consider that a victory on her part. To hell with the truth. The American public can't handle the truth.

You are probably right, in principle, in everything you said, however, you are criticizing the political response to a purely political attack. Put the whole thing in perspective. The concept that a political motive will corrupt the process is easy to grasp, just accept that this thing is a politically motivated attack and so requires a political response. Without the political aspect the whole thing could be cleared up in an afternoon with the conclusion that everyone had a hand in that fuckup but the demand for partisan victory precludes that.

 

[dr.d]

Um...I agree w everything but ur 1st statement occupied...the extreme partisans who embody our politics these days are more interested in any distortion that can rack up party points than getting at any truth....
Hillary getting mauled by the repetitive out of context portrayal of her "Who cares" comment during the last Benghazi hearing is just a harbinger of the grotesque spinning to come...
But...I have faith in her ability to handle distorting attacks with equanimity...and perhaps, with sufficient exposure, actual truth will prevail...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Stephanie]

well by golly, we should just listen to some politician who will scratch the back of another

you people didn't have a problem when it came to Democrats investigation on some SUPPOSED leak on Valier Plame and not one person was killed

such two faced hypocrites when it's your party in office

 

[Edgetho]

You people are beginning to drool just a tad bit too much. The truth has been told, the facts have been aired. You are all just hoping that if you tell a lie enough times, someone, somewhere will believe it.

The Hillary Boogieman is giving you nightmares....

The truth is Obama andh his administration lied in order to better his chances in the election. There is no denying that. No spin to put on that. THat is the truth.

The only real question is why you are not outraged by it.

Look......

Politicians lie. Especially dimocraps. The entire dimocrap party is based on lies and corruption

But that's not what this is about. At all. Not a bit.

It's not even about whether we could have saved those Men in Benghazi. It's really not.

What it's about is -- There was a PRE-MEDITATED decision to NOT act to save Americans under fire from HOSTILE FORCES in a Foreign Land and then COVER IT UP FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.

Guys and Ladies..... Things get fucked up all the time in Battle. ALL the time. In fact, it's the one sure thing you can count on in Battle -- Nothing ever goes as planned.

Nothing.

But the Lying ********** in Chief made a CONSCIOUS DECISION TO WITHHOLD HELP FROM AMERICANS FIGHTING FOR THEIR LIVES!!!!

And then LIED ABOUT IT.

The lying is secondary to the matter at hand. The real crime, and I mean CRIME in a literal sense....... I'm talking an imprisonable offense here..... Is withholding help from those men in order to advance a political agenda.

Let me tell you a story about a place called Coventry. Most Conservatives have heard of it, but I'm going to tell you anyway....

During WWII we had captured a German 'Enigma' machine and learned how to break all of Nazi Germany's Military transmissions. Some of the German Brass were afraid this had happened but the higher-ups, being quite arrogant, refused to believe it. Side issue.

Anyway, the British intercepted and decoded a message that confirmed that there would be a DEVASTATING Air Bombardment on Coventry, England on the evening of xx

You're Prime Minister of England and the Military brings you this information. What do you do?

Do you evacuate the citizens? Do you relocate RAF Squadrons and intercept the German Bombers and shoot them out of the Sky?

What do you do?

If you do either one of those things, the Germans will KNOW that you've broken their Codes and change them.

What do you do?

But this wasn't the situation facing the Lying ********** in Chief.

This lying piece of ******* shit, this traitorous scumbag, this gangster from the streets of Chicago, this Anti-American piece of FILTH refused to act NOT because of some overriding Military or Foreign Policy issues, but because he wanted to foist a LIE on the American People so he could get re-elected.

Ladies and Gentlemen, that is an imprisonable offense, IMO.

The man is a scumbag and ANYBODY that defends him is sucking the dick of a scumbag.

But, most dimocraps are used to doing that anyway.

 

[Edgetho]

She'll agree to testify to congress but not under oath. Remember when bush and cheney pulled that stunt?

Wrong again, asswipe.

A Select Committee has ENORMOUS subpoena power. They can subpoena ANYBODY up to, and including, the Lying ********** in Chief.

You have no idea how bad this is going to get. And it is..... Going to get bad.

Really bad.

Watch, listen learn

Judge Napolitano Explains Power of Benghazi House Select Committee | Fox News Insider

 

[American Horse]

The Dems are debating whether or not to participate and appoint their own members - the breakdown will be 7-Rs and 5-Ds – and I predict they will join if only for the reason that if they don’t then the Republicans will have unlimited subpoena power. If they do participate they can use their arguments to limit that power. All they would have to do to stymie a subpoena is to convince a single Republican to vote “nay”

 

[HenryBHough]

The Dems are debating whether or not to participate and appoint their own members - the breakdown will be 7-Rs and 5-Ds – and I predict they will join if only for the reason that if they don’t then the Republicans will have unlimited subpoena power. If they do participate they can use their arguments to limit that power. All they would have to do to stymie a subpoena is to convince a single Republican to vote “nay”

For which reason if there is but a single RINO on the panel it's doomed.

 

[American Horse]

Um...I agree w everything but ur 1st statement occupied...the extreme partisans who embody our politics these days are more interested in any distortion that can rack up party points than getting at any truth....
Hillary getting mauled by the repetitive out of context portrayal of her "Who cares" comment during the last Benghazi hearing is just a harbinger of the grotesque spinning to come...
But...I have faith in her ability to handle distorting attacks with equanimity...and perhaps, with sufficient exposure, actual truth will prevail...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

The Benghazi diplomatic post was deliberately left unprotected except by Libyan nationals. It happened that those Libyan nationals were militia-men. The reason for that situation was the desire – totally unwarranted – by the president and the Clinton to give the appearance that our presence in Benghazi was normal and the situation in Benghazi was normal for a diplomatic post and it of course wasn’t.

We had just spent a year providing air support (and conducting drone-kill attacks) for Libyan rebels of unknown (or if known worse still) allegiance, but we had plenty of Intel that informed us that some large percentage of the male youth in Libya were radicalized or had been to Iraq or Afghanistan and returned to Libya well trained militarily.

In light of all that, her direct participation in a policy that denied the personnel of the post any protection by any armed guards other than Libyan militiamen speaks volumes about her competency as State Secretary, and any higher office she would aspire to.

In a hearing she claimed that: Yeah she had signed off on a lot of the policy applicable to Benghazi – but thousands of documents and actions are authorized under her signature and she obviously can’t read them all. That of course is complete BS. She authorizes others to sign documents with the understanding that those signatures approve documents only with her support, otherwise access to her signature stamp would be withheld from that person acting as her agent.

Those kinds of decisions aren’t left to be made by irresponsible underlings.

An American election for high office is a completely political process. Candidates go on the record with their actions leading up to elections and they have to live with the record those actions precipitate.

It would short circuit the electoral process to deny the public of a complete exposure of decisions made by any politician including Hillary Clinton.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Web Hubbell?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You people are beginning to drool just a tad bit too much. The truth has been told, the facts have been aired. You are all just hoping that if you tell a lie enough times, someone, somewhere will believe it.

The Hillary Boogieman is giving you nightmares....

The Fact is that Obama told a politically convenient lie about a terror attack leading up to the 2012 election