« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

“What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Angry, fighting words from Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, this morning in response to a question from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) when he questioned her about the Administration’s often repeated response blaming the Benghazi attack on a YouTube video.

Madame Secretary then follows her arrogant-sounding comment with, to paraphrase, it’s less important to find out why these militants did this, than to find them and bring them to justice.  Yes, and here we are four months later, still looking for the perpetrators.  Now we also learn that some of the militants involved in the latest attack on the BP plant in Algeria were also present in Libya:

The New York Times quoted an Algerian official saying that three of the militants captured alive told their interrogators that Egyptian members of their team had also been involved in last September’s attack in Benghazi against the American diplomatic mission in Libya.

So, “what difference, at this point, does it make?”  The difference it makes is knowingly supporting and perpetuating the YouTube video farce, of which the Secretary was an all too willing participant (remember her filming an advertisement that played over the airwaves in Pakistan) vs. recognizing the transnationalization of Al Qaeda jihadists and the intent behind their actions; that North Africa is fast becoming the new Afghanistan and the Administration’s probable failure to realize this; which has resulted in the needless deaths of four Americans.

When Secretary Clinton admited she did not read the cables from her ambassador requesting more security, in an area that undoubtedly ranked as one of the world’s “hotspots”, her culpability, responsibility and failure of leadership became all the more incongruous and unforgivable.  The arrogance displayed today should come as no surprise to followers of Mrs. Clinton through her political career.  And when all else fails, obfuscate, bloviate, shift the blame — in this case, to Congress and lack of authorized funds for security.

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) got it right (h/t Daily Caller):

“Had I been president at the time and I had found that you had not read the cables from Benghazi, you had not read the cables from Ambassador Stevens,” he went on, “I would have relieved you of your post.”

Hopefully, the American people will relieve her of her dreams of the Presidency.

 

COMMENTS

  • plumely

    What difference does it make?Ambassador Stevens and the four other Americans killed for starters. And your attitude as well. I don’t believe you or anybody else involved cares a wit about bringing those terrorists to justice.

  • Don T.

    The difference, Secretary Clinton, is between truth and falsehood. Something you might want to acquaint yourself with.

  • gawken

    She knows well the old maxim that in politics, “the best defense is to go on the offensive.”

    However, it matters, a lot for 2016.

  • Jack_Savage

    “Come on guys – let’s just move on! It’s what we Clintons ask when we screw up royally!”

    What an inhumane remark from a disgrace of a Secretary of State. She is not fit for any post, least of all President.

  • jamesmpratt

    EXCELLENT!

  • kipling

    The remark was calculated to allow her to take the offensive; however, I think it will come back to haunt her in the future.

  • http://www.TerriersOfTheRight.blogspot.com Flagstaff

    Listen to the answer, paraphrased: “I don’t care why they did this, I want to prevent it from happening again.”

    But NOBODY cares “why they did it.” The questions is, why were we lied to about it? At the time the “explanation” was being spread around the TV, you KNEW it was wrong, so why did YOU do THAT?

    But because of the clumsy wording of Johnson’s statement, not even a question really, he didn’t get ANY answer to anything, just an opportunity for Clinton to show off.

    We know four Americans were killed there, Ms Clinton. That’s why we are trying to get some answers from you. If you don’t know or won’t tell us WHY they were killed, how do you hope to stop it next time, given your reluctance to provide adequate defensive troops for an embassy in a war zone?

  • checkmate2012

    The whole love-fest hearings were hurl inducing and her comment was the cherry on top of what’s wrong with this admin and the Left in general. Feigned outrage is used to obfuscate as you aptly state, in an attempt to deflect responsiblitiy, “how dare you ask me that question” and make the masses feel sorry for her.
    .
    Does it make a diff from why they weren’t regular joe’s or a coup, well yes Madame; how can you prevent reoccurance if you don’t know the why. I’d call her an idiot except she’s alot smarter than 99% of Congress.
    .
    They bloviated to hear themselves speak without asking her but a few yes or no questions. I couldn’t stand the whole gambit, but does anyone know if she was asked: were you with the prez et al, when the event unfolded? What did the prez advise the military to do? You said today you weren’t watching live feed, yet Charlene Lamb (your employee) testifed already that she watched the events unfold real-time-where were you? Did she say get over here on the double, we got trouble?
    .
    If you are running for president, do you think you deserve to be responsible for the entire country when you failed at your job of State over 70K employees and 4 lives were lost under your ineffective watch? Why would we trust you as C-in-Chief?
    .
    Enough said and shame on all those in Congress for failing to do their job…as usual. She hasn’t done squat to help the security or standing of the USA! Yeah Arab Spring.

  • norris

    Hillary’s campaign debts were payed off last week to protect the President.

  • http://www.bohnetlaw.com rightappeal

    Notice that her answer set up a straw man that diverted from the terrorism cover up. If the question was whether the attacks had been the result of demonstrations vs. a few guys randomly deciding to kill Americans, I suppose it would not matter much. But a terrorist attack by al Qaeda calls for a rather different response and suggests a very different problem than either of the fictitious scenarios suggested by Secretary Clinton.

  • SoFiMil

    Are you serious?! Are you serious?!