Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

What the Hillary did I miss?

What the Hillary did I miss?

Real life got in the way of me watching Hillary.

I’ve seen a couple of video clips.

Like this one via Hot Air:

And this one via Gateway Pundit:

But what did I miss?

Update — Via The Shark Tank:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

http://www.jammiewf.com/assets/wddim.jpg

Well…

we do have Hill-larry’s 2016 campaign slogan…

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 23, 2013 at 2:39 pm

    Hill-larry got all teary as she recalled meeting the caskets of her (betrayed) colleagues…

    where she and Barrackah LIED about the cause of the incident. Right to the faces of the families of her (betrayed) subordinates.

    Remember…???

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 23, 2013 at 5:53 pm

      “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. If it was because of a protest or if it was because guys out for a walk decided to go kill some Americans.* What difference at this point does it make?”** Clinton shot back in a raised voice.

      “It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.*** Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer my questions about this but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get the best information … but you know, to be clear, it is from my perspective, less important today looking backward as to why these militants decided to do it,**** as to find them and bring them to justice,***** and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.”******

      *Note the straw-man; never a planned, concerted attack by AQ elements that we had LOADS of warning was in prospect.

      **It matters a great deal to the American people, who were subjected to a cynical cover-up, which is still ongoing.

      ***This directly contradicts *, above

      ****This directly contradicts ***, above

      *****How’s that working…???

      ******We already know that. AQ elements in N.Africa attacked our people on 9/11 because they were sitting ducks, and the AQ is at war with Western culture…the US in particular.

      It must be comforting for our foreign diplomatic corp to know that if somebody in DC screws-up that no heads will roll … except their own.

      Wasn’t this the same MO that DOJ used for “Fast and Furious” .. screw-up and break the law, nobody goes to jail.

      Obviously, being a federal government employee does have perks not usually mentioned in pleasant company.

    Observer in reply to Ragspierre. | January 23, 2013 at 4:14 pm

    Seems like it made a difference whether it was a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video, or a planned AQ terror attack, back in the summer when Obama and Clinton were lying about it to the American public. If it didn’t make any difference who the attackers were, or how long they had planned the attack, then why lie?

    The White House (and State) knew within a day of the attack that it wasn’t a “spontaneous protest” over the video, yet they continued to lie about it to the public for weeks. We all know why Obama lied: he wanted to get re-elected. Obama knew that if the American public knew the truth about the murders of the ambassador and the three others in Benghazi, that it would hurt his chances of being re-elected. The truth would (1) expose as false Obama’s prior boasts that AQ had been decimated and was no longer a threat; and (2) would show the folly of Obama’s unilateral decision to intervene militarily in Libya to depose Quaddaffi. That’s why it made a difference that the killers were AQ terrorists and not “spontaneous” off-the-street protestors angry about a video.

    Of course, Hillary knows all that. She’s frustrated about why it should matter now. What difference does it make who the killers were, now that Obama has been re-elected? The identity and motive of the Benghazi killers mattered in the summer, when Obama was facing re-election, and that’s why Obama lied. But it doesn’t make any difference now (to the Dims), because the lies worked, and Obama was re-elected.

      Ragspierre in reply to Observer. | January 23, 2013 at 4:26 pm

      One of the things you may have noted about human nature is that people get inordinately defensive when they are wrong, and know it.

      A skillful interrogator knows this, and watches carefully for it. Hill-larry told us where her soft, pallid, rotten underbelly is…

      …and now I’m temporarily blind…

        The old adage about law, facts and behavior comes to mind when seeing Hillary’s performance piece here:

        “When the law is against you, pound the facts. When both the law and the facts are against you, pound the table.”

        There was an awful lot of “table pounding” (or at least wild gesticulating) going on here when Secretary Clinton was asked about why the false narrative of the “spontaneous protest” kept being peddled by the Obama Administration when they KNEW it was false.

          Marinaman1954 in reply to Chuck Skinner. | January 23, 2013 at 7:01 pm

          The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

          Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

          Why?

          “Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

          How could a 27-year-old House staff member do all that? She couldn’t do it by herself, but Zeifman said she was one of several individuals – including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum – who engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigatio

        IrateNate in reply to Ragspierre. | January 23, 2013 at 8:22 pm

        The cankles! Don’t look at the cankles!

What did you miss? Nothing – buncha guys in some foreign place got killed cause somebody high up didn’t bother doing their job – they were too busy dodging responsibility. Nothing newsworthy…

Incredibly bad acting on Hillary’s part. While she ‘takes responsibility’ she doesn’t accept the consequences.

workingclass artist | January 23, 2013 at 1:42 pm

She cried and then pretended to take responsibility

She said she needed more money from congress

She smirked and became a bit Bidenesque

She summed Bengazi up by saying…

“What difference does it make?”

The disciples of Machiavelli triumphed

“What difference does it make!” screeches Hildabeast.

Well Hillary. With an Administration that is resolved on the issue words mean things
Terrorism might actually involve a response elevated from sending in the FBI a month later as if they were looking into a bank robbery.
You know. Think Reagan in 1986.

For me that was about her worst response because it made no sense.
But I did enjoy how she dissed Rice “Clinton style”

One of my readers posted this egregious comment of Hilary’s that says it all – in other words, we’ll never know what really happened in Benghazi.

“It is less important today as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice and maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.”

    herm2416 in reply to eosredux. | January 23, 2013 at 5:37 pm

    Well said. Each time I tuned in today, I thought the same. She seldom addressed the PAST, but instead would pretend to address the situation going forward. Classic distraction from uncomfortable questioning: agree with the interrogator in one brief sentence, then obfuscate for all one is worth.

    She is a shameful representative for this nation.

    I am appalled at how many of the senators and reps thought she had done a remarkable job as S of S. No, she hasn’t. She has been remarkably busy traveling, do not confuse that with accomplishment.

You missed the oohing and aahing of the media who think Hillary absolutely pulverized the panel with her intellect, tact, and smoothness. Is there any doubt she should be our next President? Such candidness and forthrightness are exactly what this country needs from its stateswomen. Watch for it tonight on TV.

Why watch it? We knew it would just be another version of circle jerk theater designed to protect the Ruling Class Aristocracy, and of course offer another rationale for the gov’t needing even more money so stuff like this doesn’t happen again… We live in a Dystopian State.

    Valerie in reply to FloydAlsbach. | January 23, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    I wanted to watch it, and I wish you had, Floyd. You might have learned something.

    I watched the hearings on Abu Ghraib, all of them, and then compared them to what people said happened. It was a genuine eye-opener. Especially the rants by the people in opposition that were placed either as questions or responses to the actual testimony.

    With Ted Kennedy firmly in mind, the clip from Rand Paul, above, doesn’t tell me much. He was not there to testify. My Conservative friends, please bear this in mind. The whole rest of the country has watched blowhards like Ted Kennedy exaggerate to the point of falsehood in an effort to shout down testimony in hearings like this. After his example, I can guarantee to you that no Democratic voter will be impressed with much of anything Rand Paul might say.

    Now, a clip of a short, pointed question followed by Hillary’s response — that could be telling.

      Browndog in reply to Valerie. | January 23, 2013 at 3:06 pm

      you are very correct.

      Certain statements/questions and certain answers/responses are specifically designed to be aired on the nightly news to frame a pre-determined narrative.

      Watch what airs tonight at 6:30.

2nd Ammendment Mother | January 23, 2013 at 2:12 pm

My money quote was “I haven’t had the opportunity to testify until now”….. and the reason why would be?

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | January 23, 2013 at 2:15 pm

Hopefully, The Right Scoop or somebody else recorded Rush’s first segment today. I’m not convinced Rush paid much attention to Clinton’s actual testimony. He had prepared in advance for it and used it as an excuse to skewer the Ruling Class of both parties. It has to be heard. It was priceless.

Henry Hawkins | January 23, 2013 at 2:22 pm

I thought Hillary did a great job – of providing enough video evidence of her failures as SoS to any future primary and election opponents.

I hope my impression was correct – she seemed like someone who’d just quit her job with no intent to ever work in the field again, and was suffering through an exit interview with Human Resources made mandatory if you want your final paycheck. She did not act like someone who knew or cared that this footage would come back out in 2016 if needed.

Whatever.

These so called Senators of ours-

Yea, a couple asked a “tough” question, made a “pointed” statement.

They did as they always do.

Make a statement, ask a question. Let Hilary lie through her teeth, and let it stand as fact, without so much as a follow up question t call her on it.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Browndog. | January 23, 2013 at 2:34 pm

    Makes you wonder if senators think, “Hmm, Hilary was once a US Senator – that could be me up there some day. Better take it easy on her. What goes around…”

      Browndog in reply to Henry Hawkins. | January 23, 2013 at 2:39 pm

      It doesn’t make me wonder. The Senate has always been an exclusive club that defends their members, past and present, at all costs.

I was hoping that a bit of light would come to the exact operations taking place at both the Compound and the CIA annex.
Well, I was hoping for a lot more…
And I was also looking for an inquiry as to the whereabouts and welfare of the Survivors.

1. Impressions, fair or not:

a. Hillary and Rubio: Two master bullshitters striking a modus vivendi. Neither willing to take the risk of going for a clear win.

b. Hillary and Johnson: She called him ‘sir’. Oh had he only responded ‘Call me Senator’!

Less humorous is that she alluded to the attackers as militants. Did she ever say ‘terrorist’?

c. Hillary and Paul: I see why there is a buzz about Paul. Unfortunately the country may not accept somebody who talks that straight.

He alluded to the Bush administration’s failure to fire anyone for 9/11. The media won’t give him any credit for it, but I took note. Country before party.

And he plainly said that Hillary should have been fired. Yes.

2. The subtext I read into Paul’s remarks is that we’re losing this thing. Our advantage remains overwhelming, but we’re losing. As long as the ruling class carries on with business as usual, we will continue to lose. As long as the country reacts to a 9/11 with America the Beautiful instead of The Battle Hymn of the Republic, we will continue to lose. (I may be wrong, but I can’t imagine any descendant of Confederates refusing to sing the Battle Hymn after an event like 9/11.)

3. Hillary can distance herself from the Obama economy in 2016. The question is whether the Mideast will be bad enough that she can’t distance herself from it.

4. Hillary looked almost like a caricature, a crazy little old lady. Unfortunately, the last election taught me that how I see things may no longer be how the country sees things.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to gs. | January 24, 2013 at 7:51 am

    For years, Hillary has been voted most admired female by the US public.

    Bill just won Father of the Year.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Uncle Samuel. | January 24, 2013 at 7:53 am

      Neither award for the Clintons is justified, just as Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize was not earned or justified.

      Yes, last month Newt said on Meet the Press that today’s GOP is incapable of competing with a Hillary candidacy.

      Still, there are an awful lot of skeletons in Hillary’s closet. I’m guessing that her popularity is the result of an intensively maintained facade for which I’m not the target audience. I’m guessing that that facade might unravel quickly under the right conditions.

      But I’m only guessing.

2nd Ammendment Mother | January 23, 2013 at 3:03 pm

I know it’s one of the Dem diversions….

but what in the world is all this “praise” for Hillary promoting women’s rights around the world? Last time, I checked this administration considered it a strictly hands off subject, including instructions to our troops in Afghanistan to not intervene or speak out about the abuse of women or children in that country.

2nd Ammendment Mother | January 23, 2013 at 3:10 pm

Oh my…. she really doesn’t want to answer questions about the YouTube claims.

    And so many representatives question Rice’s YouTube defense.

    What about Clinton? She was a prominent face of the YouTube defense.

    A few days after the Benghazi attack, she blamed the YouTube video for precipitating the violence. A few weeks after, she and Obama filmed their YouTube conclusion (=the vulgar depiction of Muhammad in the YouTube video caused Benghazi). Paid to have it broadcast on Pakistani TV.

Sounds like Hillary did what dems do. Stack up available corpses. Climb atop. Piously blowviate.

While everybody was watching the Hillary show, the House just caved on the debt ceiling. Of course Boehner swears that next time he’ll stand firm. (smirk)

    Henry Hawkins in reply to snopercod. | January 23, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    Luckily, we have the Boehner Rule, which states that for every $1 of spending, there’ll be at least $1 of cuts.

    Oh. Right.

I blame President Obama for the mess at Benghazi since Hilary is merely carrying out his “policy” there. Obama owns Libya. He started it and anything that results from it is on him. Since Bush had nothing to do with it and Obama intervened there he should have been paying attention to what was happening and should have spent the time and effort to make sure that his dealings there would be a good thing for our country. Certainly he should know there are jihadis in any muslim country who are willing to die in the cause of Allah and that diplomats need protection and how could he send a diplomat out to work for us who was so under protected. These high government officials know all the info and know how dangerous it is and it is unconscionable how our diplomats were treated. There are 11 armed guards at the private school Obama’s daughters attend. How many armed guards did our diplomat have in a chaotic Libya?

    Kenshu Ani in reply to Catherine. | January 24, 2013 at 3:02 am

    I agree, Obama is to blame as it was his unilateral decision to go into Libya.

    However, as long as the MSM continues to protect Obama, nothing will happen. The only chance of going after Obama or anyone in his administration depends on the establishment Republicans as no one else has the power to take on the presidency.

    The unfortunate truth is that the establishment Republicans (and pardon the bawdy example) don’t have enough balls between them to play a ping pong game. They are afraid. They are afraid of Obama, of the media and of leading the country. Boehner made a fool of himself just before the new year trying to push through a deal that caused Republicans to revolt against him. However, during the speaker elections no one made a serious challenge to Boehner which allowed him to retain his position. Why didn’t another Republican challenge him? My guess is because they didn’t want the job of being speaker and having to go up against Obama and the media.

    This is not meant to be a demoralizing point, just a realistic one. We have to be aware of the obstacles we are going to face if we want to change the direction the country is heading. One of the obstacles is the cowardice of the establishment Republicans. Overcoming this obstacle is actually simple. All we need to do is challenge them in the primaries hard enough to either send someone new (the best result) or to scare the incumbent with the loss of his job if he doesn’t shape up.

2nd Ammendment Mother | January 23, 2013 at 4:09 pm

Maybe I’m over reading some of this…..

If Clinton is blaming the Republican House supposedly not funding the state department and the procurement rules, is she planning on using Stevens dead body as her platform for 2016, ie the Republicans killed the Ambassador?

    Henry Hawkins in reply to 2nd Ammendment Mother. | January 23, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    I’m thinking that if she runs for anything in the future, the last thing she’ll want to do is call up memories of her worst failure as Secretary of State.

    I have a gut feeling that after 4 years in the Obama administration, she has had a bellyful of politics and may be done, gone the lecture circuit, book, and corporate board route.

      You may be right about The Big Job. But the Dems have been using Kirsten Gillibrand to hold Hillary’s place in the senate. When Hillary’s ready to come back Chuck Schumer and the others will take her to the back room, explain the facts of life, thank her for her time, and find a nice cushy job for her in DC as a consolation prize. (Not even Chuck Schumer would send someone back to the cesspool in Albany – well, maybe.)

    kind of need to have a budget to lay that blame.
    and there was funding anyways through the CR’s that have been used in place of budgets.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to dmacleo. | January 23, 2013 at 5:09 pm

      And even if one’s budget is short, part of being an administrator is knowing what to prioritize if you can’t cover it all. Would Ms. Clinton care for a public review of what was paid for instead of security for the Benghazi consulate? I think not.

    Well of course she tried that tactic to obfuscate, but the reality is that funding was not the issue. They (State Dept.) had plenty of money to build a plug in station for the green cars in Venice!

” The fact is we have four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or because some guys were out for a walk one night and decided to kill some Americans. At this point what difference does it make?”

Want to see a real reporter’s list of Benghazzi questions? Check Sheryl Attkisson’s list at Twitchy.

(via HA)

http://twitchy.com/2013/01/22/boom-cbs-sharyl-attkisson-tears-into-obama-admin-over-benghazigate/

Paul treated her the most respectfully. He did not flatter her, and tiptoe around asking a question. He treated her like she was a man. That is what bothers the left.

Johnson, Paul, and even McCain were her hardest questioners, and each got all of what, 5 minutes? hardly a grilling. There was more fake flattery and ego boosting than questioning, more talk about Hillary than anything else.

You probably saw all that was interesting in the few minute clips you watched. It took over 2 hours for that little tiny bit.

Hillary will regret the “what difference does it make”. Look

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23whatdifferencedoesitmake&src=typd

Henry Hawkins | January 23, 2013 at 5:11 pm

I’ll bet Bill Clinton was hidden away somewhere watching it live on TV and laughing his ass off.

Slartibartfast | January 23, 2013 at 5:14 pm

3am phone call fail.

Rand Paul is a real leader. He needs to run for President, especially since we are leaderless at the moment.

    Kenshu Ani in reply to redbirdacres. | January 24, 2013 at 3:19 am

    I don’t know. I think I prefer to have him remain in the Senate just because we need someone there to be a leader and I don’t see any other Republican filling that role.

    The problem I see with the country (besides the cultural corruption of the media) is that Congress has been striving to pass their responsibilities on to the Presidency. They need to jealously guard their power and responsibilities for themselves ESPECIALLY when the Presidency is held by a member of their own party. I think that Senator Paul (from what little I’ve heard from him) would do that. How many others in Congress would do that? How many others would take Senator Reid’s stance and pratically beg the President to use executive orders when they don’t want to vote on legislation that would be used against them in a reelection?

    This is why we have the check and balance system in place.

I dont know what was worse today…Hillary’s responses or Apple’s earnings report. Hey…at least we can sell APPL if we arent happy.

You can take the woman out of the garbage, but you can’t take the garbage out of the woman. What trash she is.

And what wastes of life those derelict senators are.

This debacle just proves how much our government will lie to us. Knowing that, I would encourage everyone to read Wikileaks. If you are a true constitutionalist, you realize that the government is supposed to be we the people; right now – not so much. We can never fix what is wrong unless we trully know the scope of the problem. We won’t get that information from the media or the government itself. Our government is doing things that are putting our troops and our citizens in harms way – physically and financially. I will say that there is information in there about election fraud, the Arab “Awakening”, and many other interesting items. It does not answer the “why” questions, but Wikileaks does make it obvious that our government is actively lying to us about the War on Terror, the Arab “Awakening”, and our electoral process. We need more people to wake up. If they don’t, I think that the future really looks dim.

BannedbytheGuardian | January 24, 2013 at 12:07 am

Hillary Clinton. Is recovering from a suicide attempt.

The puffy face ., the suddengreeting & swollen eyes. ( note the new heavy glasses ).The thin lips., the pallid complexion.

And most of all the attitude. F*** all of you.

BannedbytheGuardian | January 24, 2013 at 12:11 am

Greying . Note she is refusing to have it touched up. It is the exact growth expected since her last public appearance .

Her outbursts are those of a newly medicated patient .

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | January 24, 2013 at 1:20 am

Thank God for Sen Rand Paul, who hammered this inept incompetent liberal fascist ideologue with the Truth, with facts, with common sense, for her failed leadership, which is what she is supposed to do, supposed to be there to ensure- ie; the Sec. of State, not some low to mid level bureaucrat.

The deflecting, evading, excusing, ie; the bull crap from her is so pathetic, so outrageous, so insufferably disgusting, it makes your blood boil, just like it does with Obama, her same like ilk Boss-the head anti-American liberal socialist marxist islamist traitor-in chief.

[…] she sound like somebody with a concussion? What difference, at this point, does it make? Really, Secretary Clinton. I know you fans think you're now going to rest up for the 2016 campaign. I […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend