Takes on Hillary Clinton’s Testimony #1 – Chiller & Muddler

Thanks to FreeRepublic for this photo.

Fox News – Hillary, the Chiller

According to a Fox News assessment by K.T. McFarland, Hillary showed her chilling side in the Benghazi hearings.

“She didn’t mean to, but she showed us a glimpse into her soul.

It was chilling.

We now know that when Secretary Clinton met the plane carrying the bodies of the four Americans who died at Benghazi that the Obama administration had intially lied about what happened.

She stood over the flag-draped coffins of four dead Americans knowing that the first narrative blamed their deaths on an Internet video, which caused a demonstration outside the consulate to turn into a deadly attack, when she already knew the truth.

She looked into the eyes of the families of the fallen heroes knowing all about that.

She always knew they died from a planned terrorist attack from an Al Qaeda-like group. That’s what she told her family and foreign leaders according to newly released emails.

So why support the false narrative at the start? Because the Obama administration had an election to win eight weeks later, and a terrorist attack that killed four Americans didn’t fit into that plan.

President Obama asked voters to reelect him because he had killed Usama bin Laden. Al Qaeda was on the ropes. Qaddafi was dead and the Libyan war a success. The wave of war was a receding. President George W. Bush’s War on Terror was over because Obama and Clinton had won it.

A terrorist attack that killed Americans at Benghazi did not fit into that campaign narrative, so it had to be retold and spun into a different story. It wasn’t radical Islamist terrorists, but a spontaneous demonstration that got out of control in reaction to an obscure Internet video.

Instead it was — and still is — about character. And Secretary Clinton has been found wanting.

The even greater tragedy is Secretary Clinton doesn’t think she did anything wrong. In today’s Washington integrity and truth telling — even to mourning families — take a backseat to the relentless pursuit of power.

No wonder the rest of the country wants to throw all the bums out.”

Likewise, K. T. McFarland spoke on the Lou Dobbs show to illustrate the many ways that Clinton (like her word-parsing husband) lied.  From within hours of the attack, she told her family that the attack was perpetrated by terrorists.  Nonetheless, Clinton went to the American people and announced that it was a response to an amateurish video.  Then Clinton went to the grieving families and told them the same lie.

Hillary, the Muddler

In a 23 October broadcast, CBN news pointed out the testimony on the letters:

The committee pressed Clinton for answers to many questions, such as why was the United States in Libya? Why were security requests denied? And why was she willing to tell everyone but the American people that this was a terrorist attack?

One of the most revealing moments came when Republican Rep. Jim Jordan questioned Hillary about the explanations she gave in the first 24 hours following the attack.

“At 10:08, on the night of the attack, you released this statement, ‘Some have sought to justify the vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet,’ Jordan said.

Yet even though she led the American people to believe an anti-Islamic video was the motivation for the attack, she told her family, the president of Libya, and the prime minister of Egypt a different story.

“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,” Jordan charged.

“Why didn’t you tell the American people exactly what you told the Egyptian prime minister?” he asked.

Clinton defended her statements, saying she was careful with her wording to the American people about what happened at Benghazi, saying, “some have sought to justify” that the video, not terrorism, was the reason for the attack.

To me, this seems very much like the parsing of words that gave Mr. “Depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is” Clinton his moniker.

“I was very careful in saying that ‘some have sought to justify,'” Clinton said. “None of us can speak to the individual motivations of those terrorists who overran our compound and who attacked our CIA annex. There were probably a number of different motivations.”

But analysts like Terry Jeffrey, editor of Cybercast News Service, questions whether Clinton intentionally misled America into thinking it was a protest over a video and not a terror attack.

Bible Input

As discussed in the post on lies and untruths, the Bible may present God’s approval of those who told untruths that defended the lives (Exodus 1:17; Joshua 2:9).  However, for those who lie to further their own will, there is nothing but condemnation (Proverbs 12: 22; Leviticus 19:11; Psalm 5:6; and others).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.