Hillary Clinton ‘took responsibility’ for 2012 Benghazi consulate attack

[webfact]

Hillary Clinton ‘took responsibility’ for 2012 Benghazi consulate attack



WASHINGTON: -- Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has told a Congressional committee she took responsibility after a deadly 2012 attack on a US consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

“I took responsibility and as part of that, before I left office I launched reforms to better protect our people in the field and help reduce the chance of another tragedy happening in the future,” she told the panel.

However, she added that it is impossible to prevent all terrorist attacks and warned US diplomats must inherently work in unstable and dangerous areas around the world.

The Democratic presidential contender is testifying in front of a Republican-heavy panel (seven Republicans to five Democrats). Her party is labelling the process a witch-hunt aimed at harming her leadership bid.

Democrats on the committee say there is little left to discover about the Benghazi attack that several previous inquiries did not already unearth.

Months of controversy preceded her appearance after it was revealed that Clinton had used a private home email server for her State Department work. The revelation surfaced, in part, because the Benghazi committee asked to see her official records in 2014.


-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2015-10-23

[ezzra]

If she took responsibility for that humongous cock up and breach in security protocol, she has

no business of running for president of the united state, what assurety that she will not screw up

again but this time it will cost many more lives than just four?

[Pinot]

If she took responsibility for that humongous cock up and breach in security protocol, she has

no business of running for president of the united state, what assurety that she will not screw up

again but this time it will cost many more lives than just four?

No, a humongous cock up would be something like, oh say 9/11 or invading Iraq for no reason. The Republicans are trying to stick anything on HRC at this point but...forgedaboutit. NO ONE CARES ABOUT EMAILS OR BENGHAZI!

I know this going to be difficult, maybe as difficult as a black President, but Hillary will be the next President. Not Trump , not Carson , not Bush and not little Marco Rubio or any of the rest of the clowns

It's over long before it begins, Hillary Clinton President of the United States

HRC is a slam dunk.

[JohnC]

Well as an outsider looking in this comes across as a witch hunt by the republicans against what they perceive is a strong contender to be the next President, and as said before what about the two Iraq wars? How many lives were lost there and yet it never gets a mention? It looks like the republicans are running scared but then I am not an American so I don't have a vote, just an ordinary guy looking in!

[X pat]

Ah noble lady that thow shod fall apound they masters soared to save his reputation.

[ezzra]

If she took responsibility for that humongous cock up and breach in security protocol, she has

no business of running for president of the united state, what assurety that she will not screw up

again but this time it will cost many more lives than just four?

No, a humongous cock up would be something like, oh say 9/11 or invading Iraq for no reason. The Republicans are trying to stick anything on HRC at this point but...forgedaboutit. NO ONE CARES ABOUT EMAILS OR BENGHAZI!

I know this going to be difficult, maybe as difficult as a black President, but Hillary will be the next President. Not Trump , not Carson , not Bush and not little Marco Rubio or any of the rest of the clowns

It's over long before it begins, Hillary Clinton President of the United States

HRC is a slam dunk.

That would be a nightmare for the US, and if she wins,( fat chance) that would be by default of not

having anyone else worthy of the US of A presidency and NOT because she's the right choice...

[Usernames]

She sits there before the committee with that smug frown of entitlement on her fact. The more people see of her, the less they like her. This will reinforce that sentiment.

[Trouble]

After watching the entire testimony today, I take away a couple of conclusions. (1) Every Democrat on the committee spent their time denouncing the Republicans for a witch hunt and further denouncing the very committee of which they were charged with finding facts. Not one of them asked any questions pertinent to the investigation and in fact it looked all staged to support Hillary. (2) Had the State Department and Hillary Clinton been forthright from the get go there would have been no need for this set of hearings. Information, emails, testimony has dribbled out over three years and neither the Administration, State Department, nor Hillary has been very cooperative in the various committee investigations that have taken place. (4) Hillary has a difficult time taking responsibility for anything that occurred under her watch (Remember Harry Truman's "the buck stops here" motto).

(5) The Republicans main thrust of questioning should have been on the outright negligence of some State Department employees neglecting Steven's requests for more security and Hillary's oversight of that and also whether or not the Administration deliberately put out false information about the video seeming to be the cause of the incident when they knew differently and whether Hillary when along with it (In the hearings today Hillary's emails certainly show she did not consider the attack a result of the video and appears complicit in spreading the video theory) as it appears she never contradicted what the Administration was putting forth even when she knew different. (6) Hillary is quite adept in deflecting direct questions and putting on a great performance. She's pretty damn good.

Hillary is a smart woman but for some reason it is difficult for her just to clearly admit that the State Department screwed up on the requests for Security and she was the person running the State Department and therefore inherently bears some of the responsibility. If she had clearly admitted some degree of fault early on this would never have become an issue for her at this point in time. It had to be dragged out of her tooth and nail.

[granuaile]

I'm for Sanders, though the reality is that Clinton likely will get the nomination and I will vote for her when she does. Watching these hearings late last night, what's been clear since the beginning and later reinforced by Representative McCarthy's statements was reinforced by these hearings - they are baseless and the real reasons for them are political.

Watching last night, I loved Trey Gowdy's meltdown when Cummings challenged him on the focus of selective Sidney Blumenthal emails calling for all of the emails involving Blumenthal to be released... Gowdy looked like "Eraserhead" at times...

[freebyrd]

While us foreigners don't have a vote, she could end up becoming President of the world, which is what it amounts to as world leaders queue up to kiss the 'royal ring'. No disputing the fact she is a very intelligent woman, but I wouldn't trust her as far as I could throw her.

That said, does anyone really want Trump or Sanders? The alternatives do seem to be rather non-existent.....

[tonypace02]

At the Congressional 911 hearings, Condoleezza Rice said, "It was not until late March of 2001 that we had evidence that Osama Bin Laden was reponsible for the attack on the USS Cole. But we decided not to go after him because we did not want to give him standing with the Arab community." I guess that makes GWB responsible for the destruction of the twin towers in NYC and the Pentagon.

When Saddam Hussein advised U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glasspie, that he was considering an invasion of Kuwait and asked her how the U.S. would respond, she told him the U.S. would fall back on the 1967 accords and had no interest in Arab to Arab problems. I guess that makes GHWB responsible for the invasion of Kuwait and Operation Desert Storm.

I am a lifelong Republican and I am not so thrilled with the idea of a second President Clinton, although I thought the first one was pretty good. On the other hand, I feel exactly the same way about every candidate on our side of the aisle. The only Republican I would support for the presidency is not even a candidate; but I might give some thoughts to Ron Paul.

Edited October 23, 2015 by tonypace02

[up-country_sinclair]

Of course something about all this doesn't seem quite right, but it's well past time to let it go. I want a Republican in the White House, but this current strategy is going to backfire. Expecially with female voters who make up more than half of the electorate.

There have been several congressional investigations, but never a smoking gun.

For me, the most telling incident from yesterday came after the session. Chairman Gowdy was asked by reporters what new information he learned from Secretary Clinton's 11 hours of testimony, and he couldn't specify a single thing.

Let it go.

[Jai Dee]

Several off-topic troll posts have been removed from this thread.

[Christie Paul]

This is what happens, when your ambassador engages in arms dealing.

[RidgeRunner]

This is what happens, when your ambassador engages in arms dealing.

Clearly he is CIA.

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.

[catinthehat]

While us foreigners don't have a vote, she could end up becoming President of the world, which is what it amounts to as world leaders queue up to kiss the 'royal ring'. No disputing the fact she is a very intelligent woman, but I wouldn't trust her as far as I could throw her.

That said, does anyone really want Trump or Sanders? The alternatives do seem to be rather non-existent.....

That's not true at all. The US Embassy here has made it extremely easy to cast your vote. In any election!!!

Just make sure you are registered to vote, I believe it is at least 30,60 or 90 days before any election you would care to vote in.

I have been ouot of the US for 10 years now and have not missed my chance to vote ever.

[RidgeRunner]

Why did Fox News turn away from the live, unfolding Benghazi hearing after making a living from full time coverage the last 3 years?

The move to cut away raises the question of whether Fox News was hesitant to expose its viewers to the live-on-the-spot unraveling of many Benghazi themes that it has pushed on air.

​Instead of live coverage, they turned to their commentators to continue their non stop harassment of Hillary.

[freebyrd]

While us foreigners don't have a vote, she could end up becoming President of the world, which is what it amounts to as world leaders queue up to kiss the 'royal ring'. No disputing the fact she is a very intelligent woman, but I wouldn't trust her as far as I could throw her.

That said, does anyone really want Trump or Sanders? The alternatives do seem to be rather non-existent.....

That's not true at all. The US Embassy here has made it extremely easy to cast your vote. In any election!!!

Just make sure you are registered to vote, I believe it is at least 30,60 or 90 days before any election you would care to vote in.

I have been ouot of the US for 10 years now and have not missed my chance to vote ever.

I think you misunderstood me, when I said foreigner I meant it, I'm English.

[Chicog]

Why did Fox News turn away from the live, unfolding Benghazi hearing after making a living from full time coverage the last 3 years?

The move to cut away raises the question of whether Fox News was hesitant to expose its viewers to the live-on-the-spot unraveling of many Benghazi themes that it has pushed on air.

​Instead of live coverage, they turned to their commentators to continue their non stop harassment of Hillary.

They're getting desperate now.

Drudge is trying to claim that Hillary is ill with a thyroid problem because she coughed after ten hours of testimony.

Edited October 24, 2015 by Chicog

[Berkshire]

After watching the entire testimony today, I take away a couple of conclusions. (1) Every Democrat on the committee spent their time denouncing the Republicans for a witch hunt and further denouncing the very committee of which they were charged with finding facts. Not one of them asked any questions pertinent to the investigation and in fact it looked all staged to support Hillary. (2) Had the State Department and Hillary Clinton been forthright from the get go there would have been no need for this set of hearings. Information, emails, testimony has dribbled out over three years and neither the Administration, State Department, nor Hillary has been very cooperative in the various committee investigations that have taken place. (4) Hillary has a difficult time taking responsibility for anything that occurred under her watch (Remember Harry Truman's "the buck stops here" motto).

(5) The Republicans main thrust of questioning should have been on the outright negligence of some State Department employees neglecting Steven's requests for more security and Hillary's oversight of that and also whether or not the Administration deliberately put out false information about the video seeming to be the cause of the incident when they knew differently and whether Hillary when along with it (In the hearings today Hillary's emails certainly show she did not consider the attack a result of the video and appears complicit in spreading the video theory) as it appears she never contradicted what the Administration was putting forth even when she knew different. (6) Hillary is quite adept in deflecting direct questions and putting on a great performance. She's pretty damn good.

Hillary is a smart woman but for some reason it is difficult for her just to clearly admit that the State Department screwed up on the requests for Security and she was the person running the State Department and therefore inherently bears some of the responsibility. If she had clearly admitted some degree of fault early on this would never have become an issue for her at this point in time. It had to be dragged out of her tooth and nail.

I wondered how the right-wingers watching that hearing would react and now I see. Firstly, the Democrats on that panel were the only ones making any sense. And the questions that the Republicans were asking weren't questions at all, but accusations and persistent badgering in an attempt to get her to crack. What was most glaring was that the GOP folks weren't the least bit interested in her answers.

I was not a big fan of HRC, but she came out of that hearing looking very "presidential." It was the biased Republicans on the panel who came out as partisan bullies who were not the least bit interested in the truth or saving future American lives, but rather to smear the likely Dem presidential nominee. This is why the GOP is a dying party because most Americans can see right through their shameless charade.

[Jingthing]

HRC ... biggest balls in the room.

Just inaugurate CORONATE her already and get it over with!

Obama is clearly tired and bored with the job.

Next! ...

Edited October 25, 2015 by Jingthing

[RidgeRunner]

Why did Fox News turn away from the live, unfolding Benghazi hearing after making a living from full time coverage the last 3 years?

The move to cut away raises the question of whether Fox News was hesitant to expose its viewers to the live-on-the-spot unraveling of many Benghazi themes that it has pushed on air.

​Instead of live coverage, they turned to their commentators to continue their non stop harassment of Hillary.

They're getting desperate now.

Drudge is trying to claim that Hillary is ill with a thyroid problem because she coughed after ten hours of testimony.

My money is on a "sex scandal" as the next attack on Hillary. Watch.

[canuckamuck]

Witch hunt, yes, and they caught one.