Posts Tagged ‘January 23’

Hillary Clinton Pointed Out That DEMOCRATS Cut The Embassy Security Budget Three Consecutive Years (2007-2009). So How Is GOP To Blame???

January 24, 2013

If and when we get the transcript of the Benghazi hearings, we will see Hillary Clinton explaining to a Democrat that the embassy security budget had been cut every single year but one since 2007.

Who was in charge of the Congress in 2007?  That was the year that Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid began presiding over Democrat majorities of both the House and the Senate, that’s who.  The same Democrats were also in charge in 2008 – when they voted to cut the embassy security budget again.  And the same Democrats were in charge in 2009, when yes, they voted to cut the embassy security budget still again.

And yet why are the Republicans to blame for the Benghazi disaster, in which the first US ambassador was brutally murdered since the failed Carter years in the 1970s?  Because they voted to cut the embassy security budget.  Just like the Democrats (that’s the people who have been blaming the Republicans for cutting the embassy security budget) had done before them.

Every Democrat in both the Senate and House hearings demagogued the fact that Republicans had voted to cut the embassy security budget.  Both before and after Hillary Clinton pointed out that cutting the embassy security budget was hardly a partisan issue against Republicans given how many times Democrats had done it.

But that seems to have gotten lost somehow.

Republicans seemed fixated on the fact that a number of key Democrats in various State Department and intelligence positions had stated under oath that the budget cuts had absolutely no impact on the security situation in Benghazi.  They never seemed to comprehend the fact that if they didn’t know that Democrats had been the first ones to “gut” the embassy security budget, Hillary Clinton had just stated it as a fact.  Republicans are so used to being demagogued and demonized that they just go into defense mode rather than understand that Hillary Clinton had just given them the perfect response to Democrats’ demagoguery: “Why on earth are you blaming us for doing the exact same thing that you just got through doing year after year just a short time ago?”

Mind you, Hillary Clinton’s bright, shining moment of abject moral depravity during the hearing occurred when she said:

“With all due respect, the fact is, we  had four dead Americans! Was it because of a protest or was it because  of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some  Americans?! What difference, at this point, does it make?!  It is our job  to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from  ever happening again, Senator.”

Well, for one thing, Secretary Clinton, there’s something called “the truth” and there are still a few people who believe that the truth makes a difference.  But to be more specific, you completely omitted the ONE possibility in your statement above that turned out to BE that truth: that the murder of our ambassador and the three Americans who tried heroically to save America’s honor WAS A PLANNED, COORDINATED TERRORST ATTACK like conservatives said it was from the very getgo and what liberals denied from the very getgo.  Do you notice that?  Hillary Clinton says it was either a protest or a group of guys that just randomly decided to kill Americans in an attack that just completely coincidentally occurred on the anniversary of 9/11.  How on earth, madam secretary, can we ever “figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again” when you steadfastly refuse to even consider the truth as so much as a possibility?

What was it that Obama’s stooge Susan Rice trotted out and said?

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last week was not premeditated, directly contradicting top Libyan officials who say the attack was planned in advance.

“Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo,” Rice told me this morning on “This Week.”

Not one single word of what she said was true.  We now know that it in fact was a planned, coordinated, premeditated attack by an al Qaeda affiliated terrorist organization.  Every single thing Obama’s White House told us was completely false.  So how the hell are we supposed to “figure out what happened” when that is our “truth”???

The fact that the ONLY person who has been punished or disciplined in any way, shape or form over this murder of our ambassador was the guy who exercised his First Amendment right to make a video that everybody now knows had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with that attack.  And nobody has been captured or killed because there is no possible way that we can “figure out what happened” thanks to Obama’s and Clinton’s rampant deceit to cover up their gross incompetence.

But that isn’t all, of course.  There’s also the fact that Obama had been campaigning as the guy who had al Qaeda on the run and was on the verge of destroying it.  It was a completely bogus narrative, as the 9/11 attack that murdered our ambassador and as the meltdown in Algeria clearly prove.  The thing was, an al Qaeda-affiliated attack undermined Obama’s bogus political narrative.  So he forced the intelligence narrative to support his bogus political narrative by covering up the truth about what happened in Benghazi.

Obama produced a narrative of complete, abject lies as a cover-story for his cover-up in Benghazi.  And reacts with outrage to the suggestion that maybe the lies had a political motive even though they very clearly had a political motive.

What Obama did – altering the intelligence to conform to a politically convenient narrative – is an impeachable offense.  That’s what difference it makes, Hillary, you liar.

What does it matter?  Well, the truth does NOT matter to this wicked administration.

Tragically, Ambassador Christopher Stevens would be alive today had we had a Secretary of State, who had been more informed, who had been more available, who had bothered to read Ambassador Steven’s desperate pleas for security.

But “what difference, at this point,” does it make now?  Apprently none.

Advertisements