Thursday, October 22, 2015
Hillary Leaves Goops In The Dust At Benghazi Hearings
Hillary holds her own at the Benghazi hearings. She left the GOOps looking like frustrated lap dogs.
Maybe now, after Hillary outlasting the hound dog Goopers - with grace, class and assurance - these misfit mutts will leave her alone. If the House "Select" Banghazi Committee was hoping to score any points off Hillary they failed miserably. The front running Dem candidate faced them with courage and moments of humor that ultimately had them looking like snarling junkyard dogs desperate for a bone.
But a bone they didn't get, only a boning.
In truth, one could say Hillary prevailed at this GOP circus without saying a word. Her mere body language conveyed the futility of these gathered imps (the Dem faction excepted) and their obvious political witch hunt. Only a hardline, hardcore GOP -er would indeed see any benefit on their side. As a salon.com piece noted::
"The fact that Hillary Clinton is often more effective when she’s cornered, and that she seems to have retained some of the poise and focus she demonstrated at the Democratic debates, pushes this even more into her column."
Here are the contrasts boiled down to the basics:
Clinton: Poised, knowledgeable, contrite, humble, clear.
Republicans: Small, petty, uninterested, disjointed, prepossessed.
Especially, the loser Trey Gowdy - presiding over the hearings, who looked more like a lost dog catcher from Dogpatch, SC than a serious inquisitor or hearings chair. His whiny, nasal redneck twang even gave him away as perhaps better fitted for chasing runaway hounds - or collecting their poop- than presiding over a serious committee. (Especially after Elijah Cummings, D- MD, got done raking him and his fellow GOOPr hoaksters over the coals!)
The real question is why this farce is still going on after already wasting $5 million of taxpayer money.
The idiot Reepos kept pressing Hillary for 'why' it happened but that's already been asked and answered. Nearly two years ago.
In the wake of that violent 2012 incident, the idiot media (most of them) hyped the Al Qaeda connection as assorted Repukes - especially Mittster Romney- screamed and pounded for justice. A question on possible 9/11 Benghazi connections to Al Qaeda was actually asked during the 2nd Presidential debate by Candy Crowley. Almost every Repuke and lax media nabob - to a man -asserted that saying a vile, vicious anti-Muslim video was responsible "amounted to foolishness". They insisted it was Al Qaeda, thereby providing their presumptive 9/11 analogy and confirmation bias.
Thanks to a New York Times investigative piece ('Deadly Mix In Benghazi, False Allies, Rude Video', December 29, 2013) we now know that the same American-made anti-Islamic video WAS responsible, and incited anti-American rage but it wasn't Al Qaeda involved. Rather, it was one of the militias with which the U.S. had made common cause to oust Libyan dictator Muammar el-Qaddafi. In retrospect, this also shows the wisdom of the U.S. not compounding previous errors by making an alliance with the Syrian rebels to take down Assad, see e.g. http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/09/if-youre-agaist-radical-jihadists-you.html
As the NY Times piece stated:
"Months of investigation centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.
The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO's extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in part by anger at an American -made video denigrating Islam."
The piece went on to delve into the basis in much more detail while also noting the (usually) garrulous Darryl Issa (then committee chair) "had no comment" and that the incident "shows the risks of expecting American aid in a time of desperation to buy durable loyalty and the difficulty of discerning friends from allies in convenience in a culture shaped by decades of anti-American sentiment."
This provides the cautionary lesson for the U.S. not to meddle in Middle East affairs or states - whether by indirect interjection (via NATO air attacks and supplying rebels, as in Libya) or direct, as was contemplated two years ago when the thought of using Syrian rebels to attack Hafez Assad was bruited in tandem with a cruise missile assault. It also provides another domestic political lesson, of ignoring political grandstanding by known demagogues such as Darryl Issa, Peter King (R, NY), Lindsey Graham, and their assorted clones - like Trey 'Hay' Gowdy.
Btw, as far as "protection" at embassies, let's remind ourselves it was the GOP that repeatedly cut the budget - not just for the Embassy in Benghazi, but around the world.
Meanwhile, look for reality to remain the casualty with this Benghazi witch hunt and the pukes to have no problem squandering tens of millions more of your tax dollars on a lengthy investigation that will go nowhere. Given it's all about politics, in this case trying to diminish Hillary's presidential election chances.
But according to a recent poll, 53% of Americans want no more part of it. The GOOPs best pay attention or pay the price next year.