Connect with us

Executive

Madame Secretary, “At this point it makes a very big difference.”

Hillary Clinton once asked what difference any version of events at Benghazi made. It makes a big difference when someone lies about such deadly events.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Published

on

The elephant in the room: is Hillary Clinton paving the way for Bill? Or his her own ideology bad enough? She exhibits many traits of a sociopath, but does so deliberately.

During a January 23, 2013, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Hillary Clinton was questioned about the September 11, 2012 bombing of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The Benghazi anniversary attack occurred while Clinton was Obama’s Secretary of State during the final months of Romney’s presidential bid to unseat Obama and just two months before the November presidential elections.

Hillary Clinton and the contentious hearing

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was conducting a review of the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans including U.S. Ambassador J. Chris Stevens. During questioning by Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), Hillary Clinton famously said, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Let’s find out.

The transcript of the hearing recorded on C-SPAN shows Sen. Johnson repeatedly asking Clinton about the story coming out of Obama’s White House that the Benghazi attack was a response to protests outside the Consulate and an anti-Islam video posted on YouTube.

Clinton brazens it out

Johnson: No, again, we were misled (5:02 on C-SPAN) that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that — an assault sprang out of that – and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

Clinton: With all due respect (5:16 on C-SPAN tape), 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 who decided that they’d they 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.

Clinton continues

Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. The IC (intelligence community) has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out. But you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.

Johnson: OK. Thank you, Madame Secretary.

Judicial Watch gets involved

After numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests made by Judicial Watch for documents related to the Benghazi attacks, on May 15, 2014 Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of State and U.S. Department of Defense for their failure to comply with FOIA requests. The judge ruled in favor of Judicial Watch and ordered that the papers be released.

On May 18, 2015 Judicial Watch published a stunning report that the Department of Defense and Department of State documents clearly showed that the Obama administration knew that Al-Qaeda terrorists had planned the Benghazi attack 10 days in advance.

So, Hillary Clinton knowingly lied to Senator Johnson on January 23, 2013 during the Senate hearings. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Susan Rice knowingly lied repeatedly to the American public by insisting that an anti-Islam video was the cause of a spontaneous protest that turned violent and sparked the Benghazi attack. Lies. Lies. Lies.

Now about that film…

Filmmaker Nakoula Bassely Nakoula, an Egyptian-born Coptic Christian, posted a short anti-Islam video “Innocence of Muslims” on YouTube. His video was falsely blamed for the Benghazi attack and used deceitfully by Obama and his administration to dupe the American people and hide their own culpability. Nakoula was shamed, incarcerated, and threatened with death by Obama’s White House. He now lives in a homeless shelter in California.

More lies. Wikipedia continues to disingenuously maintain that Nakoula’s film sparked the Benghazi attack. The section on “Arrest and imprisonment” begins with, “Following the violent reactions to the video . . .” The section concludes with one interesting fact verified by Reuters – that on November 28, 2012, two days before the Muslim-Brotherhood government of Obama-favored Mohamed al-Morsi was ousted, an Egyptian court sentenced Nakoula to death in absentia for defaming Islam.

That brings us to:

The Muslim-Brotherhood connection to the attack on Benghazi

The stunning Judicial Watch report was published on 5.18.15 – four years ago. Its revelations were jaw-dropping then but even more relevant now as the dots connecting Obama to Hillary’s private email server and Benghazi are also connecting Obama and Hillary to the Muslim Brotherhood and the unlawful FISA warrants used to spy on Donald Trump.

From the Judicial Watch report:

A Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), dated September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack, details that the attack on the compound had been carefully planned by the BOCAR terrorist group “to kill as many Americans as possible.” The document was sent to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council. The heavily redacted Defense Department ‘information report’ says that the attack on the Benghazi facility “was planned and executed by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman (BOCAR).” The group subscribes to “Al-Queda ideologies.”

Placing the blame where it lies

In this Defense Department document Abdul Baset known as AZUZ, the leader of BOCAR, is blamed for the attack on Benghazi – NOT Nakoula Bassely Nakoula.

Further, from a separate Judicial Watch lawsuit, the State Department produced a different document created the morning after the Benghazi attack by Hillary Clinton’s offices that made no mention of videos or demonstrations: “Four COM personnel were killed and three wounded in an attack by dozens of fighters on the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi beginning approximately 1550 Eastern Time…”

Conclusion

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch concludes:

If the American people had known the truth – that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other top administration officials knew that the Benghazi attack was an al-Qaeda terrorist attack from the get-go – and yet lied and covered up this fact – Mitt Romney might very well be president. And why would the Obama administration continue to support the Muslim Brotherhood even after it knew it was tied to the Benghazi terrorist attack and to al-Qaeda? … These documents show that the Benghazi cover-up has continued for years and is only unraveling through our independent lawsuits. The Benghazi scandal just got a whole lot worse for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton was to carry on Obama’s legacy

Hillary’s Benghazi lies and cover-up protected Obama’s 2012 presidential candidacy and made her Obama’s legacy candidate for 2016. Obama’s lies and cover-up protected Hillary’s presidential bid and his own political malfeasance and ideological connection to the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary’s private email server was an off-the-books carrier of classified information that protected Hillary, Obama, Rice, and every other Obama administration official implicated in the Benghazi attack and its cover-up including the aftermath of securing FISA warrants through unverified foreign intelligence sources to spy on the the Trump campaign.

The illegal surveillance campaign against Trump

Tony Shaffer, former senior intelligence officer in the U.S. Army, explains the unprecedented corruption and shocking abuse of FISA by Obama’s FBI to spy on the Trump campaign in a stunning interview with Jan Jekielek from American Thought Leaders. Tony Shaffer describes what was done by the Obama administration but the question remains – WHY?

Journalist Joan Swirsky provides the answer. In her stunning 4.23.19 article, “Prison, anyone?” she identifies the nine words uttered by then Candidate Trump during a campaign debate that launched the shocking coup attempt against a sitting president of the United States. “If I were president, Hillary would be in jail.” These nine words are the key to everything – they unlock the Benghazi cover-up the FISA abuses, Spygate, Russiagate, the partisan Mueller investigation, and the ongoing hysterical screams by Democrats to impeach President Trump.

And Trump wins despite Hillary Clinton…

When the unthinkable happened and Candidate Trump was elected president, the Strok/Page insurance policy was launched to overthrow President Trump because if Hillary Clinton goes to jail so does Obama and his collaborators – the entire house of cards collapses and the enormity of the coup attempt against sitting President Trump is explained and exposed.

Madame Secretary, “At this point it makes a very big difference.”


This article also appears here.


About the image

The featured image is the official portrait of Hillary Clinton in her role as Secretary of State.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Website | + posts
Linda Goudsmit is the devoted wife of Rob and they are the parents of four children and the grandparents of four. She and Rob owned and operated a girls’ clothing store in Michigan for forty years before retiring to the sunny beaches of Florida. A graduate of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Linda has a lifelong commitment to learning and is an avid reader and observer of life. She is the author of the philosophy book Dear America: Who’s Driving the Bus? and its political sequel, The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’, along with numerous current affairs articles featured on her websites www.lindagoudsmit.com and www.goudsmit.pundicity.comThe Collapsing American Family: From Bonding to Bondage completes Linda’s trilogy of insightful books that connect the philosophical, political, and psychological dots of the globalist war on both American and individual sovereignty.
 
Linda believes the future of our nation requires reviving individualism, restoring meritocracy, and teaching critical-thinking skills to children again. Her illustrated children’s book series, Mimi’s Strategy, offers youngsters new and exciting ways of solving their problems and having their needs met. Mrs. Goudsmit believes that learning to think strategically rather than reacting emotionally is a valuable skill that will empower any child throughout his or her life. Plus, in Linda’s words, “I have yet to meet the child who would prefer a reprimand to a kiss.”  
CATEGORY:Executive
Click to comment
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

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

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Trending

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x