2016, Lies, And Video
“Yesterday, our U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya was attacked. Heavily armed militants assaulted the compound and set fire to our buildings. American and Libyan security personnel battled the attackers together.”
Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the internet.
– Hillary Clinton
Can someone explain to me how Hillary Clinton can be blamed for participating in a coverup when she made the following statement on September 12 in a formal press conference? She had no reason to lie, and the record shows she didn’t lie.
Depends On What Some Means
It seems to me that, in her statement, Hillary was talking about more than the attack with respect to the video. Who is the “some” she is talking about? International news stories from that week discuss both the video and the attacks in Libya (and other places). Time, National Post, International Business Times, and the BBC all week here, here, and here.
It wasn’t Hillary that “conflated” the video with the attack in Benghazi, and the story certainly wasn’t propagated for weeks as some are alleging. If you look at the Republican led investigation by the House Intelligence Committee you will see that by the following week, it was widely acknowledged that there was no protest at the Special Mission Compound.
Was it a demonstration that got out of hand, or was it an “assault by heavily armed militants”? We know now it was the latter, which is what Clinton said both publicly and privately. We also know that the intelligence community initially thought that there had been a demonstration going on in Benghazi (See House Intelligence Committee Report). This wasn’t cleared up until the video footage from the compound was reviewed the following week.
What Was The Motivation For The Attack?
Reviewing the reports from the seven previous investigations, the answer is still unclear although the video was likely the motivation for some of the attackers. We know that ring leader Ahmed Abu Khatallah stated he was motivated by the video. We know from the news articles I linked that the video and the actions of thousands in the middle east were motivated by the video. Who thinks the video played no role in motivating the attackers? If it didn’t, why would Khatallah say it did?
“The White House Lied”
You could argue that when Susan Rice appeared on the Sunday News Shows, although I don’t agree with that. To me, its not worth arguing about because it goes to motive and someone that thinks the President had the motive to lie will never believe it was a mistake. The State Department got it right. The White House got it wrong, until the following week when the Intelligence Community finally figured it out.
People don’t have to like Mrs. Clinton. People don’t have to vote for her either. Neither of those dispositions mean she was lying about Benghazi. The facts of what she said are true. She believes, as I do, that the video was part of the motivation for the attack and so her comments to the families is not the statement of a pathological liar, but of someone who honestly believed (and believes) that the video was a factor.
2016, Lies, and Videotape
Hillary didn’t care whether Obama was elected or not. In fact, I think one could argue it would have improved her chances in 2016 for Obama to lose in 2012. The issue was dead before the end of September. What resurrected it was the loss of Romney in November. For some, the tragedy of Benghazi wasn’t what happened on September 11, 2012, it was what happened on the first Tuesday in November in 2012.