The difference that it makes

| January 24, 2013

So, concussion-addled Hillary Clinton finally recovered enough to testify to the committee investigating the assault on the Benghazi consulate on September 11th last year. Of course, she accepted full responsibility for the deaths of four Americans, well until folks started heaping the blame on her. What most Americans will remember is the quote of hers from the testimony in which she says;

“Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Well, if it’s not that important, why did the Administration lie about it to the American people – you know, the folks who pay the bills and are actually in charge of this country, not the Clintons and Obamas of the world who think they can tell us only what they think matters. We already know now that the late Chris Stevens wrote to the State Department that it was Obama’s policies that were making Libya dangerous for our diplomatic mission there.

Clinton denies that she saw Stevens’ communications with his bosses which expressed his concern about security of his facilities. Well, why didn’t she see them, if that’s true? I mean, it’s not like Libya was a some backwater unimportant shit hole at the time. We had sent troops and material there during their civil war – if it was important enough that we committed our blood and treasure to Libya, why wasn’t it important enough to read the communiques from our ambassador there?

I guess Rand Paul upset her staff when he said that he would have fired her ample ass, and John McCain tried to recover some of his voters by getting tough with the secretary. From the Washington Times;

“The answers, frankly, that you’ve given this morning are not satisfactory to me,” said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.

“Were you and the president made aware of the classified cable from Chris Stevens [that] said that the United States Consulate in Benghazi could not survive a sustained assault?” he asked. Mr. McCain added that “numerous warnings, including personally to me, about the security were unanswered or unaddressed.”

“The American people deserve to know answers, and they certainly don’t deserve false answers,” he said.

Clinton blamed security failures on the fact that Congress had cut her funding for security, borrowing from the Mother Jones article which gave her that cover, but two things are wrong with that excuse; first, Congress hasn’t passed a budget in four years, so how could they have cut State’s budget? Secondly, they had security there and cut it back. They had military security as well as their own diplomatic security folks, which were reduced just prior to the assault. So why wasn’t any of our representatives questioning that, instead of co-starring in the theater conducted by Clinton for the cameras?

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War

Comments (20)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Old Trooper says:

    Jonn, one congressman did ask her about the cut backs and her blaming congress for it. I don’t remember which one it was, but he basically asked, and I’m paraphrasing, “how can you say it was a lack of funding when your State Dept. was, at the same time, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on menial stuff in several places around the world”? Of course, she started crawfishing and trying to weasel out of answering for her blame game.

  2. Devtun says:


    Yeah, that was Ron Paul’s kid Sen Rand Paul who dared to broach such questions. Frankly, I liked Ron Johnson’s (R-WI) blunt style…he got under Hillary’s hair, made her scream “whats the difference?” bullcrap.

  3. J says:

    Actual money is doled out through appropriations bills, which is the place where State Dept funding would have been cut and not through a budget, which are advisory if I remember correctly.

  4. Ex-PH2 says:

    Memo to Hillary: The difference, you silly bitch, is that you were in charge and now you claim you didn’t have a clue what was going on when other people did.

    Being in charge means showing some concern for the welfare of your employees, not getting your photo taken slugging a beer in a longneck bottle at a local pub with your pals.

    Secy of State is a 24-hour a day job, dumbass. It’s not something that you leave behind at day’s end.

    Oh. You didn’t know that? Tough shit. You were in charge.
    Si esurientes domum itis, vestra hercle culpa est!

    Enjoy being roasted.

  5. USMCE8Ret says:

    Yes, John McCain made his comments but they whithered in the air and weren’t responded to, which made them ineffective. Hillary pretty much blew him off. While the committee was important, what they failed to do was ask more probing questions in order to get the information the American people are entitled to. I think the committee members could have done a much better job, instead they asked wave top type of questions but didn’t delve more into what really matters.

  6. NHSparky says:

    So why wasn’t any of our representatives questioning that, instead of co-starring in the theater conducted by Clinton for the cameras?

    You just hit it right there. It’s not about serving the people anymore, it’s about camera time.

  7. DefendUSA says:

    One of the first things a leader does is takes the heat, even if it wasn’t she who fucked up. Clearly she fucked up and so did the rest of them and they will all go to their deaths denying the parts they played in it.
    What did she do exactly to “help” Ambassador Stevens? What?
    We have been calling Bullshit for months, and now we’ve got Rush to get it out there to the lame.

  8. UpNorth says:

    Hey, look, the idiot known as GFY is calling anyone else an idiot? It is to laugh.

  9. Flagwaver says:

    I still want to know what happened to the survivors. So far, they have been completely incommunicado. Including the ones that were uninjured during the attack. Where are they being held and why is the Senate not asking about them?

  10. Miss Ladybug says:

    I don’t remember who, but I do recall hearing some Congresscritter (don’t remember which chamber) saying something about wanting to talk to the survivors, but that was several days ago, and not in the hearing…

  11. USMCE8Ret says:

    @9 – What of the other State Department lackey’s who were supposed to have handled the messages that failed to get into Hillary’s hands? Some news reports said they were fired. I suspect they just escaped it all like their boss did, and got reassigned.

  12. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    @11. No one was fired, simply reassigned. Secretary Wide Load herself, as I am fond of pointing out, readily accepted most of the responsibilty BUT NONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES. You go figure that one. I can’t.

  13. The Other Whitey says:

    What difference does it make?

    How about this: this morning Chelsea Clinton was found brutally beaten to death in an alleyway. The medical examiner reports that she was raped several times before she died. Law enforcement released the following statement. “The heinous rape and murder of Secretary Clinton’s daughter was a tragedy. However, we will not be investigating further. What difference does it make if the perpetrator was a serial killer who may strike again or a bunch of gang members committing an “initiation crime”? After all, it’s in the past and we can’t change it, so instead we will be moving on and advise the family of the victim to do the same.”

    How ’bout that? Not so cool, huh? And by the way, if you accept full responsibility, that means you accept full *blame* for what took place.

  14. Smaj says:

    She knows she can say and do anything and never be called to account.

  15. john Miska says:

    Hillary just give me a call and I will tell you what difference it makes………………

  16. DefendUSA says:

    Pshaw…youse guys!@!! Smaj, OW, John…you know accountability is for suckers. And these people are true dickweed sucking pigs who lack any kind of integrity to be serving this Country- Problem is that the uninformed voters keep electing them and we get stuck trying to keep the republic in tact…which, at this point, I am still willing to do.

  17. obsidian says:

    We are seeing the real Hillary at last.
    Spiteful, pompous and deceitful.
    She doesn’t give a rats ass four American’s died because of her political parties ideology and it’s boss the POTUS.
    She is arguing that even if she was in charge it wasn’t her fault they died but it was Stevens his aide and the two SEALs fault for fighting back. An Admiral or Captain who endangers his ship will get canned but not Hillary.
    They don’t mind making policy but when it fails these asses want to cover it up and make like it never happened and scream “What difference does it make” to all who can hear.
    It was her watch, her job and four people died, intel was lost and the survivors if any are missing and a consulate was looted and burned.
    To say “what difference does it make” is the real way Hillary is seeing those four dead.
    As expendable and now bothersome because it keeps floating back up like that dead Hill Billy in Deliverance, to haunt her, for ever.

  18. obsidian says:

    I ask everyone, If after Pearl Harbor Roosenveldt had said, 2,000 men died during the attack…..”What difference does it make” how long would he have remained POTUS?

  19. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    I think from a political theater standpoint Hillary was spot on. It should be clear that I am not a fan or a supporter of the Dems, but I suspect this will play differently to the choir of supporters than it does to her detractors.

    With her comments being that we need to prepare to defend ourselves so future events don’t happen, along with her resignation this will play to many people as her taking full responsibility for the event because she is no longer the Secretary. In the context of a call for better future preparations I think the Dems can sell the “What difference does it make” line rather easily to the general public. They will state that mistakes were made, folks were sacked Hillary resigned and now we are moving in a new, correct direction with a new Secretary….mission accomplished.

    It’s been clear from day one to even the Libyan President this was a terror attack. It’s also clear in the time since that date that State has a problem tracking all the memos it receives, expecting Clinton to be aware of a million plus memos is ludicrous, but memos from war zones should be a priority for the team at State along with the Secretary. Was anyone really surprised by her performance? She’s tough, she’s intelligent and she’s not likely to make a mistake in a hearing regarding admission of responsibility. Subpoena the memos, review what was asked for, what was denied or lessened and reveal the truth of the conditions that led to this inability to defend a consulate in a war zone. If there is criminal negligence (there won’t be, even if there is there won’t be) prosecute….other than that it’s a tragedy that played out after the fact exactly as the Dems planned it to play out.

    No surprises here.

  20. Mockery Mocha says:

    There are a ton of holes to rip open on Benghazi. They may not ever tell us what happened, but we aren’t stupid.

    And…To paraphrase Hilary- “Sure, I’ll take the blame becasue I don’t give a crap that they died. Even if it was just one guy out walking around who decide to kill an American, it’s not like we would actually go and find who did it and make them pay. And what are you going to do about it, fire me?”

    A sociopath is defined as “a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.”
    I think she fits all but the antisocial piece. Lord knows we’ve seen more pictures of her drinking socially than we could have asked for.