Posts
Thanks to commenter AesopFan we have Hillary Clinton’s comments
on Benghazi. Most importantly, for a woman who aspires to become our first
commandress in chief, we have Clinton’s explanation for why she did not bear
any responsibility for what happened to our ambassador and three others.
Interviewing her for 60 Minutes Scott Pelley asked her the
right question. She bobbed and weaved and evaded responsibility. We are a long
way from “The buck stops here.”
The transcript is from J. E. Dyer, on the Liberty Unyielding blog:
Hillary
Clinton:
Distinguished Americans, military and civilian experts, they came out, and they
said, you know, “The ball was dropped
in security,” and, you know, uh, some of the decisions that were made probably
should have been rethought –
Scott
Pelley: But
wasn’t that your ball to carry?
Clinton: No. It wasn’t. It was not my
ball to carry. It was very – eh – read the, read the reports, read all of
the reports, all many hundreds of pages of them, including this latest one,
which was a political exercise from the very beginning.
Uh,
those [department communications on security concerns] never reached me, those
never came to my attention –
Pelley: The concerns about the security never
came to your attention.
Clinton: No! The experts…we have security experts.
I am not going to substitute my judgment for people who have been in the field,
who understand what our men and women are up against. So, this has all
been investigated, over and over again, but as Tim [Kaine] was just saying, it
didn’t get the result that some of the Republicans wanted, so they kept at it,
and I feel very sorry that they have politicized it unlike any prior example,
and I just think the most important challenge we face is learning from it and
doing everything we can to keep our people safe.
As J. E. Dyer says:
…these
are the words of a defensive bureaucrat, not the words of a national leader.
Certainly not the words of a commander in chief.
9 comments:
"A chief is a man who takes responsibility. He does not say, 'my men were defeated,' he says, 'I was defeated.'
-Antoine de St-Exupery
See my post Excusing Failure by Pleading Incompetence:
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/34733.html
I wonder if Tom Cruise will tell Hillary that she's glib.
At least now I understand why it is a hopeless goal to try to satisfy people whose intention is to scapegoat.
All apparent mistakes and failures can never be forgotten, and the purpose of this kangaroo court is NEVER to learn from mistakes and make things better next time. The purpose is to dishonor a person sufficiently that they never try to succeed again. That's the only way to satisfy a hater.
The problem with this tactic however, is it actually creates sympathy for Hillary, even if she's guilty.
Like the republicans chanted, "Lock her up, lock her up..." (And yes, some Sanders supporters too)
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/19/politics/hillary-clinton-republican-convention-chants/
That's the only outcome that will satisfy, and perhaps President Trump will make some Executive Orders to the effect when he's elected, at least the haters can hope. And if it fails, the haters will at least be glad Trump tried his best.
There's plenty of reasons to dislike Hillary and her policies, but once you feel entitled to judge a person's from a distance and be certain in your convictions, it seems very hard to break those delusions.
We can turn it around and say Trump haters do the same thing, but I don't think so. No one is saying lock him up because he believes in inflicting pain and suffering on defenseless prisoners, even if that is against international law. We just don't want someone with that little empathy and good sense to do what he promises he'll do, even if he is just a blowhard and really would not do such things.
Ares Olympus @July 27, 2016 at 6:52 AM:
"At least now I understand why it is a hopeless goal to try to satisfy people whose intention is to scapegoat."
Great. So stop trying.
"... but once you feel entitled to judge a person's from a distance and be certain in your convictions, it seems very hard to break those delusions."
Your lack of self-awareness continues to impress me. You are a hypocrite. You are a Trump hater. Your comments about Trump consistently demonstrate your phony "I'm Ares Olympus, above the fray" narrative. You are the one who is deluded.
IAC, I think Trump makes a great billionaire, sitting in his high towers, doing his reality TV shows. It's all great.
I just have no trust with him in ANY position of government leadership. I'd trust him as a janitor since its a low-risk job to fail at.
OTOH, if my desire was for someone to break things, to make things worse so I could complain more, and make hatred against people not like me more socially acceptable, perhaps I'd support Trump's mission whole heartedly.
Ares Olympus @July 27, 2016 at 8:57 AM:
Keep digging.
This is Hillary Clinton.
"Clinton Cash"
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/27/exclusive-directors-cut-clinton-cash-now-playing/
Curious how American companies are mercilessly hacked for trade secrets from China, North Korea, Iran, Russia, etc. and Washington yawns. Figure it out yourselves, they say offhandedly.
But when the previous Democratic National Committee gets hacked, it's a national security issue.
Give me peace from these self-important nonsense.
It's more of it: politicians protecting themselves, not citizens, and companies that employ citizens.
Maybe Putin will turn over the 30,000 Clinton emails he's already found, or perhaps it makes more sense (for his own self-interest) that he keep them in his back pocket for blackmail. But Hillary has nothing to hide. Nothing at all. No way.
I think it is humorous to ridicule Trump for asking for Russian help regarding emails that she says she already had erased, and that these pertained to such innocuous topics as yoga lessons and Chelsea's wedding. I don't want to see Hillary's yoga poses, nor anything related to Chelsea.
I'll go back to focusing on God, gays and guns, as Nancy Pelosi so aptly described my daily interests. At least two of them.
Ares Olympus @July 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM:
"... you can be sure if Clinton was calling on Russian hackers to access Trump's businesses to gain dirt on his dirty dealings, he'd be make the same claims against the democrats loyalties to the communist interests."
You're missing the whole point. Whoever is doing the hacking is trying to embarrass Hillary. Period.
This is not a national security issue. This is a political party compromising itself because its nominee is a crook.
Again, this is politics. I'm not falling for Hillary's damsel in distress fiction. She's a bit long in the tooth, and it's payback time.
Post a Comment