Hillary Clinton - "what difference does it make at this point"

reply to post by FlyersFan


One of these days they are all going to catch themselves in a lie they just can't get out of.

Then they will start turning on each other to save themselves..

More truth will be revealed and people will be angry, but hopefully not upset enough to do anything stupid.

People just want the truth so we can move forward knowing what really happened.

And this applies to everything we are told 50% of the truth or less on.

Originally posted by bladerunner44
reply to post by OmegaLogos

 

So after the hearings Obama calls Bill Clinton and asks him how's Hillary's head?
He responded not as good as......

Buh Dummp, Cheeeeh

Sorry this adds nothing to the topic, I just found the joke funny is all lol

The liberals are already out defending her and calling Rand Paul a racist for questioning her on Benghazi.

I know...it makes no sense...

reply to post by FlyersFan


I dig Hillary but... yeah, that was weird. I remember hearing that clip the other day on the radio and thinking "there will be a thread on ATS about this for sure".

I really don't know what she was thinking with the wording she used. She obviously feels strongly about the situation but I can't tell if she sounded like that out of defensiveness or out of true vigilance.

I can't believe some of you fell for that act. Bloody amazing.

She is the worst actress in the history of cinema and you are talking like she convinced you she felt bad and was indignant.

Are you people serious?

I would hate to see what would happen to you out on the streets trying to deal with operators.

The level of gullibility here is incredible.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

This is an important thread and I hope her words are analyzed further. It's terrible how she's making it out to be the equivalent of an auto accident.

Not to derail, but check out the second video in this article: www.weeklystandard.com...
I don't think it looks like Hillary. After all, she was MIA for a while with her mysterious fall and blood clot situation. I honestly think it could possibly be a body double. Even the sound of her voice is different. I don't know. Maybe this is nothing, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

Sometimes brain damage can bring shifts in personality. And she does look more nerdly in that video than in other videos, like I'm looking at her like photos of her during her college years. No, she's got energy again after a month of Christmas parties and the bump on the head is over with. Most people used to watching the news and other scripted events involving a teleprompter aren't aware that what Clinton is doing in that video is normal in politics. What is happening isn't out of the ordinary.

I would say she was irritated by the pushy way the question was asked. Did you see how he was nearly smiling when she was throwing up her hands? They like putting each other in uncomfortable positions. It's part of their sport; gives them a sense that they're doing something productive when they can put someone on defense.

Potayto, potahto, what difference does it make when they are both cut up and fried? But this was no ordinary American; this one had beaten the odds of being selected to keep civility together between nations. This was someone who got paid to be an American among Libyans.

Having not forgotten some of Hitleries mispokes like the disembarked on the runway bla bla bla that never happened in the Balkans..she "mispoke" remember?

thought I'd just through this opinion out there from the Ulsterman just for donuts and giggles

EVERY **** QUESTION WAS AGREED TO BEFOREHAND. Hillary had notes for every question. Watch her look down every time a question is asked. She sucks at hiding it. That’s the tell. They negotiated the terms of the questioning weeks ago. She was prepared. There is no real investigation by the Senate. There is no real search for justice here. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

theulstermanreport.com...

I do not trust this woman as far as I can throw her...Why?
It might have something to do with the FACT that she has been caught red handed lying more then once:
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me...
Oh yeah, then there was the Whitehouse photo of hillary watching the Osama raid that never happened as well...
where she missposed...

Originally posted by neo96
Then what the hell is this eh?

The above photo was from the Bin Laden "raid".

Guess who is in that picture.

Al-Qaeda? This is why.. What is the Arabic translation of the word apparently?

The Base
Al-Qaeda (also al-Qaida or al-Qa'ida or al-Qa'idah) (Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-qāʕida, translation: The Base) is an international alliance of militant Sunni jihadist organizations. Its roots can be traced back to Osama bin Laden and others around the time of the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989.[1] Al-Qaeda's objectives include the elimination of foreign influence in Muslim countries, elimination of Israel, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate.

That is bs.. heres why.

- al-Qaida simply translates back to Qaeda.
- al-Qa'ida simply translates to commander.
- al-Qa'idah simply translates back to Qaeda.
- al-Qaeda simply translates to Leaders

This is the arabic translation of Al-Qaeda القادة that looks nothing like القاعدة from the above source. qāʕida doesn't even translate into Arabic. All it says is al-qāʕ if.

How the hell did people get "the base"? It doesn't even make sense. All Al-Qaeda is saying is that leaders are the terrorists.. I think we have even been duped with that also. al- means all. qaeda means Leadership. So when they say Al-Qaeda done it, they are actually saying they done it

The most insensitive statement ever made by a politician! The girl has a history of saying some stupid things!!

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Hillary Clinton - what difference does it make at this point?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday lashed out over the claim that the administration misled Americans about the nature of the Libya terror attack by asserting that it was the result of a protest, raising her voice during a Senate hearing and asking: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

and then this ...

Clinton continued to speak, raising her voice and gesturing: "Was it because of a protest or is it because of guys out for a walk one night and they decide they go kill some Americans?

"What difference, at this point, does it make?"

Clinton, lowering her voice, then said it is the administration's job to "figure out what happened" and prevent it from happening again.

So .. she goes from 'what difference does it make' to 'we'll figure out what happened' .. all in one breath. Yeah .. like I"m going to trust her to find out what happened after she said 'what difference does it make'???

edit on 1/23/2013 by FlyersFan because: hit enter too early ..

You messed up the quote:

"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to 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."

She made a valid statement.

I am furious because George Bush actually said all this:

Video Speech

Tell me that isn't his voice!

Disgusting.

So I take it the motto of the republican convention in 2016 is settled then? "What difference does it make at this point"?

Originally posted by eLPresidente
The liberals are already out defending her and calling Rand Paul a racist for questioning her on Benghazi.

I know...it makes no sense...

Curious what liberals are calling Rand Paul a racist because of his idiotic grilling of Hillary?

Or is that just another false blanket statement with no facts behind it, but it's read by gullible people and thus believed here on ats...?

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by Indigo5
(B) The photo from the OBL raid..that was planned...ya know ...drones above and network prepped for the OP....VS. A real time unexpected attack on a consulate in Libya.

I can see your knowledge of the US intelligence collection capabilities is limited - I assure you mine is not. The drones send their information through satellites which in turn can broadcast that feed to any place with a receiver with access to the "channel". Just like satellite TV.

And yet you still are either confused or being dishonest?

I am not debating capabilities...I am articulating facts that have been testified to by multiple sources and substantiated by multiple reviews and GOP driven investigations.

The difference between the OBL raid and the Benghazi attack is that the OBL raid was PLANNED...thus drones were deployed and overhead BEFORE the raid began in Abbottabad, whilst when the Benghazi attack occured, they needed to redirect drones to that location which took a full one hour and fifteen minutes (1:15) to arrive and recorded only the 20 minutes prior to complete extraction. If I had to speculate I would say that the CIA annex in Benghazi waited for "eyes in the sky" before going in to extract the personnel and were operating on the false assumption that the "safe room" at the consulate was intact, and that the 20 minutes of drone footage overlaps perfectly with the begining and end of the extraction/rescue OP.

9:42 p.m. -- Armed men begin their assault on the U.S. Consulate.

9:59 p.m. -- A surveillance drone is directed to fly over the U.S. compound, but it is unarmed.

11:10 p.m. -- The surveillance drone arrives over the Benghazi facility.

11:30 p.m. -- All surviving U.S. personnel are evacuated from the consulate. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and State Department computer expert Sean Smith were killed in the initial assault.

Now...you can claim that the President and Sec. of State ceased what they were doing...which would have involved co-ordinating responses, approving operations and support, contacting every other embassy in the middle east where simultaneous semi-violent protests were going and securing those embassies, getting security teams in place etc. and sat down to watch 20 minutes of video...but that makes no logical sense. Sh*& had hit the fan and there was a strong possibility of simultaneous attacks elsewhere...they would have been looking to every other embassy and consulate in the middle east and how to secure those embassies immediately against similair attacks...not sitting down and watching a 20 Spec Ops for no other reason than what? ....."What is the status of our other embassies?!!" "What teams do we have in place to secure them?" "CIA? Spec Ops?" ...It would have been frantic...The 20 minutes of drone data would have only been useful to the DOD/CIA/Spec Ops actually running the operation in REAL-TIME.

Again...you can ignore logic, you can ignore multiple reviews and investigations both internal (Admin) and external (GOP Congress) that all substantiate that it was not seen in real time...by Sec. Clinton or POTUS...But that opinion is a deliberate choice to ignore all evidence and logic to the contrary.

reply to post by Indigo5


Very well said. But ideologues on this site will ignore logic (on both sides). Right now it happens to be people who just hate Hillary Clinton. Why? Well atsers will blame it on her being part of the zionest social elite, tptb, a left wing socialist hell bent on destroying our County.

Truth is, they just don't like her because she's a woman who has done something with her life. And truth be told, someone who has given more of her life to the service of her country than anyone on ats can ever claim (except our ats vets of course)

reply to post by Indigo5


So I am asking you directly. Do you think this attack was based on a video? Do you think some religious libyans were watching youtube in English and found this movie trailer that depicted some negativity toward Mohammed, and decided we must take down the american consolate in benghazi, and murder those individuals for the sake of their prophet? Do you think they were just taking a walk and decided to do this?

You can confuse the whole issue all you want, but we, the world, were lead to believe this story, day after day, with hourly updates on each new riot that followed in islamic states, as the "video" story played over and over on American and global news.

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by Indigo5

 

So I am asking you directly. Do you think this attack was based on a video? Do you think some religious libyans were watching youtube in English and found this movie trailer that depicted some negativity toward Mohammed, and decided we must take down the american consolate in benghazi, and murder those individuals for the sake of their prophet? Do you think they were just taking a walk and decided to do this?

You can confuse the whole issue all you want, but we, the world, were lead to believe this story, day after day, with hourly updates on each new riot that followed in islamic states, as the "video" story played over and over on American and global news.

What difference does it make at this point how accurate early reports where?
Meh.... Romney/Ryan will win in a landslide anyway.

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by Indigo5

 

So I am asking you directly. Do you think this attack was based on a video?

No...from everything I have read...two streams of immediate 'intelligence" came in from CIA in Libya and associated contacts. One said it was a protest that got out of hand and since the recent overthrow, RPGs and other weapons were spread across the country...and it evolved from there. The CIA/Spec Ops who actually rescued the surviving Embassy personel were there in Libya in the first place to hunt down and find the heavy arms. This intelligence was WRONG. The drone only had footage of the last 20 minutes, missing how it started, so this remained a question until enough "human" intelligence was gathered to disprove the "protest" intelligence.

This was also confusing because by the time "extraction" occured and the drone arrived...civilians had arrived to see what the commotion was. Example: the folks who dragged the Ambassador from the compound and brought him tot he hospital.

A seperate intelligence stream made the case that this was a singular planned militant attack...at the time of Rice's statement they were sorting it out and she communicated a hybrid of the two intelligence streams...Protests morphing into attacks. Later the "protests" intelligence became less credible and the militant attack intelligence became substantiated.

Originally posted by SunnyDee
Do you think some religious libyans were watching youtube in English and found this movie trailer that depicted some negativity toward Mohammed, and decided we must take down the american consolate in benghazi, and murder those individuals for the sake of their prophet? Do you think they were just taking a walk and decided to do this?

No ...see above. At multiple other locations in the middle-east at the exact same time...what you describe is exactly what was occuring. Extremists promoted the video to inflame anger toward the USA. So if you are asking if it was plausable? sure. Is that what happened in Benghazi? no.

Originally posted by SunnyDee
You can confuse the whole issue all you want, but we, the world, were lead to believe this story, day after day, with hourly updates on each new riot that followed in islamic states, as the "video" story played over and over on American and global news.

Sure did. But THAT was the result of a News Media rushing to construct a story despite Amb. Rices Cautions in her statement that we didn't know for sure...alll they siezed on was "protests" etc. It made sense to the media cuz again there were in fact protests about the film across the middle east. Now the CIA didn't come out and tell the news media...Hey, you are running with a bad story...but they were busy getting facts and intelligence and it's not thier job to fact-check the news media. AND it doesn't serve thier mission well to let the perpetrators know everything that they know. Often CIA will say a terroist attack is not attributed to anyone in order to flush out the perpetrators...the terrorists get frustrated that it hasn't hit the news that it was them. The CIA will sometimes throw in words like "sloppy" "unplanned" "spontaneous" ...essentially baiting the terrorists into loudly taking credit, which helps them in the hunt.

Click here for more information.

well, what i read from these posts is this:
1....hillary knew that the compound at bengazi was going to be attacked by an overwelming force
2...the ambassador called her personally and asked for immediate help
3...she refused and allowed it to happen
4...she purposely lied and blamed a video for the attack
5...she is guilty of murder
does that about sum it up?