Top Stories:

Hilarious Meme Reveals What Happens When Hillary Is Caught in a Lie

Washington Examiner reports the questions legitimate journalists should be asking Hillary Clinton:

On Sept. 14, 2012, three days after the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods in Benghazi, Libya, Hillary Clinton appeared at Andrew Air Force Base, where she spoke with family members of those slain.

Shortly afterward, Tyrone Woods’ father reported that she told him, “We are going to have the film maker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son.” Sean Smith’s mother recently repeated that “she said it was because of the video.” Glen Doherty’s sister said she chose “in that moment to basically perpetuate what she knew was untrue.”

In her public remarks, Clinton said that “We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.” Those words and her assurances to the family members, stand in stark contradiction to what Clinton said in messages she sent over her private email system at the time.

On Sept. 11 she told her daughter that the “officers were killed in Benghazi by an al Qaeda-like group.” On the morning of Sept. 12 she told an Egyptian diplomat, “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack — not a protest.”

Blaming the Benghazi murders on spontaneous protest of an anti-Muslim video (whose maker was indeed arrested, on unrelated charges) was apparently part of an Obama administration strategy. On Sept. 15 Susan Rice, then ambassador to the United Nations, after a White House briefing went on five Sunday interview programs and blamed the attacks on the video.

There was an obvious political motive for blaming the video. Early September polling showed the race between Obama and Mitt Romney tied. Obama was claiming success against terrorists, frequently citing the death of Osama bin Laden as evidence that the threat was reduced.

The Benghazi attack — the first murder of an American ambassador in 33 years — obviously cast doubt on those claims. It validated criticism of the administration’s “leading from behind” Libya policy.

Yet now Clinton says the victims’ family members are mistaken and that she didn’t mention the video to them at all. On ABC News’ “This Week” last Sunday George Stephanopoulos, a former Clinton White House aide, asked the candidate, “Did you tell them it was about the film?”

“No,” Clinton said.

She went on to say she understood “the continuing grief at the loss that parents experienced,” thus suggesting that they are unreliable witnesses. She cited her testimony before the Benghazi committee three years later, as if that is relevant. She talked about “a fast-moving series of events in the fog of war.”

To believe that Clinton’s “No” is not a lie, you have to believe that multiple individuals each misremembered what the U.S. secretary of state had said to them. Or that members of three different families, struck by tragedy, got together and conspired to invent and spread…

 if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.


Opinions posted on are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
%d bloggers like this: