George W. Bush Bashes Obama on Middle East

In a closed-door meeting with Jewish donors on Saturday night, former President George W. Bush delivered his harshest public criticisms to date against his successor on foreign policy, saying that President Barack Obama is being naïve about Iran and the pending nuclear deal and losing the war against the Islamic State.

One attendee at the Republican Jewish Coalition session, held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas with owner Sheldon Adelson in attendance, transcribed large portions of Bush’s remarks. The former president, who rarely ever criticizes Obama in public, at first remarked that the idea of re-entering the political arena was something he didn’t want to do. He then proceeded to explain why Obama, in his view, was placing the U.S. in “retreat” around the world. He also said Obama was misreading Iran’s intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily.

According to the attendee’s transcription, Bush noted that Iran has a new president, Hassan Rouhani. “He’s smooth,” Bush said. “And you’ve got to ask yourself, is there a new policy or did they just change the spokesman?”

Bush said that Obama’s plan to lift sanctions on Iran with a promise that they could snap back in place at any time was not plausible. He also said the deal would be bad for American national security in the long term: “You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That’s how Americans should view the deal.”

Bush then went into a detailed criticism of Obama’s policies in fighting the Islamic State and dealing with the chaos in Iraq. On Obama’s decision to withdraw all U.S. troops in Iraq at the end of 2011, he quoted Senator Lindsey Graham calling it a “strategic blunder.” Bush signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw those troops, but the idea had been to negotiate a new status of forces agreement to keep U.S. forces there past 2011. The Obama administration tried and failed to negotiate such an agreement.

Bush said he views the rise of the Islamic State as al-Qaeda’s “second act” and that they may have changed the name but that murdering innocents is still the favored tactic. He defended his own administration’s handling of terrorism, noting that the terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who confessed to killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, was captured on his watch: “Just remember the guy who slit Danny Pearl’s throat is in Gitmo, and now they’re doing it on TV.”

Obama promised to degrade and destroy Islamic State’s forces but then didn’t develop a strategy to complete the mission, Bush said. He said that if you have a military goal and you mean it, “you call in your military and say ‘What’s your plan?’ ” He indirectly touted his own decision to surge troops to Iraq in 2007, by saying, “When the plan wasn’t working in Iraq, we changed.”

“In order to be an effective president … when you say something you have to mean it,” he said. “You gotta kill em.”

Bush told several anecdotes about his old friend and rival Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bush recalled that Putin met his dog Barney at the White House and then later, when Bush went to Moscow, Putin showed him his dog and remarked that he was “bigger stronger and faster than Barney.” For Bush, that behavior showed him that Putin didn’t think in “win-win” terms.

Bush also remarked that Putin was rich, divorced his wife and loves power. Putin’s domestic popularity comes from his control of Russian media, according to Bush. “Hell, I’d be popular, too, if I owned NBC news,” he said.

Regarding his brother Jeb’s potential run for the presidency, Bush acknowledged that he was a political liability for Jeb, that the Bush name can be used against him, and that Americans don’t like dynasties. He also said that foreign policy is going to be especially important in the presidential campaign and that the test for Republicans running will be who has got the “courage” to resist isolationist tendencies.

Regarding Hillary Clinton, Bush said it will be crucial how she plays her relationship with the president. She will eventually have to choose between running on the Obama administration’s policies or running against them. If she defends them, she’s admitting failure, he said, but if she doesn’t she’s blaming the president.

For George W. Bush, the remarks in Vegas showed he has little respect for how the current president is running the world. He also revealed that he takes little responsibility for the policies that he put in place that contributed to the current state of affairs.

Kirsten Powers: Christians thrown overboard left to drown by Obama

Kirsten Powers: Christians thrown overboard left to drown by Obama

Obama only mentions Christians to lecture them, rather than defend them from persecution.

What do you call it when 12 men are drowned at sea for praying to Jesus?

Answer: Religious persecution.

Yet, when a throng of Muslims threw a dozen Christians overboard a migrant ship traveling fromLibya to Italy, Prime Minister Matteo Renzi missed the opportunity to label it as such. Standing next to President Obama at their joint news conference Friday, Renzi dismissed it as a one-off event and said, “The problem is not a problem of (a) clash of religions.”

While the prime minister plunged his head into the sand, Italian authorities arrestedand charged the Muslim migrants with “multiple aggravated murder motivated by religious hate,” according to the BBC.

Religious persecution of Christians is rampant worldwide, as Pew has noted, but nowhere is it more prevalent than in the Middle East and Northern Africa, where followers of Jesus are the targets of religious cleansing. Pope Francis has repeatedly decried the persecution and begged the world for help, but it has had little impact. Western leaders — including Obama — will be remembered for their near silence as this human rights tragedy unfolded. The president’s mumblings about the atrocities visited upon Christians (usually extracted after public outcry over his silence) are few and far between. And it will be hard to forget his lecturing of Christians at the National Prayer Breakfast about the centuries-old Crusades while Middle Eastern Christianswere at that moment being harassed, driven from their homes, tortured and murdered for their faith.

A week and a half after Obama’s National Prayer Breakfast speech, 21 Coptic Christians were beheaded for being “people of the cross.” Seven of the victims were former students of my friend and hero “Mama” Maggie Gobran, known as the “Mother Theresa of Cairo” for her work with the poorest of the poor. She told me these dear men grew up in rural Upper Egypt and had gone to Libya seeking work to support their families. They died with dignity as they called out to their God, while the cowardly murderers masked their faces.

Monday, there was more horrifying news: ISIL terrorists released a video purporting to show more religiously motivated killing. According to CNN, before beheading and shooting two groups of Christians in Libya, a speaker said, “The Islamic State has offered the Christian community (the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay a tax for being Christian) many times and set a deadline for this, but the Christians never cooperated.”

So they kill them.

Indeed, let’s talk more about the Crusades.

Leading conservative/libertarian declares “Pray that Hillary gets nominated. She is our best hope

By Wayne Allyn Root

WayneAllynRoot_Head copy

If you’re a conservative, Libertarian, limited government Constitutionalist or patriot, pray for Hillary. She’s our best hope for 2016. I love Hillary Clinton. I’m rooting for Hillary. She is a gift from heaven. I pray for her nomination every morning.

No, I’m not a fan of Hillary. No, I don’t support her policies. No, I don’t want her as president. But I sure want her as the Democratic nominee. She is “the gift that keeps on giving.” Hillary has so much baggage her campaign should be sponsored by Samsonite.

If the GOP has any hope of winning in 2016, Hillary has to be the nominee. Before I get to the scandals, let’s start with the obvious. Hillary is old news, over the hill, tired, worn out, spoiled milk. She is just going through the motions. She doesn’t even look or sound like she cares. Hillary herself can’t think of a single compelling reason for why she should be president. She’s just been waiting around a long time. And she’s a woman. That’s it. That’s her reason.

She’s so old and entitled that the guy who managed her campaign for U.S. Senate, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, refuses to endorse her for president. He basically just said what I said. She’s old news. She has no new ideas. She offers America nothing new. That’s one of her closest allies speaking.

Every candidate needs a brand. Hillary’s brand is “Entitlement. It’s my time. Oh, and I’m a female.” Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

If Hillary is the nominee, she can be destroyed and branded with so many scandals, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Destroy her with her own words, “What difference does it make?” Those were her words in front of a congressional committee about the Benghazi tragedy. Four heroes were murdered. She participated in a coverup and all she could think to say was, “What difference does it make?” Meaning, those young heroes are all dead, so who cares?

Her own TV ads in 2008 bragged about her decision-making abilities at 2 a.m. when the important call comes in. Well, we now know what she said when that call came in during the attack on Benghazi. She heard our heroes were about to be murdered and she said, “What difference does it make?” Then, she went back to sleep. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

I suggest TV ad campaigns featuring the parents of those four men abandoned by Hillary and Barack Obama and left to die at the hands of a radical Muslim mob, who clearly were supplied with their weapons by … Hillary and Obama. Let’s ask the parents how they feel about Hillary. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

Is she scared of her role in Benghazi? Well, she erased 32,000 emails. She should be called “Tricky Dicky Hillary.” She was a lawyer on the committee investigating Richard Nixon’s scandals. She knew all about the erased Nixon audiotapes. She learned well. That must be where she got the idea to delete 32,000 emails and wipe the server clean. Like Nixon, she decided what we the people needed to know. Then she pressed “delete.” Run those TV ads 24 hours a day. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.Hillary-Allah

What difference did she make as secretary of state? Name her accomplishments? The world is in flames, the Middle East melted down, ISIS was born, Iran laughed in our face while building a nuclear program — all under her leadership. The world is a far more dangerous place. What difference did she make? Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

“We were dead broke when we left the White House.” There’s another great line. Let’s play it 24 hours a day. Maybe that’s why the Clintons stole the china and furniture on the way out the door. Maybe that’s why $6 billion went missing at the State Department under her watch. When you’re broke, $6 billion can make a big difference. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

Hillary says she is a “woman of the people.” She’s one of us. But she hasn’t driven a car since 1996. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

Hillary is all about the middle class. She has decided to make the middle class the centerpiece of her campaign for president. But “Mrs. Middle Class” demands $300,000 for a one-hour speech and a Gulfstream private jet to take her there and back.

She also gets the presidential suite at a five-star hotel, or she won’t show up. No Marriotts, Hiltons or Holiday Inns for Hillary. Run those facts 24 hours a day. Let’s see how middle-class women respond to her list of demands. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

Hillary is all about honesty and transparency. But it turns out she bought 2 million fake Facebook fans. I guess those are the things you have to do when you ask middle-class college kids paying obscene tuition to pay for your $300,000 speeches and private jets. It must be hard to find real fans! Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

But I saved the best for last: The Clinton Foundation. The Clintons have raised more than $2 billion dollars in donations from the wealthiest people, companies and foreign governments in the world. She’s not “conflicted.” Hillary is bought and paid for. If she wins the presidency, she should wear pantsuits custom designed with patches from corporate sponsors. You know, like NASCAR. She should have Penske and Valvoline patches on her pantsuits. The White House should say: “America’s House, Brought to you by the government of Saudi Arabia.”

Hillary says she fights for the rights of women. Yet she accepts hundreds of millions in donations from Muslim governments that stone women, make them hide behind veils, don’t allow them to drive without a man in the car, don’t allow them to be educated, and arrest and whip them (occasionally even execute them) for being the victims of rape. She could be the biggest hypocrite in the history of politics.hillary vicious

Here’s a great line for TV commercials: “When a Muslim country gives a $10 million check to The Clinton Foundation, then stones a woman, what does Hillary say? ‘Thank you!’” Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

She says she fights for the rights of gays. She tweeted her horror at the new Indiana law protecting religious freedom. But she gladly accepted multimillion-dollar checks from Muslim governments that stone gays and drop them off roofs of buildings. This is the biggest fraud and hypocrite in the history of world politics. Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

Remember Hillary’s TV commercial about that important phone call at 2 a.m.? We need to run TV ads 24 hours a day asking, “When that call comes in at 2 a.m. and it involves one of those countries that gave millions to the Clinton Foundation, do you trust Hillary Clinton to make the decision that is best for America, for your interests, for your children? Hillary Clinton: bought and paid for by foreign governments.” Pray this is the Democratic nominee.

And if you’re a Democrat, you’d better start praying that Hillary is destroyed before she wins the nomination — and early enough that there is time to find and vet a credible replacement. This woman is a ticking time bomb. It’s not a matter of if, but only a matter of when, she implodes or some scandal comes rushing to the surface to blow her campaign to tatters. Maybe it’ll be Benghazi. Or the 32,000 deleted emails. Or maybe it’s the Clinton Foundation. Or maybe it’s her chief of staff and constant woman at her side, Huma Abedin. That story smells worse than all the others.

But I know one thing: Hillary is the most flawed candidate in the history of politics. And I’m praying on bended knees that Hillary gets the nomination.

I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. See you next week. God bless America.

Three words I am forbidden to use to describe Hillary Clinton

 

Hillary blog copy

Three words I am forbidden to use to describe Hillary Clinton

By Mario Murillo

Are Christians going to vote for Hillary Clinton?  Of course they are.  The Orwellian propaganda machine is in full vigor.  The same pastors who bury their Bible and their convictions when it comes to the Democratic Party Platform will do so again.

The same crime family that brought us Obama has anointed Hillary as the heir apparent.

None of this will stop me from speaking out to the church.  None of this will stop me from believing that America can experience a supernatural rescue from the scaly hands that pull the strings of the anti-God/ anti-America movement.

Let me make my position clear.  I believe that Barack Obama is the frying pan and Hillary Clinton is the fire.  She is not simply going to be the third term of Obama.  She will be worse.  Whatever pulse is left in America after Obama leaves, she will try to snuff out.  Are these harsh words?   Maybe but facts are a stubborn thing.

Believers who voted for Obama in his first election did so from misguided optimism.  With Hillary they will have to get Christians to elevate their vote to blind stupidity.

Even the people who are working to get Hillary elected president know she is not qualified and I believe that that they know she should not be president.  The problem is that they want her to be elected.  She would bring a disastrous presidency at the worst possible time.

The Clinton campaign must generate a tidal wave of self-loathing and create an electorate in the grip of battered wife syndrome.  How else can you tell people to sign up for an accelerated version of the misery of the last 8 years?

Hillary-Allah

 

Welcome to the gender card: Anything you say against Hillary is now solely because she is a woman

So what will they do to get her elected or at least make it look like she was elected?  Here is the answer: Remember when Barack Obama was running for President, and suddenly racism was around every corner? Every single criticism of Obama was scrutinized for racial “dog whistles” and code words. Oh wait—that’s still happening.

However, the age of racism is now lapsing into the age of sexism, as many conservatives predicted it would should Hillary Clinton make a run for the White House.

A group that’s referring to itself as Hillary Clinton’s “Super Volunteers” has promised to track when the media uses “coded” sexist words — such as “ambitious” and “insincere” — to describe her, according to New York Times political reporter Amy Chozick. The other forbidden words and phrases are “polarizing,” “calculating,” “disingenuous,” “insincere,” “ambitious,” “inevitable,” “entitled,” “over-confident,” “secretive,” “will do anything to win,”

Yours truly has been warned of three of these forbidden words when writing about Hillary:  Secretive, Ambitious, and Entitled.

So here goes:

Secretive:  This is mild compared to what she really is.  She steadfastly lives by a secret code.  That has been her MO since the beginning.    Carly Fiorina  said “After the famous reset with Russia, Russia is now a more powerful adversary than it was when she became secretary of state. Our relationship with Israel has deteriorated dramatically. The Middle East is in flames. And of course she has not been transparent. She told us for weeks after the purposeful terrorist attack in Benghazi that this was the result of an American video in a demonstration gone bad, and now we learn that she has used a private email server and a private email system for the most sensitive of communications while she was secretary of state. She doesn’t have a track record of leadership or trustworthiness. She’s not the woman for the White House.

hillary vicious

Ambitious:   Viciously ambitious is more like it.  He has been an “end justifies the means” practitioner from the beginning.  Hillary was fired for her work during the Watergate investigation. As her supervisor at the time put it, “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Former Secret Service agent Dan Emmett has recently come forward with his claims that Senator Hillary Clinton is allegedly “vicious”. Emmett has made claims that Hillary treats most of her security guards as hired services, using profanity and derogatory words when working with them.

Emmett was frequently told by Hillary to “get the f*ck away from [her]” when working with one another. Dan Emmett has worked with President George W. Bush, George H.W along with Bill Clinton himself, giving him decades of experience and merit throughout Washington D.C. Because of Emmett’s credibility and history, the backlash is finding itself in numerous headlines nationally. Emmett is currently working towards writing and releasing a tell-all book on his personal and professional stories related to Hillary Clinton.

Think of the Many of the Clinton era scandals in the 90’s – including the opening up of 900 confidential FBI files of political opponents – cast Hillary in a suspicious light. Nothing was proven, but you know how that goes.

Entitlement: Under her reign as Secretary of State Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were murdered when terrorists stormed the American compound in Benghazi, Libya. When she was questioned about the Obama Administration’s initial story that the attack was provoked by an anti-Islam YouTube video, Clinton callously blurted, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Really!?

I will continue to speak out and not let up.  So if the radical feminist left has anymore words of inspiration regarding Hillary please keep me supplied.

ABC News:Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference

Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference

Jonathan KarlBy Jonathan Karl
May 10, 2013 6:33am

When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before sheappeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.

gty benghazi dm 130425 wblog Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror ReferenceAFP/Getty Images

 

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department.  The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November.

“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community.  They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012.  “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

Summaries of White House and State Department emails — some of which were first published by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard — show that the State Department had extensive input into the editing of the talking points.

State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:

“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya.  These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either?  Concerned …”

The paragraph was entirely deleted.

Like the final version used by Ambassador Rice on the Sunday shows, the CIA’s first drafts said the attack appeared to have been “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo” but the CIA version went on to say, “That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.”  The draft went on to specifically name  the al Qaeda-affiliated group named Ansar al-Sharia.

 

Once again, Nuland objected to naming the terrorist groups because “we don’t want to prejudice the investigation.”

In response, an NSC staffer coordinating the review of the talking points wrote back to Nuland, “The FBI did not have major concerns with the points and offered only a couple minor suggestions.”

After the talking points were edited slightly to address Nuland’s concerns, she responded that changes did not go far enough.

“These changes don’t resolve all of my issues or those of my buildings leadership,” Nuland wrote.

In an email dated 9/14/12 at 9:34 p.m. — three days after the attack and two days before Ambassador Rice appeared on the Sunday shows – Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes wrote an email saying the State Department’s concerns needed to be addressed.

“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.  We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”

 

After that meeting, which took place Saturday morning at the White House, the CIA drafted the final version of the talking points – deleting all references to al Qaeda and to the security warnings in Benghazi prior to the attack.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said none of this contradicts what he said about the talking points because ultimately all versions were actually written and signed-off by the CIA.

“The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points,” Carney said. “The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like. And ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn’t the substance here.”

UPDATE:  A source familiar with the White House emails on the Benghazi talking point revisions say that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland was raising two concerns about the CIA’s first version of talking points, which were going to be sent to Congress:  1) The talking points went further than what she was allowed to say about the attack during her state department briefings; and, 2) she believed the CIA was attempting to exonerate itself at the State Department’s expense by suggesting CIA warnings about the security situation were ignored.

In one email, Nuland asked, why are we suggest Congress “start making assertions to the media [about the al Qaeda connection] that we ourselves are not making because we don’t want to prejudice the investigation?”

One other point:  The significant edits – deleting references to al Qaeda and the CIA’s warnings – came after a White House meeting on the Saturday before Ambassador Susan Rice appeared on five Sunday shows.  Nuland, a 30-year foreign service veteran who has served under Democratic and Republican Secretaries of State, was not at that meeting and played no direct role in preparing Rice for her interviews.

In Context: Hillary Clinton’s ‘What difference does it make’ comment.

In Context: Hillary Clinton’s ‘What difference does it make’ comment.

Plus my comments at the end.

 

Then-Secretary of State and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., greeted each other prior to a Senate committee hearing on Jan. 23, 2013 in this Reuters photo.
First in order to be fair let’s read the actual transcript that contains the infamous remark “What difference does it make?”  by Secretary Hillary Clinton.  Then I want to answer her question.

Based on a C-SPAN video of their six-minute exchange, here is a transcript of what Johnson and Clinton said during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Jan. 23, 2013:

Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary. I’d like to join my colleagues in thanking you for your service sincerely, and also appreciate the fact that you’re here testifying and glad that you’re looking in good health.

Clinton: Thank you.

Johnson: Were you fully aware in real time — and again, I realize how big your job is and everything is erupting in the Middle East at this time — were you fully aware of these 20 incidents that were reported in the ARB[State Department Accountability Review Board] in real time?

Clinton: I was aware of the ones that were brought to my attention. They were part of our ongoing discussion about the deteriorating threat environment in eastern Libya. We certainly were very conscious of them. I was assured by our security professionals that repairs were under way, additional security upgrades had taken place.

Johnson: Thank you. Did you see personally the cable on — I believe it was August 12th — specifically asking for, basically, reinforcements for the security detail that was going to be evacuating or leaving in August? Did you see that personally?

Clinton: No, sir.

Johnson: OK. When you read the ARB, it strikes me as how certain the people were that the attacks started at 9:40 Benghazi time. When was the first time you spoke to — or have you ever spoken to — the returnees, the evacuees? Did you personally speak to those folks?

Clinton: I‘ve spoken to one of them, but I waited until after the ARB had done its investigation because I did not want there to be anybody raising any issue that I had spoken to anyone before the ARB conducted its investigation.

Johnson: How many people were evacuated from Libya?

Clinton: Well, the numbers are a little bit hard to pin down because of our other friends —

Johnson: Approximately?

Clinton: Approximately, 25 to 30.

Johnson: Did anybody in the State Department talk to those folks very shortly afterwards?

Clinton: There was discussion going on afterwards, but once the investigation started, the FBI spoke to them before we spoke to them, and so other than our people in Tripoli — which, I think you’re talking about Washington, right?

Johnson: The point I’m making is, a very simple phone call to these individuals, I think, would’ve ascertained immediately that there was no protest prior to this. This attack started at 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time and it was an assault. I appreciate the fact that you called it an assault. But I’m going back to then-Ambassador [Susan] Rice five days later going on the Sunday shows and, what I would say, is purposefully misleading the American public. Why wasn’t that known? And again, I appreciate the fact that the transparency of this hearing, but why weren’t we transparent to that point in time?

Clinton: Well, first of all, Senator, I would say that once the assault happened, and once we got our people rescued and out, our most immediate concern was, number one, taking care of their injuries. As I said, I still have a DS [Diplomatic Security] agent at Walter Reed seriously injured — getting them into Frankfurt, Ramstein to get taken care of, the FBI going over immediately to start talking to them. We did not think it was appropriate for us to talk to them before the FBI conducted their interviews. And we did not — I think this is accurate, sir — I certainly did not know of any reports that contradicted the IC [Intelligence Community] talking points at the time that Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows. And you know I just want to say that people have accused Ambassador Rice and the administration of misleading Americans. I can say trying to be in the middle of this and understanding what was going on, nothing could be further from the truth. Was information developing? Was the situation fluid? Would we reach conclusions later that weren’t reached initially? And I appreciate the —

Johnson: But, Madame Secretary, do you disagree with me that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determine what happened wouldn’t have ascertained immediately that there was no protest? That was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained?

Clinton: But, Senator, again—

Johnson: Within hours, if not days?

Clinton: Senator, you know, when you’re in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process going on, number one—

Johnson: I realize that’s a good excuse.

Clinton: Well, no, it’s the fact. Number two, I would recommend highly you read both what the ARB said about it and the classified ARB because, even today, there are questions being raised. Now, we have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people. But what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing is still unknown —

Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that — an assault sprang out of that — and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go 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. Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. The IC has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out. But you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.

Johnson: OK. Thank you, Madame Secretary.

With no due respect.  

Friends, without America there is no freedom in the world.  As an Evangelist I am constantly aware of this fact.  America deserves, and I believe that it is God’s wish for us to have honest leadership that can brush aside the politics of nations who hate us and act on behalf of our citizens.

What does it matter Secretary Clinton asks? It matters more than anything else.  We suspected terrorist activity.  We knew that the Embassy was not guarded adequately.  Four Americans are dead because for months warnings from the Embassy about terrorism were ignored and requests for security were denied.

Moreover, when the attacks they dreaded in fact took place, help was still denied. 

It is insane to say, “we want to make sure that it never happens again,” if the root cause is Mr. Obama and his mission to whip America into global subservience.  Now we have been attacked at home by terrorists who received more than $100,000 in federal aid to plot the Boston bombing!  We have gone from an unguarded embassy in Benghazi to an unguarded nation.  

This investigation into Benghazi will test the honesty of the American people in a way that is unprecedented .  We will see if there is a fatal double standard that can convict Nixon of Watergate and let Obama skate on Benghazi.  Remember, no one died in Watergate.