A visibly angry Hillary Clinton just went off on Republicans for their Benghazi investigation

[Lychee2]

Source: Business Insider

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton unloaded on Congress' Benghazi investigation during a Monday morning interview on the "Today" show.

A visibly angry Clinton tore into the Republican-led Select Committee on Benghazi when she was asked how she would react to hypothetical GOP leaders facing scrutiny over their own government email use.

"Look at the situation they chose to exploit, to go after me for political reasons: the death of four Americans in Benghazi," Clinton said. "I knew the ambassador. I identified him. I asked him to go there. I asked the president to nominate him."

"This committee was set up, as they have admitted, for the purpose of making a partisan, political issue out of the deaths of four Americans," she said. "I would have never done that! And if I were president — and there were Republicans or Democrats who were thinking about that — I would have done everything to shut it down."




Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-benghazi-investigation-kevin-mccarthy-today-show

---

See the video of Hillary at the link.

[TwilightGardener]

1. I notice the descriptions of Hillary now include "visibly angry" and "visibly upset", and so on.

Part of her Version 5.0 reprogramming, I guess. (Step 3: SHOW EMOTION!)

[riversedge]

7. too bad you have to be so cynical that you have to diss Hillary at every chance you get.

Grow up and recognize that Hillary has emotions just like the rest of us.

[Android3.14]

22. Oh, I kinda doubt her emotions are just like the rest of us

It's been pretty well documented that hyper wealthy people lack empathy, and the awkward way she struggles with her lackluster campaign indicates anything she shows on camera is intentional to the point of scripted.

[Gman]

31. You must consider anyone with

More than $20 in their pocket as hyper-wealthy.

[Android3.14]

60. That, or $10-$50 million

Let's put on our thinking caps, shall we.

[Gman]

70. That's hardly "hyper" wealthy

Comfortable, yes. Hyper? no.

[Android3.14]

71. Speak for yourself

Disgusting.

[leftofcool]

52. The old "people who have money don't have feelings" meme.

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. And he/she left out the key phrase ...

EXCEPT FOR the uber-wealthy THAT I LIKE ...

No one seems to have a problem with FDR's or the Kennedys' wealth.

[dorkzilla]

64. The Rooselvelts and the Kennedys had money before they went into politics. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

66. Okay ... George Soros or Warren Buffett. n/t

[dorkzilla]

67. I have no problem with successful people nor do I think the wealthy are all evil

Just pointing out that some people make a lot of money from being "public servants". Something about all the millionaires in government makes me queasy...the old quid pro quo system at work. That's all.

[Android3.14]

61. Yup, you now, the observation with data to back it up

I'll bet she has feelings. Annoyance when people don't jump at her whim, frustration that the proles won't recognize her richly awesomeness, happiness when ordering the DNC around like her personal servants.

She definitely has feelings, just not the feelings regular folks experience.

[Sunlei]

75. doesn't seem to me like shes ever been jealous of wealthier persons. I've never heard her

mention the republican speak of "wealth building" ? or Shes in politics for the money or wants to be President to amass a fortune.?

[Android3.14]

77. Where do you get "jealousy" from my remarks?

She is already one of the "wealthier persons".

[Beacool]

79. You forgot your sarcasm emoticon.

[Renew Deal]

10. Actually it has to do with the sexism from you and others.

Last edited Mon Oct 5, 2015, 07:35 PM - Edit history (1)

The angry woman.

[mcar]

65. Thank you

HRC cannot express emotions or she, like PBO is "angry," something women and black men cannot be. But then she's robotic. Does that sound familiar too?

[JoePhilly]

55. So you think she should be more demure?

Well played!!!!

[TwilightGardener]

58. She would do "visibly demure" if her handlers thought it would help her poll numbers.

Or visibly angry. Or visibly sad. Or visibly reflective. Or visibly stern. But visible, mostly.

[Kingofalldems]

63. So you agree with the republicans on this?

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

2. Thank you, Hillary!

[Glorfindel]

3. She has every right to be angry

I'm glad she decided to show it.

[Johnny2X2X]

4. Good news

She's let the Republicans define her up to this point, take away these faux scandals and she will throttle them on the issues.

I love me some Bernie Sanders, he's an inspiration, but she will be the nominee and Bernie will make her stronger by pulling the conversation towards the American Middle Class.

Hilary will be the next President and she'll be the most Lineral one we've had in a generation.

[jalan48]

5. This is what Republicans do.

And this is why it makes no sense to give them a pass when they break the law. Her husband announcing he would not pursue an investigation of George Sr.'s abuse of power once he was elected President and Obama not choosing to investigate Bush/Cheney for war crimes. Why do we roll over like good little puppies when the issue is handed to us?

[Botany]

6. This "Benghazi thing" should have been stopped years ago.

I wonder how much money these investigations have pissed away?

[leftofcool]

8. I heard about 4.2 million..........and counting.

You tax dollars hard at work.

[Human101948]

9. Well worth it to smear Secretary of State Hillary Clinton!

The American people have a right to be propagandized with political witch hunts!

[raindaddy]

40. Ironic, the candidate that the neolibs are trying to sink defending Hillary.

[ruffburr]

11. My self i'm a Bernie fan, but-

This is showing just how dispicable the Republican party has become, Please tell me why no one is pointing out how much taxpayer money these endless hearings have wasted, just for political gain

[Baitball Blogger]

12. She has the moral right to do this.

Democrats should have been calling out Republicans on their bullshit a long time ago.

[Lychee2]

13. This is just a replay of her "defense" before the Committee

?t=7

[CreekDog]

86. ah so you call it her "defense"

but tell us how you really feel.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141240005

[Gothmog]

14. Hillary has a right to be angry

[karynnj]

30. She was asked about EMAIL, not Benghazi

This was a contrived answer - though the anger is real -- and likely extends to being questioned on her email.

[lsewpershad]

15. 'If I were President'

what is that supposed to mean..... is it to knock President?

[lsewpershad]

16. President Obama?

[A Simple Game]

17. I noticed that too, what does she get from throwing President Obama under the bus? n/t

[dorkzilla]

19. Pre-emptive strike

If Joe Biden decides to enter the race, Obama will back Joe.

[A Simple Game]

49. You could be right.

She could be saying "here's a sample of what you could get Joe."

[karynnj]

28. I really really hated that -- especially because the President CAN NOT shut down Congressional

investigations.

I suspect that she is angry that the State Department did not stonewall and cover for her. They did give her a lot of time to get her records to them before they let out that all her email had been on a private server. Had they simply gone to the committee and explained that they did not have the records as soon as they noticed that - the committee would have gone to the media with an even worse story.

[leftofcool]

53. Nope, she isn't. Bernie already threw Obama under the bus.

Hillary wants to continue Obama's legacy.

[A Simple Game]

56. That's a pretty big stretch, I hope you didn't pull a muscle or anything. n/t

[thesquanderer]

20. Yeah, I think she's upset that Obama hasn't had her back enough,

upset that he hasn't done everything he could to try to shut down this endless string of Benghazi investigations. He probably doesn't want to spend political capital on it, and she's probably (somewhat understandably) peeved about it.

[AtomicKitten]

36. Congress is not his purview, but a separate and equal part of government.

He cannot shut down their hearings any more than he can overturn Supreme Court decisions.

[thesquanderer]

39. See my post #38. (n/t)

[magical thyme]

82. yeah, I picked up on that immediately. So President Obama is at fault for not shutting it down?

color me not surprised.

[MynameisBlarney]

18. She has every right to be pissed!

Who wouldn't be?

[WhoWoodaKnew]

43. Yep

[ornotna]

21. Can't blame her

The Benghazi investigation has been nothing but a witch-hunt.

[karynnj]

46. Did you listen to the question asked?

It was not about Benghazi.

[ornotna]

47. I'm responding to the OP

The title of the OP was about Benghazi. She may have been deflecting from the question that was asked but the facts are that the investigation was indeed a witch-hunt. Do you disagree with my statement?

[karynnj]

48. I agree that Benghazi is a witch hunt. The OP ignores the question asked, but includes the video

Given that HRC was asked about her email, don't you think a long angry answer about the Benghazi investigation is a weird response? Later, I saw a longer excerpt - on the Today site - http://www.today.com/news/visibly-angry-hillary-clinton-talks-benghazi-today-committee-not-appropriate-t48111 What is clear is that the question here followed several on her decision to use email. Most of her answers were the standard ones given. She also makes a diversion that she should have had two accounts, but everyone decides what should be on each. Note the issue is NOT just that she commingled private and public - it is that she made no effort to assure the work ones were sent to the State Department.

To me, it seems that she got really angry at Guthrie and purposely channeled the anger and spoke of Benghazi -- adding in a hit on Obama for not stopping this. (Do you agree that the administration should have the ability to shut down investigations when they want?)

[ornotna]

50. No, I don't think the administration should be able to shut it down when they want

They can certainly get their message out often to counter but not interfere. I'll wait on the FBI investigation before forming a final opinion over the email issue.

[cynzke]

23. Best Thing That SHOULD Happen NOW....

is for the Democrats to pull out of this sham and for HILIARY to refuse to testify. Let the GOP run their own dog and pony show. IGNORE THEM.

[Lychee2]

74. So you want her to be charged with contempt of Congress?

That wouldn't look so good.

[perdita9]

24. How stupid are the journalists in this country...

...that they couldn't realize what was going on?

Time, taxpayer dollars wasted, and credibility of the Congress in the crapper.

Our national media is a joke.

[rockfordfile]

25. I agree

[karynnj]

26. I don't know if it will work, but she is answering "Benghazi" investigation when asked about "email"

In fact, the question is distanced from the Benghazi investigation further because it was asked as hypothetical use of a private email by Cheney or Rove (which I think actually happened in Rove's case).

Her response was I never would have gone there - where there is defined as making the deaths of the ambassador and the others political - using McCarthy's comment to give it more weight.

Then, as it was Benghazi she was speaking of - of course righteous anger is justified. This was similar to comments last week - so I think this might be her team's decision on how to handle the over all question. Whether it will work, is whether anyone can pull her back after that response by returning the issue to email. (I suspect that the more angry, indignant etc -- the harder that might be.)

OT I really really disliked her last line - that if she were President, Democrat or Republican, she would have shut it (the investigations ?) down. Ignoring that it is a slap at Obama who has NOT done that -- it is a Constitutionally given right to the Congress to have oversight. The only real check on too many worthless hearings is that if the public thinks so - they can reject the investigators.

[AtomicKitten]

37. She conveniently conflates Benghazi with her private server.

The Benghazi dog and pony show is politically motivated as the GOP have inadvertently fessed up to, but that's not what was being asked. She conflates the two in an attempt to distract from the issue of her using an unsecured private server for classified government business. And, as both Clintons often do, claims blanket immunity for being oppressed.

[Myrina]

27. Did she happen to mention that it would likely have not happened if funding hadn't been cut?

n/t

[Prism]

29. Interesting shot at Obama

I'd be careful if I were her. She seems to be entering a delicate dance where she wants to criticize President Obama while simultaneously carrying the bulk of his coalition.

That will be a neat trick to see.

[thesquanderer]

32. Strange pivot, and missed opportunity.

She was asked about emails, and answered about Benghazi.

The question was, "if the tables were turned, and it was Dick Cheney or Karl Rove who had a private email account and prvate server on which they conducted all their government business, would you be as understanding?"

She turned the answer to the politicization of Benghazi.

But the Bush administration did indeed have its own email scandal...

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2015/03/18/flashback-rove-erases-22-million-white-house-emails-on-private-server-at-height-of-u-s-attorney-scandal-media-yawns/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

It wouldn't be worth derailing the conversation into that whole thing, but an allusion to the fact that it happened might not have been a bad idea, speaking directly to the question.

[TwilightGardener]

34. Her strategy is to make the email debacle all about Benghazi!, and not about her

administrative practices as SoS. Separate issues, but they try to conflate it into one big VRWC.

[thesquanderer]

72. Now the pivot makes perfect sense.

She was looking for a spot to implement the new pre-debate campaign strategy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kevin-mccarthy-hillary-clinton-benghazi_5612e53ae4b022a4ce5f1a6a

[TwilightGardener]

33. BTW, how does a President "shut down" a Congressional investigation he or she doesn't like?

What is she really saying here? "I would have done everything..." Like what, Hillary?

[thesquanderer]

38. I think a president can apply pressure.

There are dems in the house trying to do this sort of thing (see democrats.benghazi.house.gov/news/press-releases/democrats-issue-op-ed-and-unveil-benghazi-committee-spending-tracker ) but Obama hasn't really thrown his weight behind them. He could do what presidents do... PR and congressional arm-twisting. But HRC is probably being unrealistic if she things Obama should have seen this as that kind of priority. He's having enough trouble trying to accomplish things, this is one more battle he doesn't need to have, which would basically only benefit one person. And it could even backfire if the right threw his aggressive stance back at him, claiming he's trying to derail the hearings before they discover something about Obama himself. Why open himself up to that? HRC's problems probably aren't that important to him, and that probably ticks her off.

[TwilightGardener]

41. A President can always try to influence the actions of Congress for political or policy benefit,

but the words "shutting down" implies more than "Hey, I'll look the other way on X if you refuse to investigate Y."

[karynnj]

45. Not to mention if both X and Y were not good, is this the way we want the government run?

Here, if Obama stonewalled, HE could have his reputation tarnished defending HRC doing something he did not approve ... while she attacks him on Syria.

[karynnj]

44. Many good points -

The President does have leverage - even if it is limited. However, I doubt that even if he was willing to put 100% of his own political capital behind it he could not stop this investigation.

As McCarthy said one thing it has done is to possibly help the Republicans in 2016. Now, imagine that HRC had either not used a personal server or had a process to collect the email and weekly or monthly move it to SD archives. Benghazi would not have ANY teeth - just as it didn't in the first several hearings. It was tragic and the SD investigated what they should change going forward.

The ONLY thing that gained traction was the email server. This has hurt both the SD and HRC - as both have been attacked as not being responsive. I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for HRC on this. She KNEW there were FOIA that should be given some of the emails -- and she did NOTHING proactively to insure the SD had them.

[Smarmie Doofus]

35. My guess is she focus-grouped that, too.

What better way to garner sympathy from the DEM wing of the DEM party? As it SLOWLY slips away. Pick a fight w. Speaker Apparent Einstein McCarthy.

Indeed, it's about the ONLY sympathetic issue that works for her ; for ME, anyway.

But doesn't this leave her DANGEROUSLY off-message?

What about working "across the aisle" and all that stuff. Moderation in all things. Blah, blah, blah.

I guess the consultancy has decided to break out yet another revised version: the SPONTANEOUS Hillary.

The one w. REAL-LIFE emotions and something resembling a political ideology.

Shheeeeezzz. What it must be like in those feverish little minds.

[hrmjustin]

51. She has the right to be angry.

[LannyDeVaney]

57. Interesting reactions from posters ...

apparently it's now OK for some Democrats to side with the Republicans regarding Benghazi.

[Action_Patrol]

62. It's disgusting.

[Beacool]

81. Why should today be any different from any other day on this site?

DU is the mirror image of Free Republic when it comes to the Clintons.

[OilemFirchen]

59. FTR...

though I argued (correctly) on another thread that the email "scandal" is not, thus far, related to the Benghazi investigations, any upcoming Congressional hearings will clearly be an extension of the Benghazi witch hunt. As of now, all legal matters related to this "scandal" have been the result, primarily, of Judicial Watch lawsuits. There have not been any Congressional hearings about the matter, though there is a now-ongoing investigation.

It's akin to arguing that the Paula Jones lawsuit wasn't a part of the Whitewater inquiry. It wasn't, then it was.

So, for all those attempting to divert from Clinton's righteous indignation: You've failed.

[Pathwalker]

68. People here will defend Larry Klayman AND Judicial watch with everything

they have; every post, every letter of every post. They ADORE that racist filth!

[OilemFirchen]

69. Yup.

A cursory search is eye-opening.

[Sunlei]

73. Mrs. Clinton needs to call "them" out by Name individually, instead of bashing at the 'group'.

Call them out by name, Mrs. Clinton. Don't let those individuals "hide" in the security of their group.

[tularetom]

76. The carefully scripted visible anger must have come from a focus group media guru

There is nothing spontaneous about anything that comes out of her mouth. Even her little sly dig at Obama ("...if I were president...&quot is a shot across the bow of Joe Biden, a potential rival for the nomination. She's scared to death Biden will enter the race and Obama will endorse him.

[JNelson6563]

78. This thread is a great example of DU now.

[Beacool]

80. This Benghazi controversy has been the biggest load of crap to come down in a long time.

If these idiots actually thought that Hillary would purposely send an ambassador, a man she considered a friend, to his death is just beyond offensive.

Did the Republicans insist on holding hearings over the 60 people who died at diplomatic posts during Bush's term in office? I don't recall Powell or Condi Rice being hauled in front of Congress over their deaths.

McCarthy confirmed what we all already knew, the hearings were meant to try to lower Hillary's high poll numbers.

[magical thyme]

83. Agreed on Benghazi. However, the question she was asked wasn't about Benghazi.

It was about her use of a private, unsecure server for government emails, on which there have now been found multiple emails containing top secret information, the latest two confirmed by the State Dept to have been top secret at the time she received them.

[Beacool]

84. The e-mail controversy came out of the Benghazi hearings.

It also came to light thanks to a FOIA request from Judicial Watch. It doesn't get more RW than that.

[magical thyme]

85. actually, it was a Roumanian hacker who broke into her friend, Blumenthal's, email that exposed her

private server, along with the extensive, unofficial advising she was receiving from Blumenthal, who was pretty much banned by Obama from any official position in the administration.

And regardless of how the situation came to light, the fact remains that the situation is now under investigation by the FBI.