HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Lieberman: ‘Clinton Has M...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:45 PM

Lieberman: ‘Clinton Has Made Clear She Will Testify’ On Benghazi

Source: TPM



PEMA LEVY 11:35 AM EST, MONDAY DECEMBER 31, 2012

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) expects Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will testify on the Benghazi attacks once her health improves, he said during a news conference Monday, while discussing a Senate Committee on Homeland Security report on the Sept. 11 attacks in Libya.

"Secretary Clinton has made clear that she will testify and I think that's a good idea," Lieberman said.

On the issue of denying requests for increased security funding at the Benghazi facility, Lieberman added that the thousands of pages of documents the committee received from the State Department offer "no evidence of direct responsibility" concerning Clinton.

Clinton is currently hospitalized for a blood clot which resulted from a concussion earlier in December. Some on the right have questioned whether Clinton's illness over the last several weeks has been feigned or exaggerated in order to avoid testifying on Benghazi.

-30-



Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/lieberman-clinton-has-made-clear-she-will-testify

32 replies, 3264 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Lieberman: ‘Clinton Has Made Clear She Will Testify’ On Benghazi (Original post)
DonViejo Dec 2012 OP
Champion Jack Dec 2012 #1
Tempest Dec 2012 #2
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #3
graham4anything Dec 2012 #4
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #5
graham4anything Dec 2012 #6
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #7
graham4anything Dec 2012 #8
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #10
graham4anything Dec 2012 #11
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #12
graham4anything Dec 2012 #14
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #15
graham4anything Dec 2012 #16
karynnj Dec 2012 #20
graham4anything Dec 2012 #21
Cha Dec 2012 #27
karynnj Dec 2012 #24
former9thward Dec 2012 #32
karynnj Dec 2012 #19
graham4anything Dec 2012 #22
karynnj Dec 2012 #25
karynnj Dec 2012 #17
graham4anything Dec 2012 #18
karynnj Dec 2012 #23
Cha Dec 2012 #28
KG Dec 2012 #9
BuelahWitch Dec 2012 #13
Boomerproud Dec 2012 #26
Festivito Dec 2012 #29
politicasista Dec 2012 #30
DailyGrind51 Dec 2012 #31

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:47 PM

1. Why would anyone think she would be afraid to testify in front of those shit throwing monkeys?

She has more intestinal fortitude than all of them combined

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:48 PM

2. He must be pissed he won't be around for it

Good riddance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:50 PM

3. That should be your last headline, Joe

Time to work on that hysterical legacy of yours now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:12 PM

4. Let John Kerry testify. That is what he was given his new job for, to be the SOS come Janaury

 

so it would be his duty to testify as he is the SOS then.

seems logical to me.

He got nothing better to do than answer to conspiracy theorists on the right

I never heard of a private citizen being called. That would require a different committee IMHO
being formed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:26 PM

5. He wasn't SoS at the time. That would make no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:33 PM

6. But if Kerry is now SOS, that specific committee can NOT call a private citizen. It is illegal

 

they would need to form a new committee with the power to call private citizens

It is a techinical separation of powers point

It's like the current President (or house or senate) cannot call for the impeachment of President Bush as he no longer is president, and can't be impeached.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:37 PM

7. Kerry is a nominee. He's as much the SoS right now as I am.

Until Hillary resigns or steps down, she is still the SoS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:41 PM

8. She already stated she is leaving before the 2nd term, which is a couple of weeks away

 

By that time, the committee cannot by law call a private citizen
If say she needs 3 weeks to recover, the inauguration day will be past, and the 2nd term will have begun

It is not her fault she is ill.

Besides, as Kerry and McCain are BFFs, he should be able to take care of this

And Joe is out of office by then, so his words are meaningless
Doesn't the new senate and house become official 1/1?(aka tomorrow?) Joe is not part of the new senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:46 PM

10. Provided this really is just a leg blood clot and resolves, and there are no

underlying health issues, there is no reason to think she wouldn't be able to testify before she stops being SoS. The GOP has said they will not confirm Kerry until she does, anyway. I'm not sure why she should go to great lengths to avoid giving testimony--it would look bad. She was in charge of the State Dept., her staffers died. I don't think she's at fault, but it's definitely in her job description to speak about what she knew at the time. It won't hurt her, there is just not much there. Consider it a formality. The GOP will try to make a big deal out of it, but so what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:53 PM

11. Hillary doesn't need Kerry to be confirmed to end her term as SOS

 

there are rules of replacement when someone is ill and resigns, the assistant would be the new SOS until a regular one is confirmed.

When she said she would stay til a new one is confirmed, that was before her current temporary health issue came into being.

So, yes, she would be a private citizen

Hillary can't be hurt by anything. The rightwing conspiracy smears will be said either way, but her fans and President Obama fans don't pay attention to the crap thrown at them.
That is what was proven in the 2012 election. It just makes the rightwing look insignificant

there is also NO downside for not testifying, none at all.
So why throw her into the lion's den?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:57 PM

12. When you are in charge, you are accountable. This was her department.

Petraeus did testify about the CIA's role, IIRC. He was supposed to again, but resigned in disgrace. I think it would look bad, and hurt her more, to NOT testify, actually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:03 PM

14. General Petraeus quit because of his personal scandal. Had nothing to do with his work.

 

Hillary can't be hurt either way.She is unhurtable because the people who back her and the President do not care about the rightwing smear machine.

they already are blathering on. It is very petty when someone says things about someone who is laid up in bed ill.

It is very bully like. And nobody likes a bully in this day and age.

And all those men picking on a woman don't play well either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:06 PM

15. I am aware of why Petraeus quit. But the point is, he did appear

before a Congressional committee on the Benghazi matter. I see no good reason why Hillary shouldn't, as it was her dept. It's not "bullying", it's a part of the job. Certainly they want something to come out that damages her or Obama, but that's coincidental and not a reason for her to stay silent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:09 PM

16. the repubs already have their soundbytes they thought of. It is a witchhunt

 

the repubs have no interest in hearing what she has to say anyhow
just bloviating, which they will still do before and after

the public doesn't care about this issue anyhow. You don't hear anyone mentioning this at all but the rightwing media

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:36 PM

20. Hillary herself spoke of wanting to remain in charge while

these questions are being asked. Apparently, she sees herself as being accountable to answering the questions. Not to mention, if she doesn't, it may be MORE likely that she has no forum to defend any decisions, that in retrospect, look questionable.

No one is suggesting that Benghazi is a reason for HRC to quit - she spoke of wanting to quit at the end of the first term long before Benghazi.

It is not bullying to say that when she is healthy, she will testify. (It is also idiotic to suggest that as she is a woman, it is bullying to make her testify.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:42 PM

21. strawmen above. Nobody but you said that

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:20 PM

27. No, they are FACTS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:52 PM

24. What law says the SFRC or the House Foreign Affairs committee can not call

private citizens? They can and have in the past.

What Lieberman said was "Hillary wants to testify". I do think it entirely possible that JL was one of the people Clinton has spoken to. Unlike you, I think they are friends.

Kerry and McCain are colleagues who respect each other, per McCain (2004 or 2005) they are not friends in the sense that they have even visited each others homes in the DC area.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:36 PM

32. What law are you talking about?

The Senate can call a private person. Private persons testify before Congress almost every day they are in session. If someone the Senate wants to testify, refuses, they may be held in contempt of Congress with criminal and civil penalties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:30 PM

19. You are totally confused

1) Clinton is STILL the SOS
2) Go look at the witness list for the SFRC - there are PLENTY of private citizens on the witness list. In fact, one LT John Kerry famously testified in 1971. (For more recent hearings - http://www.foreign.senate.gov/ There is a nice tab for hearings - have fun!)
3) Separations of powers??? What are you speaking of? The Senate or the House can hold hearings and call people before them. Do you remember that they had hearings on things like tobacco - and called the CEOs? Do you remember the 2009 House calling some of the credit card execs? They were not happy, but they were there.
4) Impeach is a first step to removing from office, NO ONE can retroactively impeach someone not in office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:43 PM

22. Why are you supporting Joe Lieberman's rantings?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:57 PM

25. First it is NOT a rant, second it defends Clinton

read what he said.


"Secretary Clinton has made clear that she will testify and I think that's a good idea," Lieberman said.

On the issue of denying requests for increased security funding at the Benghazi facility, Lieberman added that the thousands of pages of documents the committee received from the State Department offer "no evidence of direct responsibility" concerning Clinton.


Why are you demanding the Chair of SFRC testify as if he were part of the administration? THAT would be pretty strange. Maybe he can both testify and chair the hearing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:23 PM

17. How idiotic!

What first hand information would the then (and now) chair of the SFRC know about what happened in fall in the state department? If and when he is confirmed, he will have to answer questions on what is done with the recommendations. (You really need to get over your dislike of all things Kerry - and I don't care that you worked to elect him in 2004 after all your preferred candidates lost.)

As to a private citizen being called, she is NOT a private citizen, she is still the Secretary of state. In addition, private citizens can and are called before the committee. In addition, as this happened ON HER WATCH, I assume that when healthy she will want - AS SHE SAID she did to answer the questions on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:26 PM

18. You told me in a different thread, Kerry was the #1 person on this stuff for 4 years now

 



threefore, according to all your Pro-Kerry posts, he is 100% qualified.

amazing you are now saying Kerry is not qualfied for the job you so pushed him for



let him testify. Hillary needs her rest before becoming the 45th president and hiring her own SOS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:44 PM

23. I am not suggesting that Kerry will not be an excellent SOS

nor did I ever say that he was the number 1 person involved in managing our embassies. That would be ridiculous - the State Department runs the embassies and the CEO (if you want) of the state department was and is HRC.

I am saying he had no first hand knowledge or responsibility for what happened in the US embassies in 2012.

How would you expect him to answer the questions? Would you be happy with "I don't know, but we will work hard to improve security"? How about, answers like HRC told me"...." or (specific people reporting to HRC) told me? You would be the first to suggest that in doing any of these things he is throwing HRC under the bus.

As to 45, I would suggest if this is her intent - it is more important that she testify and answer all the questions in a way that ends this issue. (Consider that there were several attacks on embassies under Bush, where people but not the ambassador died. There were no special hearings that I am aware of - though those type of things did come up in SFRC hearings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #23)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:22 PM

28. Wow, you have more patience than Job!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:43 PM

9. piss on Joe Lieberman

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:01 PM

13. The rotten Republicans who cut funding for Embassy security should testify

Not Secretary Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BuelahWitch (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:57 PM

26. Why isn't that fact brought up every time a Gopper stands in front of a camera

and bleets about that tragic event? Dems, as usual, are dropping the PR ball.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 06:18 PM

29. Why do they name the messenger boy?

So, Hillary might testify. Okay, that would imply she might not.

And, for this information we put the messenger-boy's name in the newspaper?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 06:32 PM

30. Last day must be near n/t

Last edited Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:45 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 06:43 PM

31. Right after Dick Cheney testifies as to the whereabouts of those WMD he claimed there was "no doubt

the existence of..."?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread