« | »

Hillary Takes Responsibility, But Not The Blame

From CNN:

Clinton: I’m responsible for diplomats’ security

By Elise Labott | Tue October 16, 2012

Lima, Peru (CNN) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday tried to douse a political firestorm over the deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya, saying she’s responsible for the security of American diplomatic outposts.

"I take responsibility," Clinton said during a visit to Peru. "I’m in charge of the State Department’s 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They’re the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."

Notice how Mrs. Clinton takes the "responsibility" in one breath, but in the next she shifts the blame on to the "security professionals," who turned down the requested extension of security.

But what does ‘taking responsibility’ mean in politics these days, anyway? Is Hillary going to resign? Is she going to pay any damages?

No, the press will just praise her for her nobility and courage. There is no cost for taking responsibility.

But she said an investigation now under way will ultimately determine what happened at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, where Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed on September 11.

"I take this very personally," Clinton said. "So we’re going to get to the bottom of it, and then we’re going to do everything we can to work to prevent it from happening again, and then we’re going to work to bring whoever did this to us to justice." …

And never mind that the FBI and the others investigating were kept out of Libya for weeks by the State Department and the Justice Department. And never mind that the crime scene was left unsecured for weeks.

And never mind that the FBI only investigated the site for a few hours when they finally did get there. And never mind that they are not being allowed to interview the suspects that the Libyans have rounded up.

And never mind that we will never hear any report on this investigation until long after the elections. If ever.

In the wake of an attack like this, in the fog of war, there’s always going to be confusion," Clinton said. "And I think it is absolutely fair to say that everyone had the same intelligence. Everyone who spoke tried to give the information that they had. As time has gone on, that information has changed. We’ve gotten more detail, but that’s not surprising. That always happens." …

According to the sworn Congressional testimony of the State Department’s Deputy Assistant Security for Security, Charlene Lamb, the intelligence people were able to listen and even watch the attack in "almost real-time":

"When the attack began, a Diplomatic Security agent working in the Tactical Operations Center immediately activated the Imminent Danger Notification System and made an emergency announcement over the PA. Based on our security protocols, he also alerted the annex U.S. quick reaction security team stationed nearby, the Libyan 17th February Brigade, Embassy Tripoli, and the Diplomatic Security Command Center in Washington. From that point on, I could follow what was happening in almost real-time."

So how could their be so much confusion? Why wouldn’t they know whether there were protests or not beforehand? Why wouldn’t they know whether the attack was premeditated or spontaneous?

She added, "What I want to avoid is some kind of political gotcha or blame game."

"I know that we’re very close to an election," Clinton said. "I want to just take a step back here and say from my own experience, we are at our best as Americans when we pull together. I’ve done that with Democratic presidents and Republican presidents." …

We thought Hillary Clinton once shrieked said that it is patriotic to protest. We aren’t supposed to even raise questions about such an obvious fiasco and cover-up?

BuzzFeed, however, reminds us that Mrs. Clinton did not always think this way.

This is what she said back during the 2008 campaign, via the archives of the New York Daily News:

Hillary Clinton: Barack Obama no leader

By Michael Saul, Michael Mcauliff | Thursday, January 17, 2008

Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama: You don’t get what it takes to be an effective President.

"Government by adviser simply doesn’t work," charged Clinton, seizing for the second straight day on Obama’s pledge to be a President who inspires and provides a vision for the nation – not one who will make sure "everything’s running on time" in the federal bureaucracy.

"Being President means being both CEO and COO of one of the largest and most complex organizations in the world," she insisted…

"I know that we can get on top of this, but it’s going to require strong presidential leadership – it’s going to require a President who knows from day one you have to run a government and manage the economy," she said. "The buck stops in the Oval Office." …

Camp Clinton believes the argument plays into its key critique of Obama: He is a "talker" and not a "doer." …

But that was then, and this is now.

And she still needs Obama’s help to pay off her 2008 campaign debt.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, October 16th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “Hillary Takes Responsibility, But Not The Blame”

  1. Right of the People says:

    This looks like the Hildabeast doing her best Janet Reno imitation.

  2. Tater Salad says:

    Hillary Clinton takes the blame/responsibility after she said that the blame stops at the White House!


« Front Page | To Top
« | »