The Hillary Clinton love-fest, disguised as a Senate hearing on Benghazi yesterday, was illustrative of the unwillingness of politicians on either side of the isle to hold one of their own accountable. For a majority of the hearing, we heard from various senators how courageous Hillary Clinton was and how well she had served her country. This, of course, is how every politician wishes to be seen, as a selfless public servant who sacrifices for the benefit of the little people in the country. In Hillary Clinton's case, nothing could be further from the truth.
During her remarks, Hillary recounted the story about how she met the flag-draped coffins returning from Benghazi and comforted grieving family members. It was such a moving experience that Mrs. Clinton started to cry during her retelling of it. The only problem is that it never happened the way Secretary Clinton said it did. Family members in attendance say that Mrs. Clinton was cold and aloof, and one of the parents of a murdered American said Hillary wouldn't even make eye contact. This is not the first time that Mrs. Clinton stretched the truth and revised history in order to make herself look better than she is. Remember the story she told during the 2008 campaign about having to duck gunfire when she visited a war zone as first lady? That never happened either, but truth and facts don't stop her from trying to bestow upon herself the honor, dignity and courage that she doesn't otherwise warrant from her actions.
Secretary of State Clinton did receive a few tough questions, most notably one from Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin. Senator Johnson asked Secretary Clinton the sixty four thousand dollar question about the attack not being characterized as an Al Queda operation until much later, when it was known all along that it wasn't the result of a protest. Mrs. Clinton mustered her best manufactured outrage and almost screamed, "What difference does it make now?" She even went so far as to boldly and blatantly lie when she stated that she never claimed the attack was executed by anyone other than militant extremists. There is at least two weeks of video and audio evidence of Hillary Clinton blaming the attack on a protest inspired by an anti-Muslim YouTube video. In fact, the Secretary of State and President Obama made a TV commercial that ran in Pakistan which blamed the video for the attack. And one more factoid of interest on this subject, Hillary told one of the fathers whose son was murdered in Benghazi that they would bring to justice the film maker responsible for this tragedy.
But for a few exceptions, the Senators questioning Secretary Clinton gave her a pass on her culpability for the terrorist attack in Benghazi this past September 11. She herself said that a a review board put the blame squarely on lower level State Department employees. It is ironic how Democrats have screamed since the 2008 financial crisis about holding accountable the CEOs of these large banks and financial institutions, but when they are at the helm of a large organization, it's always the underlings that are at fault for any mistakes. Make no error in analysis, Hillary Clinton knew of the dangers in Benghazi as illuminated by Ambassador Steven's cables, and in her Leftist arrogance decided not to provide adequate security for U.S. personnel serving in a war zone. Then she lied for several weeks about the impetus for the attack. Yes, Mrs. Clinton, it does make a difference and the fact that you are unable or unwilling to acknowledge that difference shows how utterly unqualified and untrustworthy you are to be anywhere near the sacred trust of government. The difference it makes is the difference between responsible and culpable government and the incompetent and unaccountable government you have been a part of the last four years.