Rand Paul to Hillary Clinton: I would have relieved you of your post

[jimnyc]

Watch the video. I'm starting to like a lot about him and the way he speaks his mind!


Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) criticized Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Wednesday during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing over the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

"I'm glad that you're accepting responsibility," said Paul. "I think ultimately with your leaving that you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that."

"Had I been president and found you did not read the cables from Benghazi and from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post. I think it's inexcusable," he said, referencing Clinton's comments that she had not read all of the documentation surrounding the attack.

"I think we can understand you're not reading every cable," Paul said. He added that he didn't suspect Clinton of "bad motives" but said that it was a "failure of leadership."

Clinton responded, "I am the Secretary of State. And the [Accountability Review Board] made very clear that the level of responsibility for the failures that they outlined was set at the Assistant Secretary level and below."

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) rebuked Paul in the next exchange. "If some people on this committee want to call this tragedy the worst since 9/11, it misunderstands the nature of 4000 plus Americans lost in the War in Iraq under false pretenses."

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tH0CDErX1rg" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" width="480"></iframe>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/rand-paul-hillary-clinton_n_2534120.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular,beng hazi

[aboutime]

Jimnyc. Hillary doesn't care what Paul, or any other member of that committee said to her. She threw the entire State Department list of employee's UNDER THE BUS 4400, and only cares about Hillary....possibly Fooling the same people Obama fooled twice, come 2016. Hillary is as Untouchable as Bubba was, and still "IS"....4401 as TWO Faced as he ever was. Like Minds LIE alike.

[mundame]

"Had I been president and found you did not read the cables from Benghazi and from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post. I think it's inexcusable," he said, referencing Clinton's comments that she had not read all of the documentation surrounding the attack.

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

He won't be president because of this.

She may.

[jimnyc]

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

He won't be president because of this.

She may.

Wow, that's a tad harsh! I think he spoke factual. Let's break it down...


"Had I been president and found you did not read the cables from Benghazi and from Ambassador Stevens

Stating that if he was the president, and found out about her not even reading cables based on security issues. Clearly not abusive.


, I would have relieved you of your post.

Telling it like it is, and what a president would have authority to do. He believes the failure in her duties, would be enough to relieve her of said duties. I don't see this as abusive either.


I think it's inexcusable,"

I agree with him. There's no excuse for gross incompetence. Had the appropriate people been on top of this, lives possibly could have been saved.

Curiously, mundame, what part did you find abusive?

[aboutime]

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

He won't be president because of this.

She may.


mundame. You take no further interest in him because you are offended by Paul stating the truth????

Please tell us how that was grandstanding, or self-promotion since....IT WAS A HEARING, ya know? Like in a court room???

[mundame]

Wow, that's a tad harsh! I think he spoke factual. Let's break it down...



Stating that if he was the president, and found out about her not even reading cables based on security issues. Clearly not abusive.



Telling it like it is, and what a president would have authority to do. He believes the failure in her duties, would be enough to relieve her of said duties. I don't see this as abusive either.



I agree with him. There's no excuse for gross incompetence. Had the appropriate people been on top of this, lives possibly could have been saved.

Curiously, mundame, what part did you find abusive?


All of it. I deeply disapprove of people who do verbal abuse, however. Maybe she doesn't mind (ha.).

Maybe you are right that he had a right to say all that, and certainly gross malfeasance happened over there, no question in my mind, but what I think about Rand Paul is that he was grandstanding and self-promoting in an aggressive way to make himself a political future and I for one am not planning on voting for him should the "opportunity" arise. Other people will do as they like, of course. My vote doesn't matter because I've pretty much given up on voting, the offerings have been so poor lately. Still, if they managed to run someone really decent and good, I would take an interest. That seems to be a thing of the past, however.

I like Hillary despite this awful Benghazi business. I don't think she'll run, IMO.

[jimnyc]

All of it. I deeply disapprove of people who do verbal abuse, however. Maybe she doesn't mind (ha.).

Maybe you are right that he had a right to say all that, and certainly gross malfeasance happened over there, no question in my mind, but what I think about Rand Paul is that he was grandstanding and self-promoting in an aggressive way to make himself a political future and I for one am not planning on voting for him should the "opportunity" arise. Other people will do as they like, of course. My vote doesn't matter because I've pretty much given up on voting, the offerings have been so poor lately. Still, if they managed to run someone really decent and good, I would take an interest. That seems to be a thing of the past, however.

I like Hillary despite this awful Benghazi business. I don't think she'll run, IMO.

Well, I think all politicians grandstand to an extent, especially if they know the cameras are rolling. But I think he was on point. No one is taking responsibility for what happened. Yeah, it's great that they want things implemented to prevent it from happening again, but really don't address any higher ups that failed in command. 4 Americans dead and all anyone gets from what happened is lip service.

I think he has a good political future but I can't see him reaching the presidency. And Hillary, I'm the opposite, I'm already convinced she is running in 2016.

[ConHog]

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

yes we know you hate men and they should in noway question a woman, doesn't make it abuse.


Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

so , he's a politician? I was wondering why they had a basketball player questioning her



He won't be president because of this.

he may not , but it will have little to do with this.


She may.

she won't even be the Democratic nominee.

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/Foden20130125-Hillary20130124025938.jpg

[red states rule]

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

He won't be president because of this.

She may.

So you are one of the many people who admire Hillary's ability not to tell the truth, are not the least bit concerned about the murder of 4 Americans, and have no desire to find out why they were murdered as it might cause harm to Hillary's desire to become President in 2016.

[mundame]

And Hillary, I'm the opposite, I'm already convinced she is running in 2016.


Interesting! Well, we'll see. That hemotoma she had could be an issue. She was pretty weepy at the hearings; I didn't entirely like the health look of all that.

[LadyGunSlinger]

All of it. I deeply disapprove of people who do verbal abuse, however. Maybe she doesn't mind (ha.).

Maybe you are right that he had a right to say all that, and certainly gross malfeasance happened over there, no question in my mind, but what I think about Rand Paul is that he was grandstanding and self-promoting in an aggressive way to make himself a political future and I for one am not planning on voting for him should the "opportunity" arise. Other people will do as they like, of course. My vote doesn't matter because I've pretty much given up on voting, the offerings have been so poor lately. Still, if they managed to run someone really decent and good, I would take an interest. That seems to be a thing of the past, however.

I like Hillary despite this awful Benghazi business. I don't think she'll run, IMO.

I don't get it? What did he say that was verbally abusive? She should be relieved of her post, she cost 4 Americans their lives. Since when is telling the truth considered verbal abuse? Amazing ignorance.

[LadyGunSlinger]

Interesting! Well, we'll see. That hemotoma she had could be an issue. She was pretty weepy at the hearings; I didn't entirely like the health look of all that.

:laugh: Yea, she's always pretty "weepy" when it "suits" <SUITS>her.. (Nice play on words, no?) I don't buy any of the BS she's peddling. If a liberal is moving his or her lips, they're lying.

[jimnyc]

I don't get it? What did he say that was verbally abusive? She should be relieved of her post, she cost 4 Americans their lives. Since when is telling the truth considered verbal abuse? Amazing ignorance.

Welcome, LadyGunSlinger!! :salute:

[mundame]

I don't get it? What did he say that was verbally abusive? She should be relieved of her post, she cost 4 Americans their lives. Since when is telling the truth considered verbal abuse? Amazing ignorance.


See the bolded text: That's verbal abuse. I see you are totally clueless and have a bad disposition, both. Whoop! Out you go.

No, wait. You are a woman (maybe.......) and I give a second chance to women. Probably you won't be able to be polite or make coherent arguments, but I hope on, hope ever.

[LadyGunSlinger]

Welcome, LadyGunSlinger!! :salute:

Thank you :-) It's nice to be here!:hithere:

[LadyGunSlinger]

See the bolded text: That's verbal abuse. I see you are totally clueless and have a bad disposition, both. Whoop! Out you go.

No, wait. You are a woman (maybe.......) and I give a second chance to women. Probably you won't be able to be polite or make coherent arguments, but I hope on, hope ever.

I have a bad disposition because I asked you a simple question? REALLY? I have a feisty form of debate style which doesn't require your permission or acceptance. You're free to wuss out and ignore me. I already expected as much after reading some of your responses on this forum. Trust me, I won't lose any sleep over it. LOL

As to Rand, he was spot on!

[jimnyc]

See the bolded text: That's verbal abuse. I see you are totally clueless and have a bad disposition, both. Whoop! Out you go.

No, wait. You are a woman (maybe.......) and I give a second chance to women. Probably you won't be able to be polite or make coherent arguments, but I hope on, hope ever.

Wait a second.... I'm not getting between a good catfight, but that's just sexist to give second chances to women only! :poke:

[LadyGunSlinger]

Wait a second.... I'm not getting between a good catfight, but that's just sexist to give second chances to women only! :poke:


Now now.. liberals are never sexists.. That's only reserved for we conservatives.. Along with the racist tag. Must never disappoint! ;-)

[mundame]

Wait a second.... I'm not getting between a good catfight, but that's just sexist to give second chances to women only! :poke:



Oh, dear. http://macg.net/emoticons/smilebow.gif You may have a point there. Anyway, too late, [s]he already used up her chances.

[LadyGunSlinger]

Oh, dear. http://macg.net/emoticons/smilebow.gif You may have a point there. Anyway, too late, [s]he already used up her chances.


:laugh::laugh:

[DragonStryk72]

See the bolded text: That's verbal abuse. I see you are totally clueless and have a bad disposition, both. Whoop! Out you go.

No, wait. You are a woman (maybe.......) and I give a second chance to women. Probably you won't be able to be polite or make coherent arguments, but I hope on, hope ever.

Wow, verbal abuse and pretty blatant sexism, along with a direct insult to her intelligence. That's pretty much the trifecta of hypocrisy right there.

[mundame]

Wow, verbal abuse and pretty blatant sexism, along with a direct insult to her intelligence. That's pretty much the trifecta of hypocrisy right there.


Better put on your cup, DragonStryk -- I might trifecta you next.

[jimnyc]

Better put on your cup, DragonStryk -- I might trifecta you next.

Wait, can I get the trifecta? I never get anything from the ladies! :coffee:

[DragonStryk72]

The one that gets me so riled up was when Hilary goes "at this point, what does it matter?" In reference to whether it was a riot or an attack. 4 innocent people DIED, it fucking matters! Even other dems were taking her to task on that one.

As to abuse, it wasn't by any rational definition. Informing someone who has cost people their lives that you would have fired them for ignoring critical calls for help is not abuse. He did not insult her, did not swear or berate her.

And let's keep in mind that she jumped all over bush for not reading the memo on wmds in Iraq. if bush was at fault then, then she's at fault now. Pretty simple, really

[DragonStryk72]

Better put on your cup, DragonStryk -- I might trifecta you next.

Oh good, you finally admit to your trolling.

[mundame]

The one that gets me so riled up was when Hilary goes "at this point, what does it matter?" In reference to whether it was a riot or an attack.


Okay, good, finally someone is quoting the quote honestly.

I agree with you....it was tactless, or possibly worse, obfuscating. Of course it matters. Either way, they clearly should have sent in the Marines! And I bet Hillary very much wishes they had: this is doing her no good, obviously.

Well, it was a bad screw up and it is plain the worst terrorists have taken over Benghazi, and I hope ol' Obama isn't counting on Libya for his reputation, because that one hasn't worked out either. I personally think this nation should firmly let the Mideast burn up on its own. Nothing good comes out of that area, except oil.

[jimnyc]

The one that gets me so riled up was when Hilary goes "at this point, what does it matter?" In reference to whether it was a riot or an attack. 4 innocent people DIED, it fucking matters! Even other dems were taking her to task on that one.

That was my point. Making efforts for improvement going forward is great and all, but there should be more accountability for these deaths. She'll walk away quietly now and people will barely remember this news in 2016 when she runs, and even sadder, they will forget that due to inept leadership there are 4 more Americans buried.

[red states rule]

That was my point. Making efforts for improvement going forward is great and all, but there should be more accountability for these deaths. She'll walk away quietly now and people will barely remember this news in 2016 when she runs, and even sadder, they will forget that due to inept leadership there are 4 more Americans buried.

and the sad thing is, libs and the liberal media do not give a damn about their murders, their families, or finding out how the terrorists got through as it would cast the administration and Hillary is a bad light. All they care about is shielding them and keeping Dems in power

[ConHog]

and the sad thing is, libs and the liberal media do not give a damn about their murders, their families, or finding out how the terrorists got through as it would cast the administration and Hillary is a bad light. All they care about is shielding them and keeping Dems in power

pssh as if anyone actually believes you care about anything but attacking democrats.

[Robert A Whit]

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

He won't be president because of this.

She may.

Are you kidding?

She grandstanded and distanced herself from being responsible.

Lives were lost. I wonder had the man that died was your husband if you would have gone so easy on Hillary and so hard on Rand Paul.

Then read what Jim told you.

[Robert A Whit]

pssh as if anyone actually believes you care about anything but attacking democrats.

If you ever decide to attack a Democrat, somebody may tell you the same thing.

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by DragonStryk72 http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=611146#post611146)
The one that gets me so riled up was when Hilary goes "at this point, what does it matter?" In reference to whether it was a riot or an attack. 4 innocent people DIED, it fucking matters! Even other dems were taking her to task on that one.



That was my point. Making efforts for improvement going forward is great and all, but there should be more accountability for these deaths. She'll walk away quietly now and people will barely remember this news in 2016 when she runs, and even sadder, they will forget that due to inept leadership there are 4 more Americans buried.

Worse yet is the way they tried to cover this up. Calling it an act over a film.

And they knew they were shitting us all.

It is the task of all Sec of State to ensure that the Ambassadors are all properly protected. Then to read of the cables that she also claims she never saw. What the hell is her worth to the country then?

[bingster]

Abusive. I take no further interest in him.

Grandstanding. Self-promotion.

He won't be president because of this.

She may.

"I'm glad that you're accepting responsibility," said Paul. "I think ultimately with your leaving that you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that."
That was my favorite dumb quote of his. Grandstanding is right. He never had a chance for future president. That was what was so shocking about his other quote-what a joke!

[jimnyc]

"I'm glad that you're accepting responsibility," said Paul. "I think ultimately with your leaving that you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that."
That was my favorite dumb quote of his. Grandstanding is right. He never had a chance for future president. That was what was so shocking about his other quote-what a joke!

His opinion aside, or either presidency standing aside - there needs to be accountability - and stating 'what does it matter' now isn't enough in my opinion.

[bingster]

The one that gets me so riled up was when Hilary goes "at this point, what does it matter?" In reference to whether it was a riot or an attack. 4 innocent people DIED, it fucking matters! Even other dems were taking her to task on that one.

As to abuse, it wasn't by any rational definition. Informing someone who has cost people their lives that you would have fired them for ignoring critical calls for help is not abuse. He did not insult her, did not swear or berate her.

And let's keep in mind that she jumped all over bush for not reading the memo on wmds in Iraq. if bush was at fault then, then she's at fault now. Pretty simple, really

That is the absolute political point McCain and others have made since 9/11. It's not that it doesn't matter that people died. Nobody said it didn't matter that people died. What didn't matter was the Sunday talk shows that have been explained over and over on the networks but conservatives still have "questions". The talking points put out for the public mentioned protests. Very quickly that was changed to terrorist attack. Did they jumble or fumble the message a bit? I think they did to some degree. But the jumbling the message was neither a cover-up, nor did it cost 4 lives like Republicans kept acting like.

The problem is that until the hearings, none of the questions had to do with the deaths, they just had to do with what they were calling a "cover-up". I get it, with No Drama Obama, you have to make a drama up.

ps, what "memo" are you talking about regarding wmd's? She voted for the war.-not to mention 4,000 American lives as a difference.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That is the absolute political point McCain and others have made since 9/11. It's not that it doesn't matter that people died. Nobody said it didn't matter that people died. What didn't matter was the Sunday talk shows that have been explained over and over on the networks but conservatives still have "questions". The talking points put out for the public mentioned protests. Very quickly that was changed to terrorist attack. Did they jumble or fumble the message a bit? I think they did to some degree. But the jumbling the message was neither a cover-up, nor did it cost 4 lives like Republicans kept acting like.

The problem is that until the hearings, none of the questions had to do with the deaths, they just had to do with what they were calling a "cover-up". I get it, with No Drama Obama, you have to make a drama up.

No, you do not get it. A cover up was used, they did the LYING movie crap and tripled down on it . Then lied repeatedly about it. After that they postponed the investigation and attempted to muddy the waters even more. They lied to the victims families and the American people!! Then queen biatch gets a pass and when forced to testify gets to piss out--"whats the difference" - as if none exists! As if people did not die, were not murdered! Adding repeated insults to injuries!
Yep' , you don't get it and never will.
Too bad , some screw must be loose or you would not be treating facts as if they are absolutely not important !-Tyr

[bingster]

Other than the rude rhetoric and disrespectful tone. I didn't mind a bit that Hilary was grilled over the deaths. I really didn't.

It's the fake outrage over the messaging that persisted since 9/11 for pure political reasons, continued through the hearings, and still persists on this thread. "What do you mean it doesn't matter 4 people died?!" is an asinine comment.

[bingster]

No, you do not get it. A cover up was used, they did the LYING movie crap and tripled down on it . Then lied repeatedly about it. After that they postponed the investigation and attempted to muddy the waters even more. They lied to the victims families and the American people!! Then queen biatch gets a pass and when forced to testify gets to piss out--"whats the difference" - as if none exists! As if people did not die, were not murdered! Adding repeated insults to injuries!
Yep' , you don't get it and never will.
Too bad , some screw must be loose or you would not be treating facts as if they are absolutely not important !-Tyr

b.s. idiot

[DragonStryk72]

That is the absolute political point McCain and others have made since 9/11. It's not that it doesn't matter that people died. Nobody s. d it didn't matter that people died. What didn't matter was the Sunday talk shows that have been explained over and over on the networks but conservatives still have "questions". The talking points put out for the public mentioned protests. Very quickly that was changed to terrorist attack. Did they jumble or fumble the message a bit? I think they did to some degree. But the jumbling the message was neither a cover-up, nor did it cost 4 lives like Republicans kept acting like.

The problem is that until the hearings, none of the questions had to do with the deaths, they just had to do with what they were calling a "cover-up". I get it, with No Drama Obama, you have to make a drama up.

ps, what "memo" are you talking about regarding wmd's? She voted for the war.-not to mention 4,000 American lives as a difference.

And it matters both how and why they died, ask any homicide detective. That's pretty much their career. If a member of your family gets killed on someone's watch, you damn well deserve to know the particulars of how it happened.

I referred, rather specifically to her blasting bush after he came forward with the information that he had not actually read the memos on Iraq. I said nothing about her vote. Many dems voted for the war, then blasted bush afterward.

[bingster]

And it matters both how and why they died, ask any homicide detective. That's pretty much their career. If a member of your family gets killed on someone's watch, you damn well deserve to know the particulars of how it happened.

I referred, rather specifically to her blasting Bush after he came forward with the information that he had not actually read the memos on Iraq. I said nothing about her vote. Many dems voted for the war, then blasted bush afterward.

As I said in later posts. Hilary was not saying "it doesn't matter" regarding dead people, how it happened, when it happened, or anything related. The question she showed outrage regarding was about the original message. This has been explained on the news over and over again. McCain and his cronies have gone to original hearings. Kerry almost laughed that other guy out of the hearing regarding this incessant obsession with Susan Rice doing the Sunday talk shows. She put out the CIA (Not Secretary of State, by the way) unclassified (the classified talking points mentioned terrorism) talking points. In Congress' daily briefings, they were told why the terrorism portion was left out and it has been dealt with. As I said also in later posts, I was offended by that b.s. obsession with the fumbled message, not what really happened. She deserved a tough grilling. There could have been a modicum of respect, but she deserved the grilling.

The Sunday talk show circuit was called a cover-up and Tyr guy called it lies. That was not what happened.

Another issue. Yes, I know later on, Democrats did question what happened during the original 9/11, but NOBODY EVER went half as bonkers against Rice or Bush the regarding 9/11. It was a tradgety, as this attack was. I'm not like some, that outright blame Bush for not knowing, but I know he was looking the wrong way when it happened (obsessed with Iraq). I'm also pretty confident we can find some larger examples of Bengazi type attacks from that stupid war and you didn't see anybody threatening to fire anybody.

In this case, Romney was crying foul practically while the attack was going on! This outrage over the messaging is a disgusting political drama and nothing else.

[ConHog]

And it matters both how and why they died, ask any homicide detective. That's pretty much their career. If a member of your family gets killed on someone's watch, you damn well deserve to know the particulars of how it happened.

I referred, rather specifically to her blasting bush after he came forward with the information that he had not actually read the memos on Iraq. I said nothing about her vote. Many dems voted for the war, then blasted bush afterward.

A small point. The secretary of state is NOT a homicide detective. If you want to know the why this happened you need to ask Holder because that is the justice department via the FBI's responsibility in a case like this.

As far as she is concerned she is absolutely correct, the why doesn't matter. The HOW on the other hand is VERY important because Diplomatic Security is absolutely in the State Department's responsibility.

[bingster]

A small point. The secretary of state is NOT a homicide detective. If you want to know the why this happened you need to ask Holder because that is the justice department via the FBI's responsibility in a case like this.

As far as she is concerned she is absolutely correct, the why doesn't matter. The HOW on the other hand is VERY important because Diplomatic Security is absolutely in the State Department's responsibility.

But again! Everyone is missing the point. She didn't say it didn't matter "why" to a question of how they were killed! The question that was asked was related to what was SAID about what happened. Please, feel free to find the clip on you-tube, I'm sure it's out there, she was getting grilled on what was said about what happened when, it turns out, it didn't happen that way.

[red states rule]

Other than the rude rhetoric and disrespectful tone. I didn't mind a bit that Hilary was grilled over the deaths. I really didn't.

It's the fake outrage over the messaging that persisted since 9/11 for pure political reasons, continued through the hearings, and still persists on this thread. "What do you mean it doesn't matter 4 people died?!" is an asinine comment.

Dems showed their outrage over those 4 murders the same way the showed their outrage over the murder of Brian Terry thanks to Obama's botched gun running operation. They yawned, tried to pass the buck, went off to fundraisers, and forgot about it

[red states rule]

But again! Everyone is missing the point. She didn't say it didn't matter "why" to a question of how they were killed! The question that was asked was related to what was SAID about what happened. Please, feel free to find the clip on you-tube, I'm sure it's out there, she was getting grilled on what was said about what happened when, it turns out, it didn't happen that way.

I would like to know who came up with the lie to blame the video for the murders.

[DragonStryk72]

A small point. The secretary of state is NOT a homicide detective. If you want to know the why this happened you need to ask Holder because that is the justice department via the FBI's responsibility in a case like this.

As far as she is concerned she is absolutely correct, the why doesn't matter. The HOW on the other hand is VERY important because Diplomatic Security is absolutely in the State Department's responsibility.

Is everyone using the lowest form of word comprehension in this thread? In no way shape or form did I ever say that Hilary was a homicide detective. I said to ask one if why someone was killed mattered. READ THEN ARGUE.

The why does still matter, alongside the how. The reason the why matters is because, were it by rioters, then it was not terrorists that we need to track down. Were it terrorists, then it matter because there may be a more long range strategic element to it. Even failing that, it matters to the victims families, as I also pointed out and you ignored.

[jimnyc]

But again! Everyone is missing the point. She didn't say it didn't matter "why" to a question of how they were killed! The question that was asked was related to what was SAID about what happened. Please, feel free to find the clip on you-tube, I'm sure it's out there, she was getting grilled on what was said about what happened when, it turns out, it didn't happen that way.

No. She went on about "why does it matter" - and how they are working to ensure this kind of thing never happens again and blah blah blah... but accountability from superiors was not forthcoming. Senators wanted to know WHY these cables were not read by Hillary - and that's when she went on her tirade. And when all was said and done - still no accountability from anyone in charge. Eerily similar to the fast and furious covering up.

[red states rule]

I would like to know who came up with the lie to blame the video for the murders.

Hey Bing - cat got your tongue?