Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Knew All Along Benghazi Attack Had "Nothing To Do With The Film," Documents Reveal

What difference at this point does it make? If you value free speech, a lot.


Innocent of inciting Benghazi attack.
Sam Bacile

According to documents revealed as part of the ongoing Congressional hearings on Benghazi, then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told then-Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil in a phone call the day after the attack on the U.S. consulate, "We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest."

The film Clinton refers to is the 10 minute Youtube trailer for the ultra-low budget anti-Islam movie "Innocence of Muslims," which she and other senior Obama administration officials, including President Obama himself, almost immediately began casting as a scapegoat for the attacks. Those attacks, however, were already understood by senior administration officials to be a planned and coordinated attack, and very much not what then-ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice called a "a spontaneous reaction to a video."

Clinton also reportedly emailed her daughter Chelsea, who used the pseudonym Diane Reynolds when communicating with her mother via her private email account, on the night of the attacks, telling her that the consulate had been attacked by an "Al Queda-like group." (sic)

That same night, in her first statement following the attacks on 9/11/12, Clinton wrote

"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted to the Internet."

When challenged about that characterization at today's hearings by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), Clinton refused to admit that the administration blamed the video for the attacks, saying:

And if you look at what I said, I referred to the video that night in a very specific way. I said, some have sought to justify the attack because of the video.

I used those words deliberately, not to ascribe a motive to every attacker but as a warning to those across the region that there was no justification for further attacks.

Not only did senior administration officials persist in framing the attack as a protest sparked by the video for days after, one of its first moves upon hearing that Ambassador Chris Stevens had been murdered was to contact Youtube and ask them "to review the video to see if it was in compliance with their terms of use." 

My colleague Matt Welch wrote up this helpful and infuriating roundup of the administration officials and distinguished members of the intelligentsia who advocated for everything from imprisonment for the filmmaker (who would be imprisoned for a parole violation committed when he uploaded the video) to calls for "free speech to yield to other values."

In 2013, Reason TV produced "3 Reasons Why Benghazi Still Matters," and today's revelations prove that even now, it still does:

NEXT: Ben Carson Wants to "Intensify" the War on Drugs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack?not a protest.”

    The truth couldn’t be used to test the waters on curtailing speech. It was a crisitunity too juicy to pass up.

    1. Is this the part where I ask you to explanabrag about crisitunity?

      1. It’s a club for Charlie Crist fan-boy groupies, in south FL..

        1. Whether in Florida, California, or elsewhere, the truth is that the authorities have acted admirably in using various opportunities they have been presented with to control some of the more prurient urges of certain elements of our society. “Free speech” advocates would give far too much license to vicious “satirists” who abuse others on Youtube or in inappropriately deadpan “parody emails.” We are a religious nation, and must accordingly limit tolerance for offensive speech?as prosecutors in New York fortunately understand. See the documentation of America’s leading criminal “satire” case at:


            1. Anyone who violates it should certainly be prosecuted and incarcerated.

            2. This one’s the genuine article. As in, batshit fucking insane.

              1. I would have at thee with my lance. but will spare thee instead, for thou admittest I am genuine, and not a hypocrite or a coward.

      2. Crack open an episode of The Simpsons once in a while, why don’t you?

        1. Is that some kind of complisult?!?

          1. I will stab you with a spork.

          2. It’s a perfectly cromulent word.

            1. “It’s a perfectly cromulent word.”

              Well, it has a certain cromulence to it, but…

      3. It’s a perfectly cromulent word.

        1. Jesus, just one line lower… what I get for showing up to the Benghazi party unfashionably late and unspeakably drunk.

          1. But, you looked so ravishing!

  2. According to documents revealed as part of the ongoing Congressional hearings on Benghazi, then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told then-Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil in a phone call the day after the attack on the U.S. consulate, “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack?not a protest.”

    She repeated the film story lie over the fallen’s coffins in the presence of their families. What a piece of shit.

    Clinton also reportedly emailed her daughter Chelsea, who used the pseudonym Diane Reynolds

    Apple, tree, distance…

    1. “Have you no decency”?

    2. Clinton also reportedly emailed her daughter Chelsea, who used the pseudonym Diane Reynolds

      Chelsea Clinton actually being part of the Reynolds family makes a good deal of sense.

      1. it would have been funnier if her pseudonym was Webbeline Hubbell

    3. Hillary blames video for violence in immediate aftermath of Benghazi

      Then mentions it again, specifically as as coffins arrive from Benghazi…

      …but clearly, this is not to suggest there was any actual direct connection.

      1. Wasn’t the CIA’s assessment at the time say that the video was to blame, partially?

        1. Lulz, yeah, cuz the CIA would never parrot what the administration tells them to parrot.

          1. If that’s true, then shouldn’t that be where the controversy is, and not Hillary?

            Sept 11th – attack happens.

            Initial CIA assessment, after “vetted” through several agencies, says that the video is partially to blame, and from Sept 12th to 22th, Susan Rice and Hillary follows those talking points (including when the coffins arrived).

            On Sept 24th, the CIA changes their assessment, and says actually it was the militants all along.

            If this is the timeline, then how can it be claimed that Hillary “lied?” If you think the administration altered the talking points, then the main point of contention here should be that the administration politicized the CIA talking points.

            1. “Initial CIA assessment, after “vetted” through several agencies, says that the video is partially to blame’


              The assertion about the video was stuck AFTER CIA had disavowed the “talking points” completely (which had scrubbed any link to terror) and said they’d be better off saying nothing at all.

              Instead Rice et al just ran with their bullshit narrative about the video, and that it was a “demonstration” rather than a planned attack.

              More here if the link below wasn’t clear

              1. That’s fine, but I don’t think that changes my point. Why is this being focused on Hillary? The focus should then be finding out how these talking points got so screwed up. There may be an innocent explanation – it’s the nature of government bureaucracies to screw things up, or there could be something sinister. But this article seems to have it out for Hillary, and that just feeds into this “attack Hillary” narrative.

                1. “Why is this being focused on Hillary? The focus should then be finding out how these talking points got so screwed up.’

                  Did you not read the parts in the links there that pointed out that the person doing the “Screwing Up” was Victoria Nuland, at the behest of “State Department Leadership” [aka Hillary]?

                  ” Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:

                  “The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

                  In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned ?”

                  1. And kint vanished like a fart in a hurricane.

                2. “But this article seems to have it out for Hillary, and that just feeds into this “attack Hillary” narrative.”

                  IOW, you’re asking

                  “Why are people being so mean to the person who got caught lying to the public about a terrorist attack?”

                  Aww, maybe they just hate women? You think?

                3. That’s fine, but I don’t think that changes my point. Why is this being focused on Hillary?

                  Because what matters is what Hillary actually believed and said, not what the CIA told her.

                  Since Hillary evidently (and correctly) believed that the attacks had nothing to do with the video, it doesn’t matter what the CIA said. In addition, it is likely that the CIA only said what it said in order to placate the administration; after all, the CIA is run by people who want to protect their careers and their funding.

            2. The whole Libya intervention was a mess from the start, and everyone in the administration was involved in an ill-advised and unconstitutional action. Only one of the former members, though, is currently running for president.

              I agree that focusing on the Benghazi attack is entirely missing the bigger picture, though. Can’t be bothered with all that “War Powers Resolution” stuff.

            3. “On Sept 24th, the CIA changes their assessment, and says actually it was the militants all along”

              Wrong. They said it was militants on day 1, and that was scrubbed.

              “the CIA version went on to say, “….we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.” The draft went on to specifically name the al Qaeda-affiliated group named Ansar al-Sharia. Once again, Nuland [state dept] objected to naming the terrorist groups because “we don’t want to prejudice the investigation.”

              …..After the talking points were edited slightly … she responded that changes did not go far enough. “These changes don’t resolve all of my issues or those of my buildings leadership” [Hillary]”

              So they stripped any reference to militant orgs in the talking points, despite knowing who had conducted the attack.

              The fact that they later “acknowledged” what they already knew on day one is meaningless. it was simply a matter of when they were willing to let the press know, not any result of subsequent investigations.

              1. The important point that gets forgotten is that the State Department was trying to show a win. The image they were trying to convey since day one was that Libya had been delivered into the welcoming arms of its freedom loving people by cruise missiles. No need for boots on the ground, just some good ol’ kinetic action that decapitated a monstrous regime so that the people of Libya could do their thing.

                The idea that there was a growing islamist threat in Libya would put that entire narrative into question. The entire Administration had made their foreign policy a significant plank in their election. They had insisted they were the big boys who understood the Islamic world and would not repeat the mistake of American intervention creating a vacuum in an Islamist nation that would prove a breeding ground for more terror.

                If you think about it, their attempt to paint this as a reaction to a stupid video is completely logical.

            4. No, the controversy is that the Secretary of State (hillary) was ambassador Stevens’ top boss, as such he feared for his life and requested a higher security detail. He was the reason the state department knew of the imminent attack. Not only that, but hillary’s office denied declining assistance. There were records of ambassador Stevens’ emails but not hillary’s, because only one used a government server as she was supposed to, so the oversight committee couldn’t verify the emails were received. Long story short, she is now one of the favorites to win the dem nomination, someone whose job was to keep her staff alive, and not only turned a blind eye, but flat out refused without any consequence.

        2. “Wasn’t the CIA’s assessment at the time say that the video was to blame, partially?”

          No. The CIA never mentioned any “video” at all and resisted its mention in any set of talking points.

          The protests in Cairo were cited as influencing the decision to attack the site in Benghazi; but that the act was planned in advance and conducted by motivated individuals associated wit Ansar Al Sharia

          There’s plenty here if you care

          1. And didn’t this video have something like 100 views in total at the time of the attack? It seems unlikely that such an obscure thing inflamed Benghazi.

            1. there is also that.

              the fact that anyone believes the video has anything to do with anything is just unbelievably retarded. Its a disturbing example of people simply choosing to believe because “important people say so”

    4. Why was she e-mailing her on issues of international import?

      1. Chelsea in 2032!

  3. Our next president.

  4. Do I remember correctly that they imprisoned the person who made that film?

    1. Yeah, but it was all for probation violations, which would have gotten zero attention if not for the Obama Administration looking for a scapegoat.

      1. Welp…by hook or by crook I suppose.

      2. It’s a good reminder of how hard politicians and bureaucrats you don’t even know and did nothing to will fuck you if it serves their purposes.

        1. Is that bad? It’s for the greater good don’t you know. Come on, be a team player.

    2. Don’t forget Hillary and the Obama administration tried to pressure Google to take the videos down.

      Cuz supporting a lie concealing US foreign policy failings is more important then freedom of speech.

    3. I don’t know. Maybe if you read the article you would find out

      1. Indeed. I thought I had, but in the middle of my “fuck this guy I am re-reading this to prove his ass wrong” moment…there it was.

        Apparently my eyes began to glaze over at some point.

  5. Shirley there is a cell with her name on it.

    1. Can’t remember were you cheer-leading US interventions in Lybia and elsewhere here during the Arab spring?

      1. No that was just the voices in your head, as usual.

        1. Ah ok but you still good with re-invading Iraq cuz they hate us for our freedoms right?

          1. No I’d rather not see a large US ground force in Iraq. Again, with the voices in your head.

            1. Just a few arclight strikes…

            2. You know if I can move you from Neo-con to libertarian isolationist at the sacrifice of you hating my “crazy inarticulate” guts i would do it in a heart beat.

              1. That would require me to be a neo-con and would probably require you to know what a neo-con is. Neither of these conditions are satisfied at the current time.

    2. And don’t call me Shirley.

  6. How does she sleep at night?

    1. Like a dead baby.

      1. Drone bombed or sold for parts by planned parenthood?

        1. At this point, what difference does it make?

    2. On top of a pile of money with many beautiful ladies.

      1. Just asking. Yeesh!

    3. Sociopaths typically sleep soundly, at least as far as I’ve been able to observe.

      1. You take videos of yourself while you’re asleep?

        ha ha, just busting your balls

      2. This almost makes me wish I were a sociopath.

        1. So Dr. Whom could observe you sleeping?

          1. That backfired.

    4. I think the life extension treatments do away with the need for sleep after a while.

      1. Also true of The One Ring. Coincidence?

  7. I really do think I should get a hat tip or medal or something for pointing out only like 200 people viewed the videos before the attack according to Youtube metrics.

    1. Only if you were one of the 200.

    2. I observed the same thing. I was watching CNN when the story broke, and thought the whole video cover story sounded bogus on its face. I was just a few steps from my computer, so YouTubed the title. It was at less than a 1000 when I saw it. I only watched a few minutes since it was amateurish and obviously not a real movie or even a trailer.

      1. Yes but did you mention in the comments three or so years at hit and run and were promtly ignored for it?!?!

        I think not good sir I think not.

    3. Once again the Elders of ReZion are denying you the respect and credibility you so richly deserve.

    4. I really do think I should get a hat tip or medal or something for pointing out only like 200 people viewed the videos before the attack

      Yeah, but those 200 people were SUPER pissed.

      1. My imaginary take was a bunch of bedouin sheep herders huddled around the one smart phone in the village.

      2. Some common sense video laws would solve the problem.

  8. The video cover story brought a lot would-be censors out of the woodwork…I wonder what will happen next time a mob *actually* kills people out of protest for a book, video, etc? We have a go-to list of people who will come back out of the woodwork.

  9. You people are still on this fake scandal?

    So she lied? What difference does it make at this point?

    People who – incredibly – stand by her won’t change their minds so why bother?

    Did I ask enough questions?

    1. Judge Napolitano? Is that you?

      1. Can you imagine a secretary of state…..?

  10. The whole “Well, I thought it showed their Entrepreneurial Spirit” line has to be the most tone deaf thing I’ve seen come out of her mouth in a while, and that’s saying something.

    This cackling beast is going to be our next president. We are truly fucked beyond all repair.

    1. We already live in a country that not only elected Obama, but re-elected him. It should come as no surprise that our moron countrymen will elect either Trump or Clinton.

      1. I’ll give us a pass on President Not My Fault because the first time it was “anyone but Bush (or McCain) and the second time it was “No fucking way are we electing Mister Magical Underpants”, despite the clear evidence of how much of an unmitigated disaster Obama’s first term was, not to mention the fact that the House and Senate completely flipped that year as well.

        But Shrillary is just a whole new level of terrible. She would gladly devour a live infant if that was the requirement for POTUS, and would probably ask for seconds. And she is going to win in a landslide because the GOP is flounderingly hopeless .

        1. Except Magical Underpants would have been preferable to the guy who thinks he’s God.

        2. I think Clinton is more cyborg than monster, and I think that’s an improvement over Obama. Maybe we can live with that.

          1. Nope, cyborgs aren’t lazy. Obama is. Think of something as venal, corrupt, and self-serving as Obama, but hasn’t burned out on Washington or Power, and you’ll get close to what Hillary is. Think she’ll work her schedule to spend most of her time on the golf course? Hell no.

            And at least now, I think Obama’s realized that he can’t delegate tasks to effective people for shit. He’s finally figured out that his staff’s incompetent, so he’s stopped with most of his evil schemes for now. (He’s a bozo too, but you’d hardly think someone with his ego would realize that.)

            Hillary still thinks she’s smart. I see her potentially being much, much worse.

      2. Then we are doomed.

    2. It can’t hold a candle to, “you mean like with a cloth” when asked if she had wiped her server.

      That had to be the most “fuck you that’s why” line ever uttered by a politician.

      1. +1 We Won!

      2. Elections have consequences.

  11. Clinton also reportedly emailed her daughter Chelsea, who used the pseudonym Diane Reynolds when communicating with her mother via her private email account, on the night of the attacks, telling her that the consulate had been attacked by an “Al Queda-like group.” (sic)

    Is Diane Reynolds cleared for this type of information?

    1. Oh Paul.

    2. So what level of support do you have to be getting in a presidential poll before you can go on a crime spree and no one dares indict you for anything because it would seem like said indictment was political?

      Biden should have gotten into the race just so he could drive around in a motorcade shooting a shotgun out the windows without worrying about the DOJ raining on his fun.

        1. Diane, did you ever bang Carlos Danger?

          1. Diane engaged in a raucous mmf with Carlos Danger and Ron Mexico.

      1. Depends on which party you belong to.

        1. which wing of which party.

          They would burn Sanders at the stake for sticking his used gum under the table.

          1. Only because in this particular context he has the audacity to challenge the heir apparent.

  12. “Clinton also reportedly emailed her daughter Chelsea, who used the pseudonym Diane Reynolds”

    Maybe it’s just me, but it just doesn’t seem legit when you have to use pseudonyms to email your daughter. Am I missing something here?

    1. The irony is that Chelsea was using a pseudonym precisely because she probably believed or knew that Hillary’s email wasn’t entirely secure.

      1. I think it was an artifact from a previous episode of “Those Crazy Clintons” where they used a fake account to see if Bill was stepping out on Hillary again.

      2. That’s what you consider the irony? How about the fact that of all the people she could’ve discussed this w, she chose a family member rather than someone “in the business”? Why’d she have to confide anything to her daughter? Like she couldn’t stand just knowing herself, she was bursting to tell someone of her super-villainy?

        1. The irony of the pseudonym. Not Hillaryscapades in general.

        2. Not just that, we’re talking about possible classified information she’s emailing to Chelsea as well, before any vetting or investigation has been conducted. In what fucking universe does Chelsea have a “need to know”?

      3. I think that’s more goldy than irony.

    2. Was Chelsea even cleared for the info Hillary was passing along to her?

      1. Of course! She’s a member of the royal family, isn’t she? She too will deserve the presidency one day.

  13. This shows how great the level of duplicity there is in actively and intentionally decieving Americans everyday by their “repress-entatives”

  14. Ooh yeah, that Eric Posner article was a fucking doosey. Hey Eric, my values dictate that you should shut the fuck up.

    1. Americans need to learn that the rest of the world?and not just Muslims?see no sense in the First Amendment. Even other Western nations take a more circumspect position on freedom of expression than we do, realizing that often free speech must yield to other values and the need for order. Our own history suggests that they might have a point.

      That just brings tears of rage to my eyes. We know the rest of the world sees no sense in the First Amendment – that’s why we mock them and look down on them and talk shit about them, because we are better than they are in at least this one regard. You’re goddamn fucking right Americans see freedom of speech and of the press and of religion differently than the rest of the world, but it ain’t us that has the problem you worthless un-American commie-lovin’ piece of shit.

      1. I agree with your statement. Furthermore, everyone that wants to live like a European can kindly head to Europe. There is plenty of fails socialism and heavy tax burdens for you to enjoy.

  15. This should just about finish off the Clintons then!

    1. The Republican Party motto.

        1. My South is rising, Diane. if you know what I mean.

  16. OK, Team Stupid campaign managers. I’m tossin’ you a free one here. When she gets the nom, you f’n flood the commercial slots with footage of her receiving the body at the hanger and shots from the ground in Libya with the voice over of “Smart power at its finest”, “I accept full responsibility”, and of course the money shot “What difference does it make?” quote. Pound that those quotes and that footage like a snare drum.

    1. *flood the commercial slots with footage of her receiving the body at the hanger*

      Yup, that would really rile up thum thar bitter clingers. Until the Clinton commercial promising free shiznit comes on right after it.

      1. What if I prefer shinzit?

  17. Ayyhhhh… Umm [scratch, yawn].

    So what?

    1. Please don’t feed the troll.

      1. Gotta admit he gets 10 joe levels for knowing exactly what to say to elicit maximum aggravation here and for accurate characterization of how the voting public will react.

        1. I think you’re exactly right. By now it’s not the Clintons, it’s the people.

        2. with Bonus points for complete cover for the 1000s of words mocking Benghazi critics he has written here in the past

          1. I wasn’t thrilled with how the administration reacted to this attack. Some guy made a video about Islam and Islamics didn’t care for it and went apeshit. Sun rises in the East and sets in the West. The way the Obama administration blamed this attack on this film wasn’t its finest hour. But to hear it described as treasonous or malicious? Hardly. Just dumb.

            So now we have to listen to 3 years of investigation about just what sort of turkey sandwich Hitlery had on 9/11 and what YouTube video she watched that night? Booring!

            1. Which 200 Islamics went apeshit?

              1. The 200 with RPGs and belt fed machine guns, duh. Allegedly.

        3. He (it) is a public service! The More You Know…

        1. If I wanted your opinion Paul, I’d have STEVE SMITH rape it out of you.

    2. Yea, unless you died in Benghazi, what difference at this point does it make ?

      1. And as a matter of fact, what difference does it make if you did? The eternal liberal goal, equal outcomes!

  18. I wonder if that lowlife scumbag Chris Matthews on PMSNBC is still claiming it was all about the fucking video. He still was as recently as like a year ago.

    1. Mrs Clinton is still claiming it was about the video.

      This quote was from today:

      “Congressman, I believe to this day the video played a role,” Clinton said.

      1. There is a certain insouciance to perpetually saying what is convenient at the moment while utterly ignoring any contradictory statement you may have made in the past.

      2. She’s obviously correct,

        The video did play a role in the coverup.

  19. It’s stuff like Cankles lying to the faces of the people who lost loved ones in Benghazi that make me hope that there is some sort of cosmic justice, and that she comes down with some form of rare, incurable, and excruciatingly painful illness soon.

    1. There is some “undernews” that Hillary’s health is quite bad, much worse than admitted. The National Enquirer claims to have spoken to someone who said she might not even live long enough to be nominated.

      1. If she dies, she’ll just be plasticized and fitted with an animatronic skeleton. Nobody will be able to tell the difference.

        1. But some will suspect.
          “Is it me or does Hillary seem more human lately?”.

  20. And what if the film really was to “blame”? So what? That still would not have given the Feds a right to imprison the maker of the film? Yet look at how many people in the administration advocated that the filmmaker be punished. This is frankly a bit chilling.

  21. Honestly, I still want to know why Bush invaded Iraq. I suspect it had to do with PNAC, but I’m sure it wasn’t because of WMDs or oil.

    1. Maybe you should go read a book, and stop disingenuously wondering .

      1. “Gordon and Trainor argue broadly that America’s Iraq War difficulties came from five major failures: “the misreading of the foe,” “the overreliance on technological advancement,” “the failure to adapt to developments on the battlefield,” “the dysfunction of American military structures,” and “the Bush Administration’s disdain for nation-building.”[1]”

        What? Excuse me? They ‘disdained’ it so much that they spent 8 fucking years doing it and more in Afghanistan?

        1. Read the book shithead. It was written in 2006. it was about the planning for the war, which assumed they’d be leaving by 2004 at latest

          1. Calm down. No need to be pissy over my earlier calling out your tendency to outrun your evidence and engage in sporadic question begging. Next time, just make your point without the lippiness.

          2. Also, that still doesn’t quite work: does anyone really think Iraq would have been better off if Bush and Rumsfield et alia were big fans of nation-building even at the time?

            1. Excuse the lippy. buttplug et al were annoying me.

              The book isn’t about “what might have been”. Its simply a detailed analysis of what people in the pentagon & white house were thinking in the years between 9/11 and the iraq invasion, and why they made the (horrible, wildly mistaken) planning decisions they did, and why Paul Bremer got saddled with making even bigger, more horrible decisions.

              Read the book

    2. Honestly, I still want to know why Bush invaded Iraq.

      The usual: a combination of ego, incompetence, and political calculation, with a degree of crony capitalism.

      To put it differently, something big happened, and he wanted a big response.


    1. Ah, there you are.

      As always, you have completely convinced everyone of the correctness of your arguments.

    2. I thought you recently came out hating Hilary of flip flopping on TTP…

      1. I do. Hil-Dog is awful – but I hated her for her Iraq War vote anyway.

        But as a man of reason I hate partisan bitch-hunts too.

      2. Nevertheless, I’ve already cast my absentee ballot for her in the District and two or three different states.

      3. It’s not sentient. It’s no more capable of hate than a dung-beetle is.

    3. Hey Buttplug every time I see your handle I read “Stalin’s Buttplug”. I know I’m not the only one here that see’s it that way too. This whole time you’ve been posting and I would assume a lot of people read Stalin, lol. It suits you so fucking well. Stalin’s Buttplug.

  23. What a piece of shit.

  24. It’s a good time to remind people that Nobel Prize winner Barack Obama did not attend the Paris unity rally after Charlie Hebdo. He mumbled something about having to respect freedom of speech then proclaimed “the future must not belong to those who insult the prophet”. He also blurted out nonsense about getting off our high horse because of the crusades, which is out straight out of lefty troll talking points.

    And of course, he invited clock boy to the white house while remaining silent on dozens of zero tolerance suspensions that shat on free speech.

    Obama and Hillary are both brazen demagogues. They’ll rally behind “rights” that are cause celebre or register with their left wing base. The man who sent untracked guns to Mexico, droned civilians, and admitted to “torturing some folks” should have no audacity to “politicize” a tragedy for the sake of his self aggrandizing agenda. A man with moral clarity and conscience would not do what this man often does.

    I mean, this guy went to an Africa nation (a nation with problems with genocide, persecution and poverty) and made an issue out of gay rights. The president there was just bewildered. I’m sure homophobia is a problem there, but would he go to the middle east and insist on their royal families to allow women to drive? Everything this man does is dictated by his left wing agenda.

    1. Sadly true.

  25. You’re all nuts. If the object is to make Clinton look bad, or to hang something nefarious on her, you’re accomplishing the opposite. She looks poised, knowledgeable, well versed, calm and professional. There just was a reporter who said outside of the GOP cloak room most are saying she had a strong day, on contrast to the GOP.

    Perfect example was Pompeo’s ridiculous assertion that the Ambassador not having Clinton’s personal email meant there was no communication with her, particularly in an emergency. And Reason referenced it as important in PM links. But I will let conservative John Podhoretz tell you how damaging that line of questioning was to the GOP.

    “Why doesn’t Pompeo just go over and swear her in for president now–if he goes on like this he’ll practically get her elected”

    But keep on living that dream that Benghazi is going to have any resonance with independent voters. It won’t.

    1. Another quote from Podhoretz

      “Democrats now lining up to invite Pompeo to come into their districts to campaign against them”

      You’re all as delusional as he is.

      1. Is that why her poll numbers keep falling and her only competition is an self proclaimed socialist ?

        1. “Clinton has gained in national and New Hampshire polls (only one post-debate Iowa poll has been released, so we’ll have to wait to know for sure what’s going on there). Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders has dropped in most polling after the debate.Ah, oneout, your inability to remain current is always astonishing. Try keeping up. Sadly, Clinton’s poll numbers are growing, particularly after the debate.”


          Can’t keep current, can you? Keep trying.

    2. “He” being Pompeo.

    3. You’re right this time.

      Boy Gowdy lost this round again.

      1. PBP vs Jackhand Ace


        1. CRIPPLE FIGHT!! circle-jerk.

    4. Hey joe.

      How many times did you mock people who claimed the Obama administration and Clinton lied about the attack being motivated by youtube videos?

      You were wrong right? The people you mocked were right, right?

      1. Go easy on poor Joe. Once he outed himself as an unprincipled sycophant, he’s been reduced to interacting only with himself – as we see above.

        Just leave him be and let him keep muttering angrily at the wall.

    5. She looks poised, knowledgeable, well versed, calm and professional.

      CNN said the same. It’s amazing how her supporters are able to look past the facts of her behavior and deem her fit for the Highest Office in the Land because she can pass a lie detector test.

      1. Podhoretz isn’t a supporter and he’s telling you that most Americans will view her favorably, which matters in elections, most importantly with independents. Period. That’s his point. And as always, you’re too obtuse to get it. And Democrats are happy for that. Congrats!

        1. “And Democrats are happy for that.”

          You happy with the results of US intervention in regards to the Arab Spring?

          You happy one of the chief architects of that intervention is going to get off scotfree, become president and rinse and repeat the same foreign policy?

          You happy that a “poised, knowledgeable, well versed, calm and professional” facade is going to coverup the coverup of the complete failings of US intervention during the Arab Spring and the blowback, loss of human life and perpetual war for decades those failings entail?

          Before answering Imagine for a second that you actually were a progressive peacnik swimming in a comment blog filled with libertarian peaceniks who can plainly see the hellscape that “smart power” has wrought.

          But yeah sure blame the Republicans image problem. Whatever.

          1. Get off your soap box, Corning. You’re not impressing anyone.

        2. You and this Podho guy sure are going long on this hearing turning out well for Clinton and so well that it seals her deal. What stage is this? Denial or some kind of bargaining?

        3. most Americans will view her favorably

          Nope and nope.

          1. Really? Hold that thought til a year from November, and get back to us. Of course, you were sure Obama would lose…twice.

            1. I’m flattered by your memory of my opinions. However, I don’t believe the opinions I had circa 2007 and 2011 were quite so certain.

    6. “There just was a reporter”

      Was his name Sidney by chance ?

      1. Robert Costa, Washington Post.


      We get it: you’re a retard with a hero worship complex. We’re not. We do this thing called ‘evidence’.

    8. She looks poised, knowledgeable, well versed, calm and professional

      Yeah, sociopathy will do that to ya.

    9. No, Hillary’s haggard, wrinkled, plastic bag of a face made her look bad you fucking clueless twat. Not to mention her stupid immature grimaces and cackling laughter. Maybe you should have watched the hearing or caught the snippets.

  26. Hillary Clinton Knew All Along Benghazi Attack Had “Nothing To Do With The Film,” Documents Reveal

    Sad that no one bothered to notify the New York Times, which by late 2013 was suffering back-problems from all the water-carrying they were doing =

    Sitting for an interview on a Benghazi hotel patio three weeks after the attack, Mr. Abu Khattala acknowledged being at the scene. …. While almost everyone else in Benghazi mourned Mr. Stevens as a friend of the revolution, Mr. Abu Khattala was unmoved by his death. “I did not know him,” he said coolly….And he suggested that the video insulting the Prophet Muhammad might well have justified the killing of four Americans

    The leaders of Ansar al-Shariah, the hard-line Islamist group allied with Mr. Abu Khattala, declared in a statement read on television the morning after the attack that they had not participated in it. But they lauded the assault as a just response to the video. They, too, insisted that a “peaceful protest” had “escalated as a result of shooting that came from the consulate, which led to the ambassador’s death by suffocation.”

    This “groundbreaking” report treated vague comments made by shady people as “proof” that the video played a major role in the Benghazi attacks…. while ignoring everything CIA & state-personnel seemed to know at the time. Classy stuff.

      1. No –

        getting things “wrong” means it was a mistake or that there was information they didn’t know.

        When you know the truth and instead try and hide the facts, its called “Lying”

        1. A politician lying?

          You don’t mean that!!

          1. A politician lying about a terrorist attack, trying to pretend it wasn’t what it was.

            Before an election.

            1. In 2012, bitch!

              State lied in 2012 and Susan Rice took the hit.

              You might as well scream about Watergate. No one will listen.

              3/4 of the US think this is a partisan wingnut ploy.

              1. First you say it was a mistake
                then you say all politicians lie
                then you say lies are old, old lies don’t matter
                then you say ‘no one cares’ anyway

                Because why would anyone care if the former Secretary of State lied to the public? Its not like she’s running for president or anything. And presidents never get in trouble for lying.

                Really, dude. I think you’re dull-witted and slow, but you’re not normally as epic-stupid as AmSoc.

          2. I do think its cute how you pivot from pretending that “mistakes were made” to “lies were told” as though the difference between those two things is supposed to be of no significance.

            On the Stupid+Mendacious scale, its pretty high up there.

            1. To partisans like shreek there is no difference between truth and lies. Either it serves their narrative or it doesn’t. For him there is no distinction between lies, mistakes or truth.

          3. Buttplug, 2015, when his Beloved Cankles is being given the mean-questions =

            “A politician lying?

            You don’t mean that!!”

            Buttplug in 2013, on being lied to about Iraq

            “‘Palin’s Buttplug|2013/03/31 09:37:24|#3644066

            When you are subject to a lying campaign by the administration and compliant media it is tough to blame the powerless sheep who followed on the wrong path.

            “Everyone got it wrong” is for GOP apologists who want to spread blame around for their miserable president’s failures.

            Standards… How do they work?

            Oh, right! you have to *have them* first.

            1. Very nice find.

              Hat tip.

              Again Libya =/= Iraq.

              1. IRAQ NOT = HITLER!!

                Ok, i guess you are as stupid as AmSoc.

                1. Libya /= Iraq, dumbass. Not even close.

              2. “MUH LIES GUD UR LIES BAD”

              3. Have you seen Libya lately?

                Certainly you do not think US intervention there is a success….

                How big of a failure does one need to get above your threshold to tie down a politician to a lie?

                What if we throw in the rest of US “smart power” intervention for the Arab Spring? Do those chips stack up enough?

                1. There is no bigger failure than the Bushpigs’ Iraq misadventure.

                  1. Your mother failing to get an abortion tops that.

                  2. HITLER IS WORSE THAN ALIENS!!

                    1. But, he is not worse than a woman with cankles.

  27. I think the worst of it is that Hillary has dismissed all this as a witch-hunt when what really matters to her is that we get to the bottom of what happened and why it happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again – just brazenly shitbagging her way through the ‘scandal’ as if she herself wasn’t doing her damnedest to make sure we wouldn’t get to the bottom of what happened and why it happened and what we need to do to keep it from happening again.

    Somebody here had linked to an Alex Jones-type piece that said Benghazi was a transfer point for weapons going to Syria or something. I still think one of the original conspiracy theories is probably closer to the truth, the consulate was a CIA operation and there was something going on there – like an ‘extraordinary rendition’ that we don’t do any more – the attackers knew about (and probably Hillary knew about) but we don’t. That’s why all the lies and the bullshit – better to be thought incompetent liars than revealed as conniving crooks.

    1. I think the political A bomb that they are hiding is that the CIA helped create and armed ISIS. With Stevens being the man in charge of rounding up loose arms in Libya and sending them to the ‘Syrian Rebels’ via Turkey. The Iranians found out about it somehow and it was a militia funded by them that attacked the CIA compound. Further, the administration knew or feared that the militia attacking the compound had anti-aircraft missiles and feared that a relief mission would be destroyed, raising the death toll considerably and the political fallout by orders of magnitude.

  28. the ultra-low budget anti-Islam movie

    Anti-Islam, or tribute?


  29. More astounding to me than the mendacity of The Hildebeast are her defenders. Telling bald-faced lies while they and everyone they are lying to know they are lying.

    The woman should not even be in the running. She should be in prison.

    1. What do you mean she’s a liar? DO YOU WANT TEAM RED TO WIN?! DO YOU?!!?!

      Hildabeast defenders only care about winning. That’s it. The fact that she’s an amoral, unprincipled liar is actually a plus to them because their biggest gripe with Obama is that he hasn’t acted even more like an autocrat.

      It’s truly sick. Republicans are guilty of this as well, but not nearly to so much an extent as evidence by them refusing to fall in line behind Jeb!

      1. “The fact that she’s an amoral, unprincipled liar”

        Don’t forget one of the chief architects of smart power for the Arab Spring that has left millions of people living in a hellscape of war and perdition whose now one true and only enemy to blame being the land of liberty.

  30. Ultimately none of this matters. Conservatives will remain, and justly so, convinced she’s a lying piece of shit while proggies will drool over how awesome Hillary is for standing up to those teabagging Rethuglicans.

    I doubt this will convince anyone one way or the other. Mostly because Team Red is too damned stupid to make this about what ginormous clusterfuck Hillary’s war in Libya was. Literally only one of their presidential candidates (guess who) even makes that point and he’s not getting the nomination.

    1. I think it matters to a lot of voters in the middle. In my life, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a leading presidential candidate with more baggage of scandals and outright lies. And once the election season really begins, a lot of voters will start paying attention. When they do, I expect a torrent of negative ads about Hillary. I could write several good ones myself.

      My god, the woman is on tape laughing about her courtroom experience of successfully defending a child rapist! And the girl, now an adult, is still ticked off about being slimed in court so that her rapist could walk. You could do an entire series of ads starring women who Hillary screwed over, but I think that’s the capper.

  31. Well, you don’t fucking say. I guess I’ll.comtinue to hate her and her fans will continue to not give a fuck about this.

  32. I love this thread.

    All it needs is John and Tony to make it perfect.

  33. OT: In local super-delicious gourmet I-Told-You-So Fare, the Big Dig II, The Big Dig Goes to Washington gets yet more delays. Now two years behind schedule:

    The reassembly of tunnel-boring machine Bertha is taking longer than planned, so Seattle Tunnel Partners (STP) is now predicting to drill again Dec. 23 ? a month later than the schedule issued this summer.

    The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) posted the latest STP schedule in an online update Thursday afternoon.

    The four-lane, tolled tunnel from Sodo to South Lake Union is scheduled to open in April 2018, more than two years beyond the original December 2015 grand opening in STP’s winning bid for the $1.35 billion tunnel contract.


    1. Pfff… 1.35 billion? That’s it?

      In NYC we call that “Tuesday”.

      1. I’m not sure where that $1b price is coming from, its a $4billion project. I think they’re just talking about the STP bid.

  34. I email my mother using the pseudonym Dr. Mantis Tobogan.

    1. Hey! A sweaty wad of hundreds and some magnum condoms, and you’re ready to plow!

      I mean, not that I think that you would…you know…umm…

      /slinks away

  35. The ONLY story concerning Benghazi that has any merit, is the cover up. That’s all there’s ever been. There was no way in hell to mount a rescue op in the given timeframe with the information available and EVERYONE asks for more resources. You can’t fund them all.

    The real story here were these two shitbags (Obama and Clinton) lied their asses off, about the video, to the American people for political purposes.

    1. And possibly incited massive protests in the ME by pushing the video narrative.

    2. Caveat: Violating the War Powers Resolution has merit as well, but the Republicans were fine with that, so that issue will never see the light of day.

      1. I say it’s time to pass water on the tree of liberty.

    3. here was no way in hell to mount a rescue op in the given timeframe with the information available and EVERYONE asks for more resources

      The problem I have with this statement is that they did not know how long the the men fighting at the annex would hold off the attack. There was not even an attempt to start a rescue operation. I am not saying an rescue operation would have worked, or would have been successful, but the process should have at least started.

      Also, the fact that there was not a qrf, or something similar, for all high risk embassies on September 11th is also a problem.

      1. Rescue operation or not, Ambassador Stevens didn’t have Hillary’s personal contact info, which was the only contact info she used.

      2. “There was not even an attempt to start a rescue operation’

        Not true

        Of course this has been spun differently by the pentagon, pointing out that they didn’t tell people “Not To Go”….they told them “to Stay”. Which is totally different and not the same!!

        They were “ordered to provide security locally”, rather than try any rescue.

        1. You are right. I was trying to find out what I heard was said instead of “stand down.”

          Neither the Pentagon nor State Department officially attempted to mount a rescue operation.

      3. There was an attempt to start one. Ham was relieved for it.


        There were ships in the Med, Paratroopers and Rangers in Italy, and a Marine FAST (Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team) in Spain – probably the most appropriate unit to use.

      4. I don’t fault them for the call they made. And I don’t know what was or wasn’t discussed, but it’s not unusual to wait until there is better intel before going off half-cocked and committing assets. The last thing you want to do is make it worse by getting more people killed in a half-assed attempt to save a couple of guys.

        Command decision.

        The lying about it is unconscionable.

        1. it’s not unusual to wait until there is better intel before going off half-cocked and committing assets.

          Agreed, but they could have started the process in the event that they received better intel.

          1. That’s reasonable. But what they did, was invent a cover story that took the heat off of the administration’s foreign policy a week prior to the presidential foreign policy debate.

            1. Oh sure. As I said in an earlier thread, I am taken aback by the audacity of this entire situation. They got away with all of it, and they will continue to get away with it.

              1. And if Romney had had a single hair on his ass, he’d have been president because of this. It was well known, at the time of the last debate, that the video was a lie. He said nothing, and we got another four years of these idiots because he was a giant pussy. (Not that he’d have been much better…)

                1. Frank, please don’t tell me that you ever, for one second, thought the Romney “saved” the 2002 Winter Olympics.

                2. “It was well known, at the time of the last debate, that the video was a lie. He said nothing, and we got another four years of these idiots…”

                  he got scared off by candy crowley. the moment she backed the president, and he seemed to have no rebuttal, it made the argument look ineffective. i have little doubt that the decision was made right then to not bring it up again. if he had been more forceful in that moment, it could’ve had a lot more impact.

                  1. He also got an intel briefing before the last debate – which probably included the real operation at B, at that is what led to him not exploiting the issue.

        2. ” but it’s not unusual to wait until there is better intel before going off half-cocked and committing assets. ”

          This is the Barack “kinetic operation” Obama administration we’re talking about, here.

    4. There’s the backstory. WTF was Stevens doing there? The CIA Annex that the attackers knew about – what was going on there? Was Stevens involved in some kind of half-assed op?

      Not sure I buy that no reaction was possible. Carter Ham apparently didn’t either – so he was relieved of command.

      And of course, we know Clinton emailed Stevens’ itinerary and security info to her buddies through her unsecured server – including to Blumenthal who’s email was hacked. So did Clinton’s disregard for information security get Stevens and the others killed?

      1. And of course, we know Clinton emailed Stevens’ itinerary and security info to her buddies through her unsecured server – including to Blumenthal who’s email was hacked. So did Clinton’s disregard for information security get Stevens and the others killed?

        That’s probably unknowable, but there’s a reason why State Department Business is conducted on secure servers that are under the exclusive control of the state department, instead of a college student trying to get on at Twitter.

      2. There’s the backstory. WTF was Stevens doing there?

        The CIA has acknowledged that their mission there had multiple roles “related to” weapons in Libya… some of which were recovering things (MANPADs etc) we had provided Libyan rebels… another which involved “monitoring” the movement of weapons between Libya and Turkey/Syria

        Allegations that they were doing things that might have been a more-active role in actually supplying specific Syrian rebels with weapons… well, that’s just crazy talk.

        Stevens met with a Turkish counterpart the night he was killed. The weapons were mostly being shipped to Turkey. This is all completely coincidental, obviously.

  36. Hillary’s entire adult life has been a series of lies and obfuscation and that has helped put food on her table. The result is that any virtuous person would recoil from physical contact with her. She’s become lonely and is acting out. Someone give her a hug.

    1. Someone give her a hug.

      “Ewwwwww, *gross*!”
      /my teen-age niece

    1. Meh. She’s overrated. Give a brother Salma Hayek any time.

      1. Only the younger Salma Hayek. She’s aged … poorly.

        1. Who aged better F.A. or Salma?

          1. The “Best Aging” award goes to Honor Blackman, who is 90.

            1. That is one hungry cougar.

            2. About 10 years ago, when she was pushing 80, Ms. Blackmun guest starred on an episode of the BBC’s ‘New Tricks’, where she played a character that the others found hard to believe was 65.

  37. Well I’ll be voting against the HERO amendment here in Houston on principal but damn are the official opposition pieces of shits. Here’s some highlights from the mailing I got from the Conservative Republicans of Harris County:

    Vote NO on Houston’s Proposition #1 NO Men in Women’s Bathrooms, and NO Boys in Girls’ Showers or Locker Rooms

    Oppose LGBT’s (homosexual political movement) plan to require that homosexuality to be taught to school children

    That’s just the page.

    If passed, Houston’s Proposition 1, the so called ‘equal rights; ordinance ;which is the ‘Bathroom Ordinance,’ would allow troubled men and sexual predators, who claim to be women, to enter women’s public accomodations, including bathrooms ans showers. You are probably not aware that there are 8,345 registered, convicted sexual predators in Harris County. That only scratches the surface….
    A man dressed as a woman is a man who is engaging in deviant behavior.

    Goddamn are they obsessed with bathrooms.

    1. They also endorse 3 out of 4 bond proposals, because being a conservative means more spending and hating the gays nowadays I guess.

      1. And hating foreigners coming here for a better life.

        1. To be employed by the likes of you, me and Bo.

        2. Here? You live in Texas now?

    2. “Goddamn are they obsessed with bathrooms.”

      Have a daughter?

      Meet Sarah


      Sarah – “I used to think 5/6/7 was to young but ‘Alice’ totally changed my mind ;-;;”

      1. What the fuck are you on about?

        1. Read this instead.

          1. I still don’t see the connection.

            1. There is none. I just thought it was a really weird story.

              1. It really is, though I stopped reading it because its fucking long.

    3. Harris County, home of Stan Stanart.

    4. require that homosexuality to be taught to school children

      If that’s accurate I would vote No simply because “sex” does not belong in the classroom – period.

      As for the hilarious fantasy about cross-dressing sexual predators stalking ladies in the bathroom – well… I’ve got nothing.

      1. It’s not. It’s just a local anti-discrimination law (which I oppose on freedom association grounds) but it has nothing to do with homosexuality in school or transpeople in bathrooms.

        1. Well, then that’s tricky. Unless a No vote means walking back the CRA I don’t see the point. I guess I would abstain.

    5. NO Men in Women’s Bathrooms, and NO Boys in Girls’ Showers or Locker Rooms

      -1 Starship Troopers

    6. NO Men in Women’s Bathrooms, and NO Boys in Girls’ Showers or Locker Rooms

      -1 Starship Troopers

  38. UK student offended that he’s invited to a class on how not to rape. A calm, measured discussion ensues.

  39. OT: Kansas’s tax cuts are a huge success.


    1. Yeah, but you are still stuck living in Kansas.

      1. hey!

        Actually I know it’s boring and I’

        1. gah, *I’m fine with it. Boring has it’s upsides

          1. Kansas is cool. Sure, eastern third is more to my New England topographical tastes, but I have richly enjoyed my brief visits to Manhattan and Lawrence.

          2. This is a safe space – you do not have to lie and say that you like it there.

            1. Do you think I would hesitate to criticize something, anything, that I did not favor?

              From the Colorado border travelling eastward on I-70, the first two thirds of Kansas is just flat ass farmland that is brown and gold and amber. My wife hates it more than me.

              Then, it starts to get greener and nicer.

              We have been to Manhattan to see Kansas St. play. We think it is a pretty good college town.

              1. I was not referring to you, LM. I am sure there are sections of Kansas that are quite nice. I just do not believe lap83 actually likes it. I mean, it is Kansas.

          3. Actually I know it’s boring

            Never admit weakness on the internet.

            Tell me forests, hills and access to seaports is overrated cosmocukian bullshit. Do it.

          4. Kansas may not be a utopia, but I’d certainly take it over places like NY, CA and IL.

          5. Kansas may not be a utopia, but I’d certainly take it over places like NY, CA and IL.

            1. I disagree because, well, somebody has to.

              1. I thought that was Tulpa’s job.

                1. Nah I do actually prefer NY – I just assume I will be the only one.

          6. But what about pornados?

            1. *tornados

            2. Seriously, what about pornados?

              1. pomodori sono deliziosi

                1. Fuck off, wop,

              2. *unzips*

                Yeah, seriously?

    2. Looked up the crime stats and KC and Wichita account for almost half of the murders in the state. Throw in Overland Park and Topeka and that’s 60 percent of your murders right there.

      I bet there are a small amount of zip codes overly represented by those killings.

  40. Here’s my question for all you Open Borders Types.

    In 2010 Mark Basseley Youssef, the guy who made Innoncence of the Muslims, plead no contest to charge of federal bank fraud. Nakoula had opened bank accounts using fake names and stolen Social Security numbers, including one belonging to a 6-year-old child and deposited checks from those accounts to withdraw at ATMs.

    What was he still doing in the country? Why not deport this guy after he served his sentence?

    Or is it a violation of his human right to travel to kick him out of the country?

    1. I’m guessing it’s because at some point he became naturalized.

    2. Your conception of open borders is off base. Might even be a straw man.

      The open borders ideas championed around here had it that Mexican nationals who can show trustworthy identification, can show that they aren’t convicted felons, and show that they’re inoculated against certain diseases–and aren’t carrying a communicable disease–should be free to come and go across the border, gain employment, etc. …but they shouldn’t be eligible for social programs, etc.

      There isn’t anything about open borders that endorses letting convicted foreign nationals into the country or that would prevent us from deporting convicted felons after serving their time.

      One of the points of open borders is that the herds of illegal aliens coming through the dark and desert at night just to look for work, etc. provide cover for all the criminals and smugglers out there. If Mexican nationals looking for work could simply drive or walk across a border check point just like Americans can going the other way, they wouldn’t walk miles through the desert in the dark.

      Then the only people sneaking around in the dark in the desert would be the criminals. In other words, open borders would make it easier to target and keep out criminals because it would make it easier to find and identify them–and once identified, they could be deported.

      1. Ken, excellent analysis.

      2. That’s a good summary.

      3. “The open borders ideas championed around here had it that Mexican nationals who can show trustworthy identification, can show that they aren’t convicted felons, and show that they’re inoculated against certain diseases–and aren’t carrying a communicable disease–should be free to come and go across the border, gain employment, etc. …but they shouldn’t be eligible for social programs, etc.”

        This is what I don’t understand about this outfit: why only Mexicans? There are other countries you know, several of them First World.

        1. Hint: its not only Mexicans.

  41. Shut up you morans. Hil is a saint! With her on the throne America will get what it needs!

    1. Skulls, to decorate her throne.


    2. Maybe if she spent a bit more time on the throne each day it would improve her disposition. But on second thought – nah.

      1. A Game of Prunes

  42. “According to documents revealed as part of the ongoing Congressional hearings on Benghazi, then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told then-Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil in a phone call the day after the attack on the U.S. consulate, “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack?not a protest.”

    Given that fact, it should also be noted that President Obama’s public reactions after the attack amount to anti-Muslim hate speech.

    You know those crazy Muslims? They’re so crazy, they killed our ambassador because they can’t handle a stupid YouTube video?

    Barack Obama used fear mongering and anti-Muslim bigotry to demagogue and get himself reelected. Don’t blame me! Blame the crazy Muslims! They’re MUSLIMS!!!

    Anti-bigotry progressives should be ashamed of their bigoted, fear-mongering President (Obama), who used disgusting stereotypes about Muslims to try to deflect blame away from himself–just to stay in power. Progressives should either denounce Obama for his disgusting anti-Muslim bigotry or admit they don’t care about racism, sexism, or any other kind of bigotry. All they care about is power.

    1. Your underlying premise is that proggies are people like you; that they have a conscience and are capable of shame. That truth and moral consistency mean something to them.

      This premise is false.

      1. Why are you springing to the defense of proggies, BP? It appears that your response is impulsive, almost puerile, and that is beneath one of your intellectual heft.

        1. Buttplug’s intellectual heft. He hides it so well.

          1. Yeah, but wouldn’t you love to see him go against Cyto in a steel cage match?

            1. I’d bet money on The Plug. He’s got ‘tard strength.

      2. “You’re fucking insane.”

        What does he mean by that?

        That Obama’s response had nothing to do with the Benghazi attack happening three weeks before the Presidential election in 2012?

        That Obama didn’t really demagogue using an anti-Muslim stereotype?

        There’s a reason why no one takes you seriously Shrike. Do you even take yourself seriously anymore? Did you ever?

        Obama is an anti-Muslim hatemonger, and progressives love Obama anyway.

        Deal with it.

        1. Obama is an anti-Muslim hatemonger, and progressives love Obama anyway.

          What are you smokin’, Ken? I am anti-Muslim to the core. I will not pray to the sky-daddy. Christians will push me to do it, but they won’t chop head off if I don’t. Please explain to us why you have problem not hating Islam.

          1. There are a lot of problems with hating Islam as a matter of public policy. I can’t think of anything we should do because of Islam alone. If you can’t come up with a better reason than that, then whatever it is you want us to do becasue you hate Islam isn’t a good idea. I’ve especially become disgusted with this over the past 14 years as fear of this group has been used by the executives of both parties to justify the erosion and disregard for our Constitutional rights.

            I have a big problem with Presidents using hatemongering as a means to power.

            I also have a problem with progressives using tolerance as a justification for supporting whatever Obama wants to do–when he’s demonstrably willing to throw innocent Muslims under the bus using bigoted stereotypes when it’s in his political interests to do so.

            Here are some photos of the people of Benghazi protesting the lynching of Chris Stevens the day after the attack. I’ve seen other photos of the same protest. One of the signs read “Christ Stevens was our friend”:


            Later that night, the people of Benghazi rioted against the terrorist group responsible for killing Stevens. They burned down the group’s headquarters and chased them out of town.

            I have a problem with Obama lying to the American people.

            1. And IF IF IF you’re afraid of and hateful towards Muslims, that doesn’t change anything for me. I still despise bigots and cowards anyway–no matter IF IF IF it’s you or President Obama.

              If Obama is proud of his hatred and fear of Muslims, then he should come out and say so. If Obama is proud of the way he wields his power, through hate mongering and bigotry, then he should come out and say so.

  43. American killed in Iraq hostage rescue, Pentagon says

    So we couldn’t send this same group of badass Seals to Benghazi to rescue a group of bogged down diplomats from a CIA annex house -in a country the administration was touting as an example of their foreign policy success- who were surrounded by a coordinated terrorist group random crowd of protesters.

    And now the military is getting in to mutiny territory by taking on ISIS in Iraq directly to rescue fellow Kurds who are arguably the only group we should be helping right now. The disdain on President Not My Faults face when he found out that they went against his wishes had to have been glacial. This is insane.

    1. Not sure that this was against O’s wishes. All the CNN article says is, ”

      White House spokesman Eric Schultz said the Pentagon, not the White House, signed off on the operation under the U.S. military mission against ISIS.”

      Which is different than the “Stay” order given during the Benghazi attacks.

      NYT (non-paywall) article stating that no U.S. forces were available to relieve the Benghazi consulate

      Fox news article quoting an unnamed ‘operator’ who says the Pentagon was full of shit, and that the C-110 (EUCOM’s QRF for this sort of thing; evidently, AFRICOM didn’t have one) in Croatia could’ve made it on scene.

      I am still boggled that we didn’t have a carrier anywhere near by, nor could we have asked any NATO forces for air cover. They had a drone overhead for recon and communications. IIRC, either Doherty or Woods had the training of an ANGLICO and could direct tac air.

      And while I am sympathetic to Francisco’s argument that prudence and caution preclude sending in a bunch of rescuers, I think that the proximity to the election, not concern for endangering other servicemen, was the reason for the stand down. No Desert One’s on Obama’s watch.

      Which is fucking criminal.

      1. The answer is simple as it seems though. Benghazi was right before the election and had they sent a group that turned out like Operation Eagle Claw it would’ve sunk Obama’s election chances. Instead he let our guys twist in the wind so there was no chance it would get any worse than politically.

        Now you have “dozens” of US troops shooting up ISIS in Iraq to save 70 Kurdish prisoners from certain death and Obama still doesn’t want to take any responsibility for it because it deflates his “no more troops in Iraq” plan.

        One might think that by now he’d have this whole “being a leader” thing working a little but nope, he’s already fitting drapes for his Oahu mansion. Unbelievable.

        1. I agree with most of what you wrote. Not sure whether there were dozens of US guys there—I mean, it’s possible, and if you count all of the 160 SOAR guys, their maintainers, whatever air assets in addition, guys working the perimeter, if any, maybe we get to that many. I again agree that Obama’s sounds like he’s mostly checked out, though that may be wishful thinking on my part.

          I read the article as to say that the Kurds were in the lead on the rescue, stepped in about 10 feet of dog shit during the insertion, and needed to get bailed out by their advisers. Oh well, that’s one way to learn, I guess.

          Semi OT: article from the NY Post related to the MANPADS hunt Gilmore mentioned above. I had no idea that the Taliban picked up Stingers we sold to Qatar for use in Libya. I also had no idea the Taliban managed to pop a Chinook with one of them. One wonders if any ever made it over here…

          1. Agree with that about the Ops, and also that it’s probably for the best that Obama has checked out at this point.

            Either way he’s pissed because yet another promise he made fell short. He’s almost batting a thousand at this point.

      2. “NYT (non-paywall) article stating that no U.S. forces were available to relieve the Benghazi consulate”

        Does this pass the laugh test with anyone? We’ve got bases across the globe, aircraft carriers across the oceans, but no, we couldn’t get a plane or a boot into Benghazi all night.

    2. 70 hostages rescued, and the headline only mentions the one rescuer killed. Classic CNN.

      The White House wants nothing to do with this as BO’s major foreign policy accomplishment claim is ending the Iraq War, and having “boots on the ground” once again would pop that little balloon. According to the Obama Doctrine it’s not war when you’re merely dropping bombs on another country.

    3. So we couldn’t send this same group of badass Seals to Benghazi to rescue a group of bogged down diplomats from a CIA annex house…

      SOS Hillary Clinton froze when she heard the news of the attack. There were airbases in Italy within a 2 hour reach. The fight went on for at least 8 hours. Her goodwill and virtue signalling, the currency of our overlords, were more important.

  44. “And there’s the puppet show the parliament jesters foist on the somnambulant public.”

    I really do not understand what the GOPers on the House committee were trying to do with this testimony.

    1. They say they’re looking for the truth, but there is no chance she’s going to tell the truth.
    2. She’s had over a year to prepare for this, and every one of her responses has been focus-grouped out the wazoo. We might be appalled at the “what difference does it make” statement, but that echoes EXACTLY how many low-info moderates in the electorate feel about this issue.
    3. Probably a third of Americans don’t know the difference between Benghazi and Ben-Gay, and that’s a case where people got brutally murdered…. on the other hand, they have as much chance of grasping the importance of the email scandal as a slightly retarded gerbil does.
    4. The MSM is where most Americans who are not already committed to one of the parties get their news, and they will paint this eeeeevil white male Republicans ganging up on the first woman presidential candidate.

    So, either Trey Gowdy is a fool or he has been intending this to accomplish nothing more than pandering to the GOP base all along.

    1. Bengay /= Iraq!!

    2. “4. and they will paint this eeeeevil white male Republicans ganging up on the first woman presidential candidate.”

      Mean old republican penises. Don’t they know how much Hillary feelz her feelz? She’s lost so much sleep over this, while the republican penises were busy pushing grandma off a cliff.

      You shouldn’t be so mean to her and ask her questions and stuff; she’s a girl and she has *feelz*!

    1. It would be a lot cooler if he found it in Maine

      1. It would be cooler if he gained the power to control lightning

  45. Inscribed with,”Beware of demons named Hershel”

    1. Until 1850 or so Uranus was called Herschel.

  46. “What difference at this point does it make? If you value free speech, a lot.”

    Or honest government.

    But remember, if Progressive Theocrats have no compunction about using force against you, why would they feel any inhibition about using fraud?

    “Clinton refused to admit that the administration blamed the video for the attacks”

    Not even a smidgen of corruption. If you like your doctor, you can keep him. I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky. The dog ate my hard drive. None of the emails were classified….

    Lie after lie after lie after lie.

  47. I am in “Jaw-juh” as they say it here. On the wall behind me is a picture of an experimental double-barreled cannon built during the Civil War. It was supposed to be a superweapon for the Confederacy. The idea was to fire 2 cannon balls joined by a chain, thus killing many soldiers with a single shot. They had trouble getting both barrels to fire at the same time, so the chain would just break. The group that built it called themselves The Mitchell Thunderbolts and were men who were too old or sick to serve in the Confederate army.

    More info here: wiki

    This morning, I was wandering the underground maze of Mammoth Cave in Kentucky. I highly recommend it. The park ranger guide had a lot of good jokes. My favorite was “We are the nearing the exit which contains what many consider to be the most beautiful formation in the cave. It’s about 8 ft high, 3 ft wide, and has a knob.”

    I am drinking a beer called Shotgun Betty and am in good spirits.

    Heard about the Special Forces guy that got killed in Iraq today. Sad. He died that others may live.

  48. So it looks like Portugal won’t get a Socialist-Communist-Green anti-austerity coalition. However they have a majority in the legislature so who knows how long the current government will last and what replaces it.

  49. Nick Gillespie articles lately strike me as the equivalent of someone from the 1930s saying there was nothing to worry about since we were better off than Medieval Peasants, Female Suffrage and Talkies.

    1. That’s a bit harsh. Everybody has their favorite topics and p.o.v.

      I will say that I think Reason should be focusing more on economics. Cripes, Sanders is a friggin’ socialist hippie with economic ideas from pot-filled dorm rooms of the Nixon-era, and he’s the #2 Democrat, with widespread support. Even the wife of Mr. “The era of big government is over” isn’t running on that slogan. Us Carter- and Reagan-Era libertarians are scratching our heads and thinking: What the heck happened? Did the last 30 years of economic history mean nothing?

      Reason also needs to spend more time making the case for less government spending by documenting how much we spend for what we get. What do spend per minute, per day, per person, for all this? Tell people how many thousands of bureaucrats make $150k+/year, and yet we get feeble or pointless or actually harmful results. The debt should scare people, and it largely doesn’t, so I’d say Reason needs to make it scary. Get rid of the Dept. of Ed. by proving it’s a waste of money.

      Reason should be defiling the corpse of socialism, explaining how huge and inefficient the government is, and promoting practical, real-world libertarian solutions. (Or libertarian-ish solutions. Don’t be afraid to compromise. The socialists weren’t, and thus we got to our present sorry semi-socialized state.) I could do with less about the latest unlucky dimwit to have a bad encounter with the cops.

      1. “…Us Carter- and Reagan-Era libertarians are scratching our heads and thinking: What the heck happened? Did the last 30 years of economic history mean nothing?…”

        I’m re-reading “Hungry Ghosts” ’cause someone here is reading it and made me want to take a look again.
        Mao and company had the exact model of Russky farm collectives to examine; they were abject failures. But Mao somehow figured he could do the same thing and managed to starve millions to death in the process.
        “Free Shit” is a powerful incentive, and it seems every generation has to learn that it ain’t free, to the detriment of those who do know.

        1. Indeed. The core of statist appeals rests on the belief that statism works. It seems like decades of voters have come out of our public schools thinking that socialism works and is a good thing that we just need more of. So I think it should be Reason’s major task in 2015/2016 to attack this belief with smart, dramatic, attention-getting stories backed with impeccable evidence. Even if it means less coverage of the latest flaw in Trump, or the latest puppycide.

          1. The core of statist appeals rests on the belief that statism works.

            More like statist appeals rest on disguising the fact that they are statist. Nobody’s going to come out and say “all within the state, nothing against the state, nothing outside the state” in America in 2015, even if that really is their fundamental philosophy.

            Rather, they’ll present “common sense” solutions on small issues, solutions invariably adding more power to the state and based on emotion and/or fallacious reasoning, and paint any resistance as motivated by partisanship, bigotry, or payoffs from whoever the bogeyman of the day is. Then having loudly taken an inch in the foreground, they’ll quietly take a mile in the background and count on the inertia, apathy, and ignorance of the American public to shield them from any consequence.

            They’re much better at this game than we are because they do it for a living. How do we beat them? I haven’t the faintest idea. If we play the current game we lose. If we refuse to play any game we lose. So we have to change the game, but how in the world do you do that with 300M people in this country, and pretty much every other country, invested in the current game?

      2. Remember the scene in Idiocracy where Brawndo’s stock crashes because Not Sure ordered the farmers to stop spraying electrolyte salts on their fields? And Not Sure got drubbed out of office and forced into a Monday Night Rehabilitation?

        That’s what a significant reduction in federal spending will look like. No politician is going to risk going the Not Sure route, even if it’s best for the long term. It’s sure as hell going to take more than two years of rinsing with water (from the toilet) to get the salt out of our fiscal fields.

        1. It would be a huge victory to simply stop federal spending from growing. In fact, do that for 5-8 years and the budget is balanced.

  50. Why don’t let’s keep fucking this chicken and make Hillary emperor for life for fuck’s fuck. Jeezy Creezy did you not see her pick Trey Gowdy up whole and clean her ears with the Q-tip looking motherfucker? What planet are we on? You spend 4 years trying to win political points off a government official’s death, you better goddamn get some points. No points. Fuck off.

    1. I agree. The only deaths that should be used for political points are those of schoolchildren.

    2. You’re right, there shouldn’t have been a hearing. Hillary Clinton shouldn’t have been able to get furlough from the supermax prison where she should be serving her life sentence for egregiously harming the national security of the United States. You know, the situation anyone not among the political elite who did the same things she did with her “personal e-mail server” would be facing.

  51. Therefore, more dead people on billary watch again because and she speaks to Chris’ wonderful sense of humor. This is how she characterizes the man just prior to him being brutalized to a pulp and never answering the question. Are you kidding me, this woman is despicable, belongs totally out of politics, and should be in jail. She has had more passes the anyone in or out of politics. Anyone who votes for her is helping towards the finally take this country down. Did you notice she shook the hands of the Capital Police before entering the chambers? Photo op only because she couldn’t care less. Quite frankly, she is the personification of a ‘fema (you know what the last part is!’)!

  52. Who cares – every single candidate except, ironically, perhaps Sanders, is and will be a slave to the Jewish/Zionist lobby, to Wall Street, and to the MIC.

    And that’s all they’ll be.

  53. This story is a less-then-creative and just plain weak attempt to wrap the hate Hillary pole with a new flag.

    Virtually every time someone asks what the hell Hillary has to do with this in real terms or why it matters – much less to this ridiculous degree – that she (a politician-diplomat of all people) said one thing one day and another thing the next (for almost ANY reason much less the very cloudy circumstances in this case) neither of which had anything to do with anything of substance, the reaction is to call her a name, veer off to some even less reality-based rant or conspiratorial mumbo jumbo, or just say something like “you don’t get it.”

    I DON”T GET IT and I’m proud of that.

  54. I would be a little less irked if the cabinet-level scrutiny for the original 9/11 and the scores of overseas attacks on US people, facilities and diplomatic outposts was even a fraction of what Hillary is getting.

  55. Let’s not forget that the whole committee shitshow was a planned production of the Republican house leadership. In other words, a STRATEGY (definition #1 from our friends at Google: A plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim).

    Hmmm, let’s see if we can find that word somewhere:

    McCarthy: “I knew you’d want to ask it. What you’re going to see is a conservative speaker that takes a conservative Congress that puts a strategy to fight and win. And let me give you one example. Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s un-trustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened had we not fought and made that happen.”

    Hannity: “I agree. I give you credit for that. I give you credit for sequestration, I’ll give you credit where credit is due.” (continues about defunding stuff)

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.