Hillary Clinton

More Questions for Hillary Clinton

Clinton, haven't you stated a few dozen times that you never sent or received emails marked "classified"?

|

Phil Roeder/Flickr

At long last, Hillary Clinton testifies on the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, and her emails as secretary of state. Here are some suggested questions. Although these suggestions are based on the public record, we need to assume that the members of the House Benghazi Committee have seen far more than the public has. I have framed the questions in traditional cross-examination style, though I doubt that the politicians on the committee will have the self-discipline to adhere to it.

The theory of cross-examination—particularly of a high-profile, intelligent, belligerent or ruthless witness—is for the questioner to tell a story by asking questions that suggest answers that challenge the witness's version of events or impeach the witness's credibility. The questioner's version of events must be based on credible evidence. In a courtroom, the questioner's audience for his version of the events is the jury. In a congressional hearing, the audience is the American people.

I have publicly advised members of Congress that they should not ask any questions of Clinton; instead, they should have a prominent attorney who is her equal in intellect and knowledge of the law yet is a fierce, experienced cross-examiner do so. But the lure of TV cameras will probably cause the committee members to reject my advice. As well, some of the committee members are lawyers, and the committee's chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, is a former federal prosecutor.

Anyway, here goes…

Clinton, when you first became secretary of state, you were briefed on the proper use of emails, right? And you were informed of your obligation to preserve all governmental records that came into your possession and not destroy any of them, right? And you also were briefed on the proper handling of classified materials, weren't you? In fact, Clinton, you were presented with a written government oath that every federal employee who handles classified materials receives and must sign, correct? Isn't it also true, Mrs. Clinton, that you never signed that oath?

Didn't you pay a State Department employee—not an outside vendor—to install a private email server in your home in New York? And when you did that, you knew the practical effect of it would be to divert all your emails—governmental and personal—away from the government, right? And you used, did you not, that email system your employee in the State Department installed in your home as your exclusive email source during your tenure as secretary of state? And that email system was directly connected to the Internet, right?

Isn't it true that you received and sent emails on your personal system that included satellite photos of foreign surveillance; intercepts of telephonic and email communications of foreign agents; travel plans of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the Benghazi attacks; and the true name of a CIA agent operating under deep cover in the Middle East?

Isn't it true that you were probably too busy to read all the emails you received before storing them or sending them on to others? Isn't it true that you treated all emails alike, whether they contained delicate or personal information or not?

Clinton, haven't you stated a few dozen times that you never sent or received emails marked "classified"? Now, Mrs. Clinton, you were the country's chief diplomat for four years, right? Don't you know that nothing is marked "classified"—that the national security markings are "confidential," "secret" and "top secret"?

Clinton, isn't it true that you asked President Obama to let you hire your friend and colleague Sidney Blumenthal as a special assistant to you in the State Department? Isn't it true that the president declined your request? Didn't you then have your family's foundation hire Mr. Blumenthal, and didn't you then treat him as your assistant without telling the president?

Clinton, didn't you communicate with Mr. Blumenthal about political and national security matters on a regular and consistent and often-daily basis? Didn't he provide you with confidential information from his own sources? Didn't you pass confidential information on to him?

Clinton, you knew that the war you were waging against Moammar Gadhafi was causing great instability in Libya, right? And you knew that instability had led to the need for private security firms to protect Libyans and Americans in Libya, correct? And didn't you also know that your friend and confidant Mr. Blumenthal had a financial interest in one of those firms while he was advising you? You didn't see anything illegal about an employee of your family's foundation's receiving secret data from you while he was advising you and trying to get business for his security firm in Libya, did you?

Clinton, isn't it true that you put the travel plans of Ambassador Stevens onto nongovernmental Internet venues? Isn't it true that at the time you did that, he asked you for more security in Libya and you did not provide it? Mrs. Clinton, isn't it true that to fight your secret war against the government of Gadhafi, you sent American arms into the hands of his opponents? And you did this without a congressional declaration of war, right?

Didn't you know that many of Gadhafi's opponents were al-Qaida operatives, who are America's sworn enemies? Weren't you reckless in getting arms to them? Didn't you realize that you were arming the very people against whom your ambassador was seeking more protection?

Clinton, do you know it is a felony to provide arms to terrorist organizations? Do you know that Ambassador Stevens was murdered by al-Qaida operatives using American arms and American bullets?

Clinton, do you think anyone but the most hardened Democrats and your husband's old friends could trust you in public office?

COPYRIGHT 2015 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO || DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

Advertisement

NEXT: The Surprising Disappearance of Inflation

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. Judge, the answer to all your questions is – among anger and tears – what difference at this point does it make. She’s the presumptive nominee, obviously having come to an agreement with the Obama Administration on any DoJ investigation. And since Congress will not act, either, Benghazi and email servers and Foundation graft are irrelevant.

    1. Unfortunately, Hillary could stand in front of that committee and say she intentionally wanted to have the ambassador murdered along with any other collateral damage that got in the way. And even still the ignorant (whom now comprises of a majority in this country), free-stuff-wanting public will still vote for this cunt to be our next president!

      IT’S ALL OVER FOLKS! And the socialists won.

  2. YOU WANT ANSWERS!??!

    1. I WANT THE TRUTH!!

      1. YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

        1. You WANT me on that wall. You NEED me on that wall!!

          Best line in the speech.

          1. YOU Lt. Weinstein!?

      2. Well,I’m not gonna tell you the truth…nyah, nyah, nyah.

  3. Republicans are too huge of twats to risk being shamed for damaging any Democrat’s chances of further destroying our lives.

  4. Great questions but I keep seeing a scene from Game of Thrones –

    “Don’t you know who I am? I’m the Queen! You can’t ask me those kinds of questions.”

    1. Maybe Hillary could take the walk of shame like Cersei.

      1. No, no, no, no, no – that is just too much horror. I will not sleep for the next week with that image in my head.

      2. Maybe she could take a perp walk with her hands cuffed behind her.

  5. The thought of Hillary sticking it to the man. You know how that makes me feel.

    1. Strap on? Or is she already equipped correctly?

      1. It’s kind of like that rapist mummy on AHS Hotel with the drillbit dildo.

  6. This kind of questioning might work in a courtroom, but how can it work in a Congressional hearing? Aren’t the rules different? Does the Judge really expect Clinton to sit there and calming answer all of these yes or no questions with yesses and noes? Frankly, if the committee tried to cross-examine Clinton like this I’d expect her to walk out and none of them would do anything about it.

    1. Let the bitch walk out – the American People are only going to take just so much of her continued arrogance.

      1. Arrogance can’t compete with Free Shit. Her Royal Highness Hillary I is promising Free Shit. That will get her at least 47% of the vote.

  7. Ms. Clinton, isn’t true that there are government employees whose sole responsibility it is to determine which government documents are classified and “marking” them as such? That emails you sent and received would not and could not be “marked” until they hit the desk of a bureaucrat charged with the responsibility of making that determination? Isn’t it true that the only time your emails could be scrutinized was after they saw the light of day when your private server was discovered more than three years after you left your post? Isn’t it true that every high level government employee, including you, has a duty to properly handle sensitive (i.e., classified) information regardless of whether they are actually “marked” as classified? And that failure to do so violates federal laws meant to protect sensitive information?

    She needs to have the contents of specific emails that have since been “marked” classified read to her and asked “Are you telling us that you, as Secretary of State who probably received classified information every day you were on the job, had no idea that the information contained in this email was classified when you sent (received) it? Really?”

    Clinton switched to the “marked classified” meme when it came to light that emails she sent and received contained classified information and the press and committee investigators continue to let her get away with it. And it’s working.

    1. Regarding the emails, there are only two options. Either a) Clinton was incompetent at both managing the State Dept. and handling official documents, or b) Clinton blatantly disregarded several laws and State Dept. policies regarding the handling of official documents. There are no other options and either option should prevent her from ever holding any public office again.

      1. So right. By her own admission, the only emails she sent or received while Secretary of State passed through her server. All of them. Stated another way, one has to believe that she was either 1) stupid enough to believe that she would never, ever receive or send classified information by email or, to paraphrase what you said, 2) protecting herself was more important than protecting the nation’s security. David Petraeus was indicted for number 2).

        1. Ace Rothstein. Either you’re too dumb to know you were being scammed or you were in on it, either way yer out!

  8. Clinton, do you know it is a felony to provide arms to terrorist organizations?

    “Are you speaking about the Contras, who were provided arms by Ronald Reagan?”

    1. That’s different because …. Um, Reagan?!?

      Seriously though, there is a book “Twilight War” that documents are long adversarial relationship with Iran that is borderline creepy. Especially when it talks about the evolution of the Iran-Contra and Iran-Iraq War.

      1. +1 I started to read that awhile ago and it was very interesting but life got busy. Thanks for the reminder to finish it

    2. Were the Contras every officially designated as a terrorist organization?

      Besides, if the Democrats criticized Reagan for years, or even decades, about how the Contras were funded and supplied, why should that same party then give Mrs. Clinton a pass for doing the same thing?

      1. No the Contras were never officially designated as such.

        But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good sound bite.

  9. Ahoy thar, mateys!

    I don’t care which scam artist finally gets elected, or which doesn’t, nor what the Fed does/does not do, nor whether, according to Mr “investment advisor with a claimed “near perfect prediction record” [insert advisor name of choice] , we are supposedly in for recession, depression, deflation, hyper inflation, a stock market boom, or whatever .

    Why? Because whatever happens, my entirely self-managed, fully diversified, once per year adjusted long term savings plan will be safely protected and will , 9 times out of 10, grow at an average of 8% per annum over and above the prevailing inflation [or deflation], rate, year in, year out, as it has since 1986 when I started using it.

    Savings plan results 1972-2011: http://onebornfreesfinancialsa…..gspot.com/

    Regards,onebornfree

    1. Yep… and here’s a link for you, too… http://www.plusaf.com/_troll-p…..pinion.jpg

  10. All good questions from the Judge, and the answers would be damning, if Herself deigned to answer them honestly. But she won’t, and it wouldn’t matter anyway. Nothing will happen to her unless Obama allows the DOJ to prosecute her. And with Biden out of the running, she is his best chance of keeping Democratic control of the White House. So I am not holding my breath for that indictment.

    At this point, I assume the Clintons and Obamas have struck some sort of ceasefire. They don’t like each other, but they sort of need each other. And I’m guessing they have tons of dirt on each other. Sort of like mutually assured destruction for scumbags.

  11. Guilty on all counts, life in prison

  12. I bought brand new BMW by working ONline work. Six month ago i hear from my friend that she is working some online job and making more then 98$/hr i can’t beleive. But when i start this job i have to beleived her

    ??????? —— http://www.HomeJobs90.Com

  13. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.buzznews99.com

    1. http://www.plusaf.com/_troll-p…..pinion.jpg

      Fuck off, spammer. We don’t click your fucking links.

  14. I can think of one more question they should ask while they have her there: namely what happened to all the official White House tableware, silverware, and furniture she and her husband carried off when he left the presidency?

  15. My sole question:

    “Secretary Clinton: You’re running for President? Are you FUCKING KIDDING ME?”

  16. Clinton, do you know it is a felony to provide arms to terrorist organizations? Do you know that Ambassador Stevens was murdered by al-Qaida operatives using American arms and American bullets?

    Proof? You can’t make claims out of the blue without proof.

  17. The proper use of the term is ‘classified as’.
    From the lowest to the highest level government employe you are briefed and tested yearly on government IT systems protocol. ‘Under penalty of law, no employee shall conduct government business on a non-government system.’ The punishment being consummate with damage caused. As I am involved with government IT, I can state this as fact. If the deaths of our ambassador and staff can be tied to her insecure emails, that would be a felony, punishable by capital punishment, i.e. by death. No joke. Whether she signed the required documents or not, a crime is a crime and must be addressed.
    I don’t believe this is being taken seriously enough. I say that because if Clinton is given a pass, it sets a dangerous and deadly president that anybody and everybody can use to skirt the IT systems laws in the future.
    The government employee who performed this diversion of emails is every bit as culpable as Clinton. Get him/her up of the stand, the truth shall soon be squeezed out of them.

  18. Having read and watched a lot of all this email issue I have yet to hear or read her asked or answer, “then what DID you use?”
    Maybe someone can answer this. Lets just pretend she is telling the truth. She never mishandled classified info through email. But she only had one email. And at some point during her time as sect she had to have in some way worked with sensitive info. So what DID she use? Not email. Then all classified info was in paper? In person? By raven? If you never misused email, what did you use? I have only ever heard or read that info was NOT in email. But never have I heard how it WAS handled.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.