© 2024 Blaze Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Ben Ghazi: Who Is He?

Ben Ghazi: Who Is He?

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testifies before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the September 11, 2012 attack on the US mission in Benghazi, Libya in the Rayburn House Office Building on January 23, 2013 in Washington, DC(Credit: AFP/Getty Images) 


That this is not a ludicrous question for many - way too many - fellow Americans is significant.

What it signifies is that many of our fellow citizens are imbeciles.

Get used to it. Embrace it. Use it like jiujitsu to our advantage.

If you absorbed any of Clinton's testilying Wednesday, you are asked to accept key - ad absurd - propositions:

(1) The Secretary of State "accepts responsibility" - but not any blame - for the evident, manifest criminal negligence that caused the rape/torture/murder (sorry: That IS what happened) of our patriots that horrid night.

(2) Every request, warning, pleading and notification of/to the Secretary State's office, the Secretary of State was aware of - indeed saw - NONE of it. "What? News to me! Imagine that!"

(3) In the minds of Clinton foes, this was the big moment - confronting Clinton with irrefutable, damning facts that would expose and disarm Clinton. As if!

Clinton manipulated the impotent Q&A process as Clintons do: turning the tables, using "adversarial" "hearings" as a stage on which Clinton could transform plans for her undoing into a three-ring circus.

A few tepid Republican questions (don't blame them - after all, all they had to go on was a demonstrable, compelling air-tight case of criminal negligence) were generally twisted expertly by Clinton into either:

(a) Weeping: "I am so sad for the dead" and/or

(b) Righteous Indgnation: 'What does that matter?! We have dead Americans! We must move forward!'

In other words: who's at fault doesn't matter. All the counts is how I avoid blame and we move forward (i.e. skip over blame).

Allowed to get away with this when Republicans can control the hearings with effective questioning...this criminal strategy would be quite laughable and depressing enough if it were not for far worse: Mrs. Clinton - with a straight if absolutely frightening face - urged the investigators to "move on"...code for "forget what crimes I committed. That's old news!" "Investigators" seemed suckered into buying it.

In a civilian court of law, there seems not a molecule of doubt that Hillary Clinton, guilty of Criminal Negligence at least, would be staring at well-deserved hard prison time.

Instead, given the structure of these clown hearings, rare insinuating questions were automatically alternated through every-other-questioner by Democrats trading investigation for a monolithically predictable series of lame, shameless, stupid questions - e.g. "Mrs. Clinton! You look marvelous! Where did you get that MuMu? Lovely haircut!"

So long as this "hearing" standard is such a mockery, so long will the "hearing" yield absolutely nothing.

We have a massive U.S. security failure. A torture/slaughter of an American ambassador and Navy SEALS. To some of us, that is not politics--it is United States national defense.

To allow "hearings" to become a pre-Presidential record-cleansing for the Democrats' next presidential candidate is pornography.

Jay Severin is a host on TheBlaze Radio Network. Listen to him weekdays 2-5pm.

Want to leave a tip?

We answer to you. Help keep our content free of advertisers and big tech censorship by leaving a tip today.
Want to join the conversation?
Already a subscriber?