tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3872239785607728837.post1095690873142303188..comments2024-03-18T16:45:15.140-04:00Comments on The Brooklyn & Staten Island Independent GOP Fountainhead: Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Hearing really was NOT as good for her as the Mainstream Media would seem to want everybody to thinkGalewyn Masseyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09210379476512207622noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3872239785607728837.post-14095950691408757232015-10-24T11:25:21.394-04:002015-10-24T11:25:21.394-04:00RESPONSE: THE "DON'T REBUT WHAT I DIDN...RESPONSE: THE "DON'T REBUT WHAT I DIDN'T SAY" EDITION<br /><br />DID I SAY THAT HILLARY DIDN'T OR WOULDN'T HAVE OR MAKE ANY "GAINS" FOLLOWING THE DEBATE AND/OR THE BENGHAZI HEARING ??? I DON'T THINK SO.....<br /><br />To: "Anonymous said... at 8:10 AM" Gains in the polls and among your intra-party competitors are what they are -- and it looks like Hillary did OK with all that -- but long-term problems and hidden time-bombs are something else.....<br /><br />Let's just wait and see.Galewyn Masseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09210379476512207622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3872239785607728837.post-43124274854680451992015-10-24T11:11:09.843-04:002015-10-24T11:11:09.843-04:00BACKFILL & A QUERY: THE “WHY WASN’T THIS FOLLO...BACKFILL & A QUERY: THE “WHY WASN’T THIS FOLLOWED-UP — OR — ARE REPUBLICANS EMBARRASSED TALKING ABOUT ‘MANPADS’ ?” EDITION<br /><br />WHY DID GOWDY’S HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE AND ALL THE OTHER BENGHAZI COMMITTEES STEER CLEAR OF DIGGING INTO THIS — AND WHY DID HILLARY SPECIFICALLY MENTION IT RIGHT AT THE TOP OF THE 10/22 HEARING ? ? ?<br /><br />Here’s something that I didn’t mention above in my post, because it really wasn’t part of what “Emerged” for the first time during the House Select Committee on Benghazi’s questioning of Hillary Clinton. <br /><br />In her own statements to the House Select Committee on Thursday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton essentially implied that Ambassador Chris Stevens was engaged in gathering up shoulder-fired missiles in Libya. Wouldn’t the committee's following-up and focusing on this effort to secure these dangerous weapons have been central to answering why the U.S. special mission in Benghazi might have been attacked Sept. 11, 2012 ? Even Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, the one Democrat who did ask several fact-centric questions of former Secretary Clinton, steered clear of this.<br /><br />In her opening remarks Thursday, Clinton, referred to Ambassador Chris Stevens and a threat of shoulder-fired missiles reaching extremists. Former Secretary Clinton said , “.... Nobody knew the dangers of Libya better. A weak government, extremist groups, rampant instability. But Chris chose to go to Benghazi because he understood America had to be represented there at that pivotal time....” She also said Stevens “... also knew how urgent it was to ensure that the weapons Gadhafi had left strewn across the country, including shoulder-fired missiles that could knock an airplane out of the sky, did not fall into the wrong hands....” <br /><br />These shoulder-fired missiles are called “Man-Portable-Air-Defense-Systems,” or “MANPADS.” [Don’t make any more jokes – that part of my question in the caption was quite enough] Many of these very dangerous weapons had fallen into the hands of some very bad actors in Libya immediately after the U.S.-NATO military campaign, which had been strongly pushed by Hillary Clinton, had effectuated the end Moammar Gadhafi’s rule in Libya. Clinton did not further comment on any role Stevens himself might have played in securing the MANPADS.<br /><br />Later in her testimony, however, Clinton appeared to have addressed the sensitive nature of Stevens’ work, admitting, “Americans representing different agencies” later came into Libya and carried out “the same work” as Stevens but not overtly. In putting it just that way, the former Secretary of State apparently was referring to the CIA and its “Annex” located near the U.S. State Department “Special mission.” Clinton seemed to be implying that “U.S. Ambassador Stevens” was involved in some kind of operation that was beyond the normal diplomatic work of an ambassador. Without specifying the nature of the “same work” that both Stevens and “other agencies” were trying to carry out, Clinton clearly wanted everybody to know it was both important and sort of secret.<br /><br />Come to think of it, there probably aren’t a lot of people who want to ask a lot of questions about “MANPADS”.....Galewyn Masseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09210379476512207622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3872239785607728837.post-75706461619620612522015-10-24T11:10:18.216-04:002015-10-24T11:10:18.216-04:00Oh yeah right Hillary didnt really gain that much ...Oh yeah right Hillary didnt really gain that much since the hearing. The only thing that changed is all her opposition in democratic primary pulled out, except Eugene Debbs, and now polls show her beating every republican.<br /><br />Outside of that, not much else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3872239785607728837.post-88382819977653937242015-10-24T09:36:42.346-04:002015-10-24T09:36:42.346-04:00Gale, stop beating your Benghazi drum already. Rel...Gale, stop beating your Benghazi drum already. Relax, and have a pickle. <br /><br />Benghazi won’t be done with for a long-long time. your friend Gowdy and his Committee didn’t do a great job questioning Hillary, but it don’t matter, because Hillary said enough bad stuff on her own to keep Benghazi going until the movie comes out. <br /><br />Gale, as you and some of our more political movie friends know, in politics it’s how the movie does that’s going to count in the end. Progressive Democrats read the Times, Indies read it on Kindle books, and Republicans and Reagan Democrats watch it in the movies or on cable. <br /><br />Right now, what Gowdy did about Hillary and Benghazi will percolate and stay in the news enough so that Michael Bay’s movie, “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” will still be topical around New Years 2016. There’s an old story in the NY Post by Kyle Smith that has a trailer and tells all about it: <br /><br />http://nypost.com/2015/07/29/the-movie-hillary-clinton-should-be-very-very-worried-about/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com