Unaccountable Hillary Clinton
CNN anchor Jake Tapper blandly admitted the obvious in a radio
interview with conservative host Hugh Hewitt. The same reporters that
insist their former GOP favorite Chris Christie is ruined for 2016 by
traffic jams on a bridge are letting Hillary Clinton skate for
embassy-security neglect that led to four dead government employees at
Benghazi.
Why would so-called watchdogs of government suggest Hillary is a
shoo-in in ‘16 as if Benghazi never happened? Tapper strangely suggested
that Benghazi always seemed like more of a White House scandal than a
State Department scandal, and don’t blame him, because Hillary didn’t
grant him an interview.
“Hillary Clinton was on her way out, and you know, I can’t tackle her,”
he said in self-defense. “I haven’t had a chance to interview her since
Benghazi happened. I don’t even know, has she done interviews? I think
she did some interviews on her way out.”
That’s
awfully coy. In fact, after Hillary’s ridiculous “what difference does
it make” defense a year ago, lapped up by media lapdogs as some kind of
“riveting” triumph, she quickly granted interviews to ABC, CBS, and NBC.
All three networks now pounding away at Christie were, and continue to
be AWOL on Hillary. They have punted the chance to be watchdogs.
The most infamous one we remember is Steve Kroft’s joint Barack-and-Hillary interview
for “60 Minutes,” when Kroft asked two questions on her Benghazi
testimony. First, “You had a very long day. Also, how is your health?”
And second, “Do you feel guilty in any way, at a personal level? Do you
blame yourself that you didn`t know or that you should have known?”
This allowed Hillary to express regret for her “personal loss,” and
insist against all the evidence that she was tremendously interested in
embassy security.
On NBC, State Department correspondent Andrea Mitchell interviewed her
pal Hillary, but they only showed snippets in two news accounts. Don’t
blink, or you’ll miss the Benghazi seconds. Hillary said, “Well,
Benghazi went wrong. You know, that was a terrible example of trying to
get the right balance between being in a threatening place or not being
there.”
Mitchell had one question: “But in retrospect, shouldn’t a cable
warning of a security threat from an ambassador in a conflict zone,
shouldn't that get the highest possible attention immediately?” Hillary
said oh well, maybe next time: “Well, that’s what we’re hoping to make
sure does happen in the future.” Then it was on to Hillary’s work for
women’s rights around the globe.
ABC’s Hillary interview was performed by “Nightline” host Cynthia McFadden,
a perennial Hillary toady. McFadden informed America that Hillary was
“doubling down” on her Senate testimony. McFadden began: “It seemed as
though you lost your temper at the hearing.” Hillary said anyone trying
to hold her accountable was using a “partisan lens.”
“When someone tries to put it into a partisan lens, when they focus not
on the fact that we had such a terrible event happening with four dead
Americans, but instead, what did somebody say on a Sunday morning talk
show? That, to me, is not in keeping with the seriousness of the issue
and the obligation we all have as public servants.”
McFadden softly nudged: Does she regret the “what difference” comment?
Hillary repeated herself about the Sunday-show questions and added: “I
believe in transparency. I said, you know, let the chips fall where they
may. Put it all out there. And I don't want that to be politicized.”
Please laugh at the "transparency" part, but always pay attention when a
Clinton says you can’t proceed with a “politicized” line of
questioning. It means you’re getting dangerously close to asking them a
tough question. On these occasions, none of the interviewers wondered
what some reporters have: if Hillary believed in transparency, why
didn’t she do the Sunday morning shows after Benghazi instead of Susan
Rice? For that, we can turn to Bill Clinton’s draft-dodging language:
she was “maintaining [her] viability within the system.”
In fact, most journalists really don’t feel Hillary Clinton should be
held accountable. Time magazine had a cover story titled “Can Anyone
Stop Hillary?” Nancy Gibbs, now the managing editor of Time magazine,
was asked on MSNBC by Andrea Mitchell how long Hillary can delay making
the official declaration for the White House. Gibbs responded, “I think
she can postpone it almost longer than anyone we have seen. It allows
her to not have to answer every controversy that comes up, the latest
obviously being the Benghazi report today.”
Gibbs told Mitchell that only Hillary can stop Hillary. That must be
because her liberal-media bootlickers can’t muster one tough question
about how she mismanaged embassy security in Libya. They, too, always
seem to be interested only in maintaining her viability within the
system.
