On Thursday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spent some 11 hours testifying before a House select committee investigating the 2012 terror attack against a compound in Benghazi, Libya. While much of the country was glued to the hearings hoping to learn something new, liberals on Twitter were demanding House Republicans, led by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., set Clinton “free” from the hearing and free from any responsibility she has in the tragic attack.
Using the hashtag, “#FreeHillary,” a number demanded the hearings end before Gowdy was finished. Several compared the hearing to a hostage situation.
“Forget Waterboarding. Next time we want to torture a terrorist let’s make them spend 10 hours in front of #BenghaziCommittee,” one person said. “We need to send in the National Guard. We have a serious hostage situation,” another person tweeted.
“Wait – is their strategy to keep her locked in the hearing room answering questions through November ’16?” one Twitter user asked. “This has gone on long enough. Get a hostage negotiator in there,” added another Twitter user.
When it became clear that Clinton was not about to be set loose, the tone of the messages changed. Instead of demanding Clinton be set “free,” supporters began attacking House Republicans trying to get answers.
“Hillary will sleep like a baby, while Gowdy will cry like one; all night long,” one person tweeted Thursday evening. “It’s going to be pure comedy watching the GOP try to distance themselves from this circus tomorrow,” another person added.
The left-wing spin machine, led by the George Soros-funded Media Matters, swung into action, attacking conservatives who weighed in while propping up the former secretary who happens to be a Democratic Party candidate for the White House. The so-called mainstream media joined in after Gowdy hesitated when asked what new information was gleaned from the marathon session.
It will take more than a single news cycle to sift through the entire hearing, however. For starters, Fox News’ Catherine Herridge reported that Clinton emailed members of her family on the day of the attack, telling them: “Two officers were killed today in Benghazi by an al-Qaeda-like group.” She also contacted two foreign leaders, telling them the same thing. Nevertheless, she told the American people the attack was the result of a protest over an obscure YouTube video.
“With all due respect, the fact is, we had four dead Americans,” Clinton said during a hearing in 2013. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans?! What difference, at this point, does it make?! It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”
“Now honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is, people were trying in real time to get to the best information,” she added. “But you know, to be clear, it is — from my perspective — less important today, looking backwards, as to why these militants decided they did it and to find them and bring them to justice and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.”
But we now know that Clinton knew the attack was the result of terrorism, not anger over a video. And she knew it at the same time she insisted it was all about a video. She even told family members of the victims that the person who made that video would be brought to justice.
“We know the attack had nothing to do with the film,” Clinton reportedly told Egyptian prime minister Hisham Kandil. “It was a planned attack, not a protest . . . Based on the information we saw today, we believe that the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al-Qaeda.”
Worse yet, Clinton called the prime minister of Libya on the night of the attack, explaining that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility, the National Review reported. Nevertheless, Clinton supporters claim it’s all part of a vast right-wing conspiracy designed to take Clinton down.
Additionally, a report at Breitbart said Clinton admitted she violated the law in the handling of embassy security. “Under patient but persistent questioning from Rep. Susan Brooks (R-IN), Clinton admitted that she had not signed a waiver for security arrangements on the site, as required by the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (SECCA), 22 USC § 4865 2(B)(ii),” Breitbart.com said.
Former CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Atkisson also had questions. “What do you make of Clinton telling public that spontaneous protesters were behind Benghazi attacks after she had already told her family in a private email that an al-Qaeda-like group was responsible?” she asked in two separate tweets. She had a number of other questions, but, it now looks as though the pro-Clinton media is set to give the Democratic front-runner a victory party at the expense of the truth.