With Tina Fey determined to continue her one woman backlash against women's rights, you had to look elsewhere for the chuckles. The biggest came via Adam Vs. The Man's video of Adam Kokesh in DC asking people who attended the inauguration why they voted for Barack Obama. One woman gave a concrete reason (he saved her job, she works for Chrysler). The others couldn't and when asked about his Drone War tended to get angry. They can vote for him, they just flee when confronted with what he actually is.
Confronting what people actually are could have been the theme of last week. For example, Wednesday we attended the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing and the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified at.
As has been noted many times before, in 2008, we decided on Hillary as our choice for the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. Some said we'd drank the Kool-Aid. We begged to differ. Last week, we wrote "Iraq snapshot," "Iraq snapshot" and "20 are still at risk says Hillary in an aside (Ava)" as we reported on the hearing. Not our first criticism of Hillary since 2008 but definitely our harshest and she earned every word uttered plus the criticism offered in Wally's "Facts matter, Hillary (Wally)," Ruth's "Like watching Richard Nixon come back to life" and Kat's "Can she not answer even one damn question?" -- and actually a great deal more.
Instead of criticism, the mainstream media elected to offer fawning. To do that, they had to lie. They also had to reduce their coverage to just one hearing. Of all the bad coverage, the worse was when Diane Rehm and her panel of gas bags got together for the first hour of Friday's The Diane Rehm Show -- or, considering all the gas passed, Diane Rehm's Power Hour of Gas.
Whatever they were serving up, it wasn't truth. Diane's gas bags were Time's Michael Scherer, The Wall Street Journal's Jerry Seib and The New York Times' Sheryl Gay Stolberg.
Diane Rehm: All right. And let's turn to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's testimony yesterday. What did she have to say about Benghazi, Jerry?
Jerry Seib: It was really a day of dramatics but not a lot of new substance really. I mean, she essentially defended the position that the department took, conceded some mistakes before Benghazi in the way some security issues were handled. She got criticized for the administration's response which was expected, got criticized for allowing UN Ambassador Susan Rice to go on TV and talk about it as a spontaneous demonstration rather than a preplanned attack. But I think she rebutted that criticism pretty effectively...
Diane Rehm: How? How?
Settle down, Diane, "how" will wait. Let's instead correct the first lie. She "got criticized for allowing UN Ambassador Susan Rice to go on TV and talk about it as a spontaneous demonstration rather than a pre-planned attack." Hillary was asked and made clear that she did not select Susan Rice to be the person to go on TV and present the administration's talking points. Yes, even Hillary referred to them as the White House's "talking points." And she also testified, "I wasn't involved in the talking points process." Why would anyone criticize Hillary for allowing Rice to go on TV when Hillary made clear that she was not part of that decision?
For the record, she was not criticized for allowing Rice to go on TV.
Jerry Seib wasn't present for Hillary's testimony and doesn't care enough to know what happened before opening his big yap.
Jerry Seib: Mostly by saying there were questions then right after the attack that are still -- aren't answered today about what exactly happened that night, where the crowd came from, who joined in and how preplanned it was. And I think, you know, as I said earlier before the show and we're chatting, I think she gave as good as she got overall, and that's, I think, the way she walked away from her last big event as secretary of state.
How do you interpret Seib's first sentence? "Mostly by saying there were questions then right after the attack that are still -- aren't answered today about what exactly happened that night, where the crowd came from, who joined in and how preplanned it was." If you remember, one of the lies in the aftermath of the September 11, 2012 attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi and the CIA Annex -- the attack that resulted in the deaths of Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, Chris Stevens and Tyrone Woods -- was that it was a protest and people joined the protest to disrupt and it turned into an attack and blah, blah, blah.
Doesn't Jerry Seib seem to be harkening back to that lie? That's because he's a damn liar. Even his name's a lie. It's "Gerry" because his first name is "Gerald."
There was no protest. Hillary made that clear in her testimony, Senators made it clear in their remarks, it was made clear December 19th in the [PDF format warning] unclassified report on the investigation led by former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Retired General Mike Mullen (former Chair of the Joint Chiefs) and it was made clear in the December 31st [PDF format warning] "Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi" issued by the Senate Committee On Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
There are no questions abuot whether it was preplanned. Most people are not cruising the block at 9:40 at night with RPGs in the back seat.
Diane was ready to move on, we're not. When we were sitting in the Senate hearing on Wednesday, did we see Jerry Seib? No, we didn't. Because he wasn't there. How nice for him that he's so talented he can have breakfast with US House Rep Paul Ryan and -- via osmosis? -- still know what's going on in a hearing that's taking place at the same time.
Diane wanted Michael Scherer to speak.
Michael Scherer: You know, one of the things that was clear during the campaign when Benghazi became an issue was that this was, in public discussion, more of a political issue than it was a substantive issue. The intelligence committee was doing a review. They were trying to find out what had gone wrong, the process of finding the people who did this and figuring out what should change at the State Department was going forward. Nobody disputed that, but there was a political fight over whether, first, the president and his senior staff should be blamed for this, and second, whether they had tried to cover it up for political reasons during the campaign by saying this was just a spontaneous demonstration. I think what came out of Secretary Clinton's testimony was that she was able to sort of definitively say, politics is done. Let's move beyond politics.
When she was screaming like a crazy person, she appeared to be asking that America move beyond something.
Michael Scherer: And there's one point where she sort of exploded at one Republican senator who asked her about, you know, whether the White House should have been more forthcoming about what the cause of the attack was immediately after and whether there was a cover-up. And she said, what difference does it matter at this point? Four Americans are dead. We're trying to solve this. And the reality is politics is kind of moving on. The election is over.
Here's the full exchange Scherer's badly summarizing.
Senator Ron Johnson: Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary, I'd like to join my colleagues in thanking your for service sincerely and also I appreciate the fact that you're here testifying and glad that you're looking in good health.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Thank you.
Senator Ron Johnson: Did you, were you fully aware of -- again, I realize how big your job is, you know everything's erupting in the Middle East this time. Were you fully aware of these 20 incidents reported in the ARP in real time? I mean --
Secretary Hillary Clinton: I-I was aware of the ones that were brought to my attention. They were part of, uh, our ongoing discussion about the um-um deteriorating threat environment in uh eastern Libya uh, we certainly were, uh, very conscience of them was assured by our security professionals that, uh, repairs were underway additional security upgrades in place.
Senator Ron Johnson: Okay. Thank you. Did you see personally the cable on -- I believe it was August 12th -- specifically asking for basically reinforcements for the-the security detail that was going to be evacuating -- or leaving -- in August? Did you see that personally?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: No, sir.
Senator Ron Johnson: Okay. Uhm, when you read the ARB, it strikes me, uh, how certain the people were that the attacks started 9:40 pm Benghazi time. When was the first time you spoke to, or have you ever spoken to, the returnees, the evacuees? Did you personally speak to those folks?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: I've spoken to, uh, one of them but I waited until after the ARP had done its investigation because I did not want there to be [laughing] any issue that I had spoken to anyone before the ARP conducted its investigation.
Senator Ron Johnson: How many people were evacuated from Libya?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Uhm. Well, you, uh, the numbers are a little bit hard to pin down because of our other friends --
Senator Ron Johnson: Approximately?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Approximately 25 to 30.
Senator Ron Johnson: Uh, did anybody in the State Dept talk to those folks shortly afterwards?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Uh, there was discussion going on uh-uh afterwards. But once the investigation started, the FBI spoke to them before we spoke to them and so other than our people in Tripoli which -- I think you're talking about Washington, right?
Senator Ron Johnson: Yeah. Yeah. The point I'm making is a very simple phone call to these individuals I think would have ascertained immediately that there was no protest prior to this. I mean this attack started at 9:40 p.m. Benghazi time. It was an assault and I appreciate the fact that you called it an assault. But I mean, I'm going back to then, Ambassador Rice five days later going to the Sunday shows and what I would say purposefully misleading the American public.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Well, Senator --
Senator Ron Johnson: Why-why-why wasn't that known? And, again, I appreciate the fact that the transparency of this hearing but why weren't we transparent at that point and time?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Well, first of all, Senator, I would say that once the assault happened and once we got our people rescued out, our most immediate concern was, number one, taking care of their injuries because, as I said, I still have a DSA agent still at Walter Reed seriously injured, getting them into Frankfurt-Ramstein to get taken care of, the FBI going over immediately to talk to them, we did not think it was appropriate for us to talk to them before the FBI conducted their interviews. And we did not -- I think this is accurate, sir -- I certainly did not know of any reports that contradicted the IC talking points at the time that Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows. And, you know, I just want to say that, uhm, you know, people have, uh, accused Ambassador Rice and the administration of, uh, misleading the Americans, I can say trying to be in the middle of this and understanding what was going on, nothing could be further from the truth. Was information developing? Was the situation fluid? Would we reach conclusions later that weren't reached initially and I appreciate --
Senator Ron Johnson: But, Madam Secretary, do you disagree with me that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determine what happened wouldn't have ascertained what happened immediately that there was no protest? I mean that was -- that was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: But Senator, again --
Senator Ron Johnson: -- within hours, if not days.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Senator, I, you know, when you're in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process going --
Senator Ron Johnson: I understand, I realize ---
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Number two --
Senator Ron Johnson: -- that's a good excuse.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: No, it's a fact. Number two, I would recommend highly you read both what the ARB said about it and the classified ARB because even today there are questions being raised. Now, we have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people, but what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing --
Senator Ron Johnson: No, no, no.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: -- is still -- is still --
Senator Ron Johnson: Again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and then something sprang out of that -- an assault sprang out of that -- and that was easily --
Secretary Hillary Clinton: But-but --
Senator Ron Johnson: -- ascertained that that was not the fact.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: But-but --
Senator Ron Johnson: -- and the American people could have known that within days and they didn't know that.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans!
Senator Ron Johnson: I understand.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who 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 to do everything we can to prevent it from every 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. The IC has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out 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 then to find them and then maybe we'll figure out what was going on in the meantime.
Senator Ron Johnson: Okay, thank you Madam Secretary.
The sound bites from the hearing were taken from that exchange. It wasn't that long of an exchange and the American people would have been served better to have witnessed the full exchange and not just the snippets. Supposedly Hillary always gets a bum rap.
That's a lie. It's always been a lie. Anytime Hillary protects a man, she gets good press. When she was lying for Bill, she got good press. When she lies for Barack, she gets good press. She did not deserve good press for Wednesday. Back to Diane and company.
Michael Scherer: You know, the White House has admitted that, you know, they could have done better in communicating some of this. But there is no question now that the State Department is making changes to make sure this doesn't happen again.
Diane Rehm: But politics for 2016 --
Michael Scherer: That's right.
Diane Rehm: -- is just beginning, Michael.
Michael Scherer: No. And actually, for political reporters like me, that was the most interesting part of watching this testimony. Hillary Clinton is really without match on the public stage in terms of her ability to perform in those situations. She's under enormous pressure there. She was in complete control not only of the facts but her emotions during the whole event. And this is a hearing which, at one point, she was crying and another point, she's yelling. But there's sort of like a master-at-work feel to the whole thing. And it -- and she really, I think, acquitted herself very well going forward if she does decide to run.
Bill Clinton surpasses Hillary on the political stage. And Wednesday, Hillary reminded so many of why that is.
But Michael's nonsense? He explains it. "Political reporters like me." Yeah, he really needs to have Hillary in that 2016 race -- probably so he can beat up on her again.
And four years from now, he might care about the fact that, during the hearing, she noted that currently there are 20 US diplomatic posts around the world which do not have adequate security. She didn't ask for extra money, her Department hasn't asked for extra money. But we guess someone considers that 'doing her job.' Us? We don't.
If there are currently 20 facilities without proper security, that needs to be the sole focus of the State Dept until they can get a request through to Congress. And until that happens, the Secretary of State should get approval from President Barack Obama to use as many extra Marines as thought needed
to protect those outposts.
For Hillary Clinton to appear before Congress Wednesday, four months after the attack on Bengahzi, and announce that 20 facilities still do not have proper security was for her to confess that she's not done her job.
Jerry Seib: You know, I was just gonna, add as a footnote perhaps, that if you actually care about the substance of this issue, I think one of the things that was disappointing in that long day of hearings was how little discussion there was about what happens going forward. In other words, there is a real question here. If your top priority is simply to defend the security of American diplomats, how do those diplomats do their jobs? You can't be a diplomat in a fortress. And that's a really difficult question.
Oh, who poked his cage? We just pointed out a real question, Jerry was too busy stuffing his fat face and chatting up Paul Ryan to attend the hearing. If he had been there, he might have known that serious questions were asked but Hillary just wasn't going to address them.
For example, Ranking Member Bob Corker asked her three times in one round of questioning a basic question. The Benghazi attack came after Stevens and others had recommended and requested additional security but been turned down. Charlene Lamb was held out to the public as the fall guy and the administration insisted she had been fired. Reality, as pointed out in the hearing, no one has been fired. Americans were lied to yet again. Hillary attempted to weasel out of it by insisting it's really hard to fire people at the State Department.
But Corker wanted to know what had been done in the last four months to ensure that if State Dept security requests were made, the requests would rise to the level of Secretary of State so that the person in that position would be aware of them.
Three times he asked. Never once did Hillary answer.
For those who missed it -- like Jerry Seib -- we'll include that exchange in full.
Ranking Member Bob Corker: To my knowledge, no one has been held accountable. Our staff had a meeting with one of the State Dept officials and I hate to use this word again but it was nothing short of bizarre as they talked about the communications. These officials were screaming out for more security. And I was just wondering if you might mention one reform that would be helpful so that you would have known of the needs of security that went undone.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Well obviously, I have, uh, thought about this almost constantly since that date, Senator, uhm, you know I do feel responsible. I feel responsible for, uh, the nearly 70,000 people that work for the State Dept. You know, I take it very seriously. Uhm, the-the specific security requests, uhm, pertaining to Benghazi, you know, were handled by the security professionals in the department. I didn't see those requests. Uh, they didn't come to me. I didn't approve them. I didn't deny them. That's obviously one of the findings that Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen made -- that these requests don't ordinarily come to the Secretary of State.
Ranking Member Bob Corker: If we could -- I know -- I respect you tremendously but we have short amount of time. They did come in to folks.
Secretary Hillary Clinton: That's right.
Ranking Member Bob Corker: We did have SST people on the ground at no cost to the State Dept. They were asked to be extended by the ambassador. Someone at the State Dept turned that down. They were at no charge -- 16 officers. So I just wonder, what has happened inside to make sure that never happens again?
Secretary Hillary Clinton: Well -- uh -- several things. Not only are we, uhm, on the path to implement all of the ARB recommendations but we've gone beyond that. Uhm, we did, uh, immediately do this high threat assessment using DoD assets as well as our own. That had never been done before. Uh, we have asked the Congress to help us, uh, reallocate funds. The Senate has given us that authority -- we-we don't yet have it from the House -- so that we can get more Marine guards, we can get more diplomatic security guards, we can try to put more money into the maintenance, the upgrades, the construction that's needed. I created the first ever -- it sounds like it should have been done years ago -- but first ever Department Deputy Assistant Secretary for High Threats. I'm also recommending that there be a regular process that includes the secretaries and the deputies in these decisions because nobody wants to sit where I am and have to think now about what coulda-woulda-shoulda happened in order to avoid this. Now, as I said, we've had 19 ARBS. Only two have ever been unclassified. The one coming out of the East Africa bombings where there was full transparency, there was a set of recommendations, many of which have been implemented, along with recommendations from other ARBS. But this Committee never had a public hearing about the 17 other ARBS because they were classified. So we're-we're-we're putting into action, steps that we think will help the next Secretary be able to make these decisions, be part of these decisions, have more insight into what is going on and we would, obviously, welcome the opportunity to work closely with a subcommittee or a set of members to make sure that that's what's happening.
You see her answering anywhere in there? Nope. She never answers the question. It's a basic one and Corker asks it three times.
Must be too much for a "political reporter" like Mike Scherer to notice either. It's rather frightening and it's actually news but then "political reporters" only care about horse races.
Jerry Seib: And it's not that anybody has the right answer, but there's gonna have to be a new balance struck and it's really hard. And that ought to have some airtime, too, not just the looking-backwards part.
Senators (and House Reps) gave that time in the hearings, in both hearings, but, Jerry, you'd have to attend the hearings to know that.
Diane Rehm: And how much money is the Congress willing to devote to protecting diplomats abroad?
Jerry Seib: Right. And that was an element in the hearings as well. The Congress has cut back on the State Department's request for diplomatic security funding. There was some debate. And Secretary Clinton didn't make a big deal out of that. She acknowledged it. But she didn't say that's the reason this tragedy happened. She just acknowledged there's plenty of blame to go around.
Jer, the reason she "didn't make a big deal out of that" is because diplomatic missions are supposed to be protected by the Marines. But the outsourcing trend begun under Bully Boy Bush continues. If she made too big of a deal out of it, the House and Senate might have made that point a little more clear. Even so, it was raised by members of Congress in the hearings which -- again, you did not attend.
Diane Rehm: Sheryl.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg: Yes, I agree with what Michael said. It really was a masterful performance. I think Hillary Clinton effectively put this Benghazi issue to rest. The election is over, as you said. Susan Rice has not, you know, has already been blocked. She addressed questions by saying, look, we're implementing the accountability board's recommendations, and we're going beyond them. She appointed a deputy secretary for high-threat posts and -- but more important, for herself, she demonstrated herself to be a forceful leader yet someone who also could show emotion without falling apart, an essential ingredient for any woman to run for president.
"It really was a masterful performance." Well thank you, theater critic, Sheryl Gay Stolberg. Any chance we could hear from the reporter or is that not your dominant personality?
Instead of trying to predict what might happen in 2016, you think Diane and her gas bags might have taken the time to tell listeners what actually took place in the hearing? Is every news topic to be reduced to their musings?
Far be it from us to pull Diane Rehm off her fact-free diet but she needs to stop kidding herself that she's offering anything of value. In fact, by the end of the hour, we were asking the question Jane (Eliza Coupe) asked recently on Happy Endings, "Seriously, did you power wash this place with farts?" ("Ordinary Extraordinary Love" written by Daniel Chun).
As if everything that went down last week wasn't bad enough, the funniest and tightest sitcom on TV didn't air. Happy Endings was praise worthy from the start. In its second season it only got better and in its third season it's Must See TV But On ABC (Tuesday nights).
Adam Pally, Casey Wilson and Damon Wayans Jr. were perfection from episode one as Max, Penny and Brad. Elisha Cuthbert was on strong ground with Wayans but lost at other times as Jane when the show started. She's now hitting every note and special praise to wardrobe and hair because Cuthbert is a knock out. Elisha Cuthbert's Alex was a serious problem. Season two found Alex dumb -- really dumb, we're talking Joey Tribbiani dumb.
This season, a pop star shops at Alex's clothing store and Penny walks in as the singer is leaving.
Penny: Oh my God! Oh my God! I'm gonna die.
Alex: Me too! I mean we all are. But why are we talking about that now? It's sad.
This is a woman who puts up what she swears "is an ergonomic work hammock" even after Penny informs her it's a sex swing.
All of that and a funny Dave! Tuesday night Happy Endings returns on ABC with two episodes. How great it will be to laugh at the intentionally funny.
