Patterico's Pontifications

6/23/2014

Book: Hillary Told Obama Benghazi Cover Story Was Not Credible

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:33 am

Via Hot Air Headlines comes this piece titled Clinton bristled at Benghazi deception:

“Hillary was stunned when she heard the president talk about the Benghazi attack,” one of her top legal advisers said in an interview. “Obama wanted her to say that the attack had been a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an obscure video on the Internet that demeaned the Prophet Mohammed.”

This adviser continued: “Hillary told Obama, ‘Mr. President, that story isn’t credible. Among other things, it ignores the fact that the attack occurred on 9/11.’ But the president was adamant. He said, ‘Hillary, I need you to put out a State Department release as soon as possible.’”

After her conversation with the president, Hillary called Bill Clinton, who was at his penthouse apartment in the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, and told him what Obama wanted her to do.

“I’m sick about it,” she said, according to the legal adviser, who was filled in on the conversation.

This is all according to a new book by Edward Klein, who goes on to describe a conversation between Hillary and Bill (related by the adviser) in which they discussed how ridiculous the story was, and debated whether Hillary should resign over it. Ultimately, according to the book, she didn’t — and decided to put out the press release as requested by Obama.

It was a Hard Choice.

It’s hard to know what to make of this. Lefties will claim that the book is from right-wing Regnery Publishing. That is irrelevant, but the fact that this “adviser” is not named is of concern. If this person has the goods, he or she owes it to the American people to come forward.

Meanwhile, Hillary is telling Americans that the $100 million she and Bill have earned does not make them “truly well off”:

“But they don’t see me as part of the problem,” she protests, “because we pay ordinary income tax, unlike a lot of people who are truly well off, not to name names; and we’ve done it through dint of hard work,” she says, letting off another burst of laughter. If past form is any guide, she must be finding my question painful.

Via Ed Morrissey.

18 Responses to “Book: Hillary Told Obama Benghazi Cover Story Was Not Credible”

  1. She’s a Clinton, so you know it’s a lie. — Sammy Finkelman

    Truest thing Sammy has said here. But she might very well think that $100 million does not make her well off. Her appetites, ambitions and conceits can be telling her that she is an underachiever who married beneath herself.

    nk (dbc370)

  2. It’s hard to know what to make of this.

    If it’s an accurate characterization, then that ratchets up the level of disgust she deserves by at least 1,000 degrees, because she did tell at least one of the grieving parents of a soldier killed at Benghazi that they — meaning presumably her and rest of the US government — would do everything possible to get back at the producer of the video posted to Youtube. That sickening comment was appalling enough even if she truly believed a dumb video had inflamed the terrorists, but it goes way beyond human decency if she had the gall to say that to a bereaved family member if she knew her words were based on a totally false, 100%-BS premise.

    Mark (246552)

  3. Of course this is half truths and gossip and lies. Klein is not a serious person, and her book is “written” by an ambitious feminist politician!

    What’s interesting is all the negative press she is getting, as well as Obama. I think Rush L. is right: the left will destroy one of their own to save the ideology. Meanwhile, Elizabeth the Indian will sweep in to save the ideology.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  4. Anyone who can make tons of money on cattle futures in a very, very short period of time should be able to make 100′s of millions $ in 22 years, so, we know it has to be hard work. Not robbing from the poor or any other thing like Mitt did.

    Jim (145e10)

  5. So, the nasty cold-blooded bitch that smeared every woman who came forward with credible accusations of Bill Clinton’s of sexual abuse now wants to be seen as a passive victim of Benedict Obama’s treachery. She was just a team player, shocked and dismayed at Obama’s disingenuous fabrications, too loyal and too timid to speak up, someone who didn’t really intend to turn her back on brave men fighting for their lives. She didn’t prevent rescue attempts, she didn’t doom Americans to die at the hands of Islamic terrorists. Oh, no, not her. Some other Secretary of State did it.

    Hillary apologized to Muslims before she lied to the nation, before she lied straight-faced to the grieving parents as their sons’ flag draped coffins were carried off the airplanes. Hillary might not think it makes any difference, but others see a bit more clearly, and what they see is lipstick on a pig, nothing more than another filthy lie from the same old two-faced liar who’s been lying to the American people since the day she first appeared in the shadow of her husband’s ambition.

    ropelight (981ec9)

  6. This reads like a script for “House of Cards”. As crazy as it sounds, had she resigned on the spot upon being asked to lie about Benghazi back in 2012 she would be president by acclaimation in 2016. Instead of showing leadership she decided to follow her husband’s politically-expedient lead. She placed party ahead of country. There isn’t a lower thing to be said.

    Bugg (3a2abd)

  7. It’s hard to know what to make of this.

    First thing off, it’s not the truth.

    After studying it, my first approximation would be that:

    This whole thing is designed to:

    1) Sound true.

    2) Make her look better than Obama.

    3) Be rebuttable, if used against Hillary.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  8. I don’t believe her story about this as it is being crafted in her book that nobody’s reading. The only thing that gives it any credibility is that is that Susan Rice was apparently the only fool they could talk into going on all the Sunday shows–not somebody who was directly involved or could speak with first-hand knowledge or authority. Still, saying now that she tried to reason with Obama then ultimately backed off, sounds very self-serving and not very leader-y of Hilary.

    elissa (988c6d)

  9. The excerpt of the book I saw in the New York Post contains two obvious errors or half truths:

    1) It strongly implies that Obama had no basis for saying it was a spontaneous demonstration caused by a video.

    But I think maybe the Ansar al Sharia Facebook post he was informed about at 6:07 pm that night said just that. I have realized that nobody seems to have the text of that.

    The problem was Obama believing that.

    Hillary’s people are lying if they are implying Obama made it all up. It’s actually quite provable that he didn’t. The story did not originate in Washington. Hillary may not want to cast suspicion on the CIA and/or DNI Clapper, who probably sold Obama on this idea.

    2) It says that Hillary released a statement that blamed the attack on the video.

    Actually, it was much more carefully written than that, and she didn’t blame it on the video..

    The New York Times here has all the different statements:

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/09/12/us/politics/libya-statements.html?_r=0

    In her third paragraph, she said:

    Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.

    N.B. She did NOT endorse the idea that in fact the video had caused it, or even that the assailants said that’s why they were doing it, or that anybody in fact did.

    When Edward Klein (sorry, I think I said yesterday Ezra Klein) writes that

    And so, shortly after 10 o’clock on the night of September 11, she released an official statement that blamed the Benghazi attack on an “inflammatory [video] posted on the Internet

    ..

    He’s wrong!!!

    Of course, that may very well be what Hillary’s people told him, since that is what everybody;’s been saying. But she never endorsed it.

    She may did call Bill Clinton to discuss how to get out of this.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  10. elissa (988c6d) — 6/23/2014 @ 12:09 pm

    I don’t believe her story about this as it is being crafted in her book that nobody’s reading.

    Her book has got something a little bit different than this book.

    This book is intended for well-informed Republicans.

    It’s got different lies.

    up her savior, Bill Clinton.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  11. I think what’s in this book is not the truth, but it may be the second or third cousin of teh truth,

    She may indeed have felt trapped, and called up her savior, Bill Clinton.

    Still, saying now that she tried to reason with Obama then ultimately backed off, sounds very self-serving and not very leader-y of Hilary

    It is, but what’s really wrong with this version of events, is that, she didn’t endorse this idea, like the book says, but, with the help of Bill Clinton, carefully crafted a statement that finessed the issue!!

    That she doesn’t want to say.

    The book also seems to accuse Barack Obama of deliberately lying, rather than of being a fool.

    This is actually self-serving for Hillary because if Obama was getting bad advice and analysis, she’d have to explain why she didn’t argue more effectively, or call those advisers no good, or try to do something about them. It also an easier thing to say, since there are so many people that believe that anyway – that this spontaneous riot stimulated by a video about Mohammed was all made up in Washington.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  12. My guess is:

    Barack Obama did indeed want a statement that assumed the spontaneous attack stimulated by avideo was correct. Hillary Clinton did indeed object. she did not give her full reasons. She probably did indeed object that it happening on Sept. 11 was an indication maybe it wasn’t spontaneous. (she did not want to disagree with anyone else in the government)

    And Hillary Clinton indeed felt trapped.

    And she used her lifeline.

    She called up Bill Clinton.

    And Bill Clinton said: That story won’t hold up.

    Meaning she couldn’t get behind it. She’ll look bad.

    Now Hillary already thought this story won’t hold up. And said she told the President that, bit he wouldn’t listen to her.

    Bill Clinton again said it’s an impossible story. And maybe he couldn’t that Obama would say that.

    The thing was, Obama wanted some statement very soon.

    They discussed the idea of resigning. But they both quickly rejected that. Resigning might cause Barack Obama to lose the election, (the book says hurt his chances) and if that happened, Democrats would never forgive her, and she would not be able to win the 2016 nomination.

    The book says:

    Obama had put Hillary in a corner, and she and Bill didn’t see a way out

    But that’s WRONG!!!

    She and Bill did see a way out.

    It was walking a tightrope, but it was possible to avoid endorsing this spontaneous demonstration idea without making her non-endorsement obvious to Barack Obama.

    Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  13. * And said she told the President that, but he wouldn’t listen to her.

    Bill Clinton again said it’s an impossible story.

    And maybe he [also said that he] couldn’t [believe] that Obama would say that.

    Sammy Finkelman (5b302e)

  14. Bugg’s argument @11:33a that, had (Hillary) resigned on the spot upon being asked to lie about Benghazi back in 2012 she would be president by acclaimation in 2016 assumes she wasn’t already up to her chinny chin chin in collecting Libyan arms and recruiting Muslim fighters for transport to Syria. It also assumes she wasn’t already so deeply involved in maneuvering Ambassador Stevens et al into an unprotected and vulnerable position on the anniversary of 9/11 that any attempt to pretend otherwise wouldn’t have been every bit as obvious a self-serving fabrication as the fairy tale she eventually proclaimed to the world.

    ropelight (981ec9)

  15. …the $100 million she and Bill have earned does not make them “truly well off”:

    All right then, how much of that $100M do they have left?

    Blacque Jacques Shellacque (e817d3)

  16. elissa @9, I don’t believe her story either. But then when did I? Me, and a few million others who called BS right from the start.

    I am not a trusting individual. I tend not to walk into ambushes or fall for ruses.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Kormoran

    Steve57 (334088)

  17. 17. Steve57 (334088) — 6/23/2014 @ 1:52 pm

    elissa @9, I don’t believe her story either. But then when did I? Me, and a few million others who called BS right from the start.

    But you don’t understand hiw devious she is.

    First, that the version of her story was intended mostly for Republicans.

    The “Democratic” version is in her own book. What is in teh Edward Klein book is the “Republican” version. Naturally, she heerself does not get behind it – it is attributed to a “legal adviser” of Hillary Clinton.

    And theer are two significant things wrong with it.

    1) The spontaneous” natrure of the attack was not invented by Obama, but came from Ansar al Sharia. Although we may need a FOIA request to find that out.

    2) The Edward Klein book says Hillary felt trapped, talked it over with Bill Clinton, and she and Bill didn’t see a way out and she caved in. But actually, she did finesse the issue.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Kormoran

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2295 secs.