So, by now we all know that Hillary Clinton is a liar, right? Republicans know. Bernie supporters know. Do Hillary supporters know it? If you don’t know it, I think it says something about the state of American media. With Hillary closing in on the rigged Democratic Party nomination, I think it is a good idea to review a few of her famous lies and why it makes a difference.
Let’s start with the whole Bosnian sniper fire episode. Hillary claimed not once, but many times that her 1996 visit overseas trip was fraught with danger. So, her excuse of “mis-speaking” because she was just tired doesn’t hold water. Why would Hillary make such a claim? Wouldn’t she know there would be proof to counter her claim?
First, Hillary was running for POTUS against Obama when this story first came to light. When she started telling it, she was the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party. It was her turn, she had the Clinton name, she did a stint as a carpetbagging Senator for New York. Perhaps she felt the story would burnish her foreign policy image and that it would draw a contrast to Obama’s thin resume. Whatever Hillary’s reason, the story was a planned campaign theme. So, this particular lie was purposely deceitful and told repeatedly. If Hillary has no problem planning a lie on such an inconsequential event, you can likely surmise that she has no problems lying any time it fits her agenda. Couple that with the arrogance of her campaign to expect the heavily tilted news media to cover her tracks and you can see why she felt safe in telling the lie. Clinton’s mistakes in 2008 were many, including not recognizing the role modern technology would have in dispersing old lies to new audiences and also not seeing that the media had found a new shiny object in Obama, which meant their loyalties shifted. This lie matters. She has no problems falsifying a story, repeating it and then was either too arrogant or not smart enough to realize it could boomerang.
For Benghazi, the lie is not about the questionable inaction to beef security there prior to the Sept. 11, 2012 attack. There are ample questions around judgement on that front. The problems come in the cover up of the attack and the use of a video to deliberately confuse and mislead the American public. A great review of the timeline of the cover up can be found here. Lee masterfully breaks down the lawyerizing of public statements to ensure the adminstration, including Clinton, could play both sides of the story.
The video story was a lie in that great deception was used to generate doubt in the mind of the public. The most obvious reason for this was to be able to continue the Obama re-election storyline that Al-Qaeda was decimated. It would have been damaging to have the last month of the election focused on a terror attack on an American consulate that was only there due to Obama’s own brand of imperialist interventionism. Hillary’s involvement in the cover up includes the lie of omission. She refers to militants in her official statement, but spends quite a bit of time after that talking about a video. In front of the coffins, she tells the families of the Benghazi victims that a video is to blame. She never mentions Al-Qaeda or Ansar Al Sharia by name at any time to the public in order to maintain the ruse. When the family members called her out, Clinton continued to lie. The whole affair shows not just questionable judgement over security, but an elaborate effort to omit and alter the truth for personal gain even to the faces of victims’ families. If it were not for the investigation into Benghazi (the failure of Obama to hold either the House or Senate for Dems), we would not know about the home brew server and whole new list of lies.
The saga that is Hillary’s personal email is confusing on many fronts. Most Americans are not IT security experts, nor are they experts in Federal regulations. Hillary’s ever-changing list of excuses on the use of private email only muddies the picture even more. One thing is certain, The FBI, which reports up through the President, is conducting a criminal investigation. Even if Hillary is not prosecuted by the DOJ which has a conflict of interest in the matter, the lack of transparency and lack of common sense should be considered a big disqualifier in the minds of voters.
A timeline of the saga through January of this year is done by intrepid reporter, Sharyl Attkisson. Among the lies Clinton has told during this affair, the largest has to be in dealing with classified material. Let’s forget for a moment the stupidity of being the Secretary of State for the U.S.A. and choosing to do all business on a private, unsecured server. Let’s consider one of Hillary’s arguments that she never sent or received classified material at her private server. Now, we already know that is a lie with some of the content even being higher than classified. However, Hillary has admitted doing all of her business on the private server. She would have us believe that as Secretary of State, she never saw or handled classified information electronically. I guess she considers blatant incompetence to willfull espionage. Hillary’s ever changing story for her email server shows desperation. She even got so desperate that she apologized. Yet, her charade continues because the whole use of private email might hide even bigger scandals.
Lies Should Matter
Considering Hillary’s additional baggage with Watergate, Whitewater, cattle futures, White House furniture, Travelgate, Filegate, speaking fees, Norman Hsu, and attacking the victims of Bill’s abuse of power, it is little wonder she resorts to outright lies, omission, and obstruction. She has shown a willingness to plan the lies, to tell them repeatedly to the public, to tell more lies in support of her initial lie, and to rely on a tightrope of legalease, complicit media and partisan supporters to get away with it all. Her motivation for such deception is to enrich her personal fortune or stature. She has shown terrible judgement when actually holding a political position. She has likely committed crimes worthy of federal prison and may be the most corrupt politician of all-time. It’s worthy of debate.