Hillary: GOP Exploits Dead of Benghazi

[DonViejo]

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi chapter

By MAGGIE HABERMAN | 5/30/14 5:07 AM EDT

Hillary Clinton offers a detailed account of the deadly attack on the American embassy in Benghazi — and a pointed rebuttal to Republican critics who’ve laced into her over the incident — in a much-anticipated chapter of her forthcoming book, “Hard Choices,” obtained by POLITICO.

“Those who exploit this tragedy over and over as a political tool minimize the sacrifice of those who served our country,” Clinton writes in the gripping chapter, “Benghazi: Under Attack.”

Casting doubt on the motivations of congressional Republicans who have continued to investigate the attacks, including with an upcoming House select committee, Clinton continues: “I will not be a part of a political slugfest on the backs of dead Americans. It’s just plain wrong, and it’s unworthy of our great country. Those who insist on politicizing the tragedy will have to do so without me.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/hillary-clintons-benghazi-chapter-107240.html#ixzz33EXkRXhz

[Turbineguy]

1. Yes, but the GOP isn't picky

they'll exploit any death.

[Beacool]

2. She's correct.

I don't mean to be callous and I'm sorry that four people died, but what happened in Benghazi pales in comparison with the hundreds of thousands who died under Bush, if one includes the civilian deaths of both wars, plus 9/11/01 and the 13 Benghazi like attacks at diplomatic posts that took place during Bush's time in office.

The latest investigation will be the 9th in less than two years. What do these Republicans expect to find out that hasn't been already explored to death????

[karynnj]

3. It is beyond annoying, but the silver cloud might be that by 2016, Benghazi is SO discredited

that mentioning it has the same impact as "Vince Foster" --- ie it immediately discredits the person speaking of it.

No Republican has ever explained how their theories make sense.

For the complete loonies who think the administration either caused it in some way or purposely avoided saving them, they need to explain how a tragedy like this is positive for a campaign.

For the borderline loonies who think redefining the motive (to anger at a film) changes the American reaction.

[Beacool]

6. Funny you should mention Vince Foster.

There are some who still insist that the Clintons had him killed, as if they were rulers in Renaissance Europe and could dispose of anyone at will. It defies reason, but that's their standard MO.

The people who put out all these conspiracies know perfectly well that they are not true. They just want to rile their base and they know that many of them will believe anything against people they despise, no matter how outlandish the charges.

The same is going on now. Some will go to their grave believing that Obama and Hillary allowed the ambassador and the other three to die on purpose, that help was at hand but that none was deployed.

It's crazy.......

[karynnj]

7. I chose Foster, because it is hard to find a less credible charge against the Clintons

My point is that the impact is to take a tragedy and something that was a low point for the administration and convert it (bizarrely) to something actually hurts the Republicans if they try to use it.

[Beacool]

8. I got your point, I'm agreeing with it.

If she does run, it's their insane reaction to anything Clinton that will doom them in 2016. The hate is so visceral that it blinds them to reason and they always overreach (as they did in the 90s). That will be to her benefit in a general election. People are not as stupid as the Right assumes them to be.

[kairos12]

4. I believe their goal to be to get her on the stand and get her to say

something in a "gotcha" moment. They want the equivalent visual of Dukakis on the tank to do in her election bid.

[Beacool]

5. then, they will fail.

Hillary has been battling the Right since her days as first lady of Arkansas. They can try to swift boat her at their peril. She's no push-over.