Hillary Clinton Storms Fox News And Blows Up Their Biggest Benghazi Lie

[riversedge]

Source: politicususa





By Jason Easley on Sun, Jul 31st, 2016 at 1:01 pm




Fox News tried to push their Benghazi lies during an interview with Hillary Clinton only to see their conspiracy get blown to bits by the Democratic nominee.


Video:

Transcript via Fox News Sunday:

WALLACE: One reason that people question your account, and this gets to the important question of trust, is because that day at Andrews, you never talked about terrorism. You talked about the video.
............................

Fox’s big lie about Benghazi has always been that Hillary Clinton blamed a video and not terrorism, but a close look at her emails and statements reveal that Clinton was talking about two different things. In the days after the attacks, she never blamed the video for the attacks. At the same time, her emails were calling the attacks terrorism.

Her emails and statements were different because the US government didn’t have confirmation in the immediate aftermath of the attack that it was terrorism. It would have been reckless and irresponsible for the Sec. of State to label the attack terrorism without evidence.

Hillary Clinton went on Fox News and broke the backbone of the right’s Benghazi conspiracy theory into tiny pieces. The Democratic nominee showed that behind Fox News’s tough talk is a network that presents no challenge to her. Clinton gave a fairly dominant interview on Fox, as once again, the network talked a big game, but was schooled by a superior Democrat.

Read more: http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/31/hillary-clinton-storms-fox-news-blows-biggest-benghazi-lie.html

---

Lots of dialogue and a video at the link.


Chris Wallace was no match for the truth

[OhZone]

1. I never understood -

Why the cause was so important. We were attacked. Maybe it was partly the video. Maybe it had nothing to do with it. Maybe there were multiple motivations.

Weren't there protests going on all over the middleast about the video?

[Zambero]

4. It was not important

An act of terror is an act of terror. The reason why the GOP feigned outrage is two-fold:

The video in question attacking Islam came from the religious right. This would not make them look good.

and

The GOP Congress had not acted on proposed legislation to bolster security at embassies and consulates. Once again, given the tragedy that occurred, the GOP needed to shift the blame for something that might have been preventable.

Also worth noting is that the GOP was looking for opportunities to pin anything and everything on Hillary, sensing that she would run again in 2016. The first Benghazi hit was on Obama during the 2012 campaign. But Romney wandered into a rope-a-dope during the second debate and that was that.

With the 2012 in the bag for Obama, the heir apparent scapegoat was now Hillary. Any question of whether this might not be politically motivated is dashed when examining the Bush-Cheney record of 13 embassy/consulate terrorist attacks and 60+ deaths during the previous administration, At the time, Congress did not drop everything and pursue a partisan investigation of these attacks. There was one of them after another, and the sentiment was "well, too bad, but we all know it's a dangerous world out there for our State Dept folks in those places....".

[Blackjackdavey]

35. Another reason

I believe another factor may be that the operations at the annex were at the minimum classified and at the worst highly sensitive -- and their are right wingers in the know. Therefore, they knew that the Obama administration was never going to be in a position to thoroughly and wholeheartedly debunk the right's narrative because it would require disclosure of things that can't be disclosed. I think it was a set up in that regard which is why Romney was so smug as he knew Obama was unable to tell the whole truth.

[IronLionZion]

16. There were both, and several groups of people

People were protesting the video. People were also protesting other local political stuff. And there were also some murderous terrorists who decided to use that chaos as cover to launch attacks on Americans.

Bad people have always hijacked legitimate causes as a means to do bad things. Terrorists hijack protests all the time. Many times they even target the protesters.

[C_U_L8R]

2. You just can't reason with stupid or spiteful

And good lord the Republicans have believed enough of their own bullshit.
It's like a mass psychosis.

But I am so proud and impressed at Hillary Clinton's courageousness

[ailsagirl]

3. Gross Cognitive Dissonance

Congeniality bias (also referred to as confirmation bias) refers to how people read or access information that affirms their already established opinions, rather than referencing material that contradicts them.[23] For example, a person who is politically right-leaning might only watch news commentary that is from conservative news sources just as left-leaning individuals might only watch news commentary from progressive news sources. This bias is particularly apparent when someone is faced with deeply held beliefs, i.e., when a person has 'high commitment' to their attitudes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. cocksure

[jcgoldie]

32. Nice Russell quote

Describes Donald J. Trump to a tee.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. Misunderstanding the scientific process = confirmation bias

Many people think that Science works by making theories and trying to find evidence to prove them.

So they apply this principle in their lives: create or hear a position on an issue and look for supporting evidence.

But, actually, Science works the opposite way. Scientists make theories and then try to disprove them. If a theory stands after repeated efforts to disprove it, then it becomes more widely accepted, but is never considered absolutely and truly proven. Even Newton's theory of gravitation was found flawed (incomplete) when Einstein's theory probed it near limit conditions.

So it is in life. Atheists often know more about religion than religious people (more than the average christian for example). Democrats, liberals, and progressives are more likely to visit Republican, conservative websites than the other way around.

[emulatorloo]

5. Excellent. That embedded clip is the full interview, she was funny, informed, well reasoned replies

Brilliant warm empathetic.

[BigDemVoter]

6. What a stupid, stupid, stupid man.

Did he really think he would be a match to argue constitutional law with a lawyer from Yale? Seriously?

[TexasBushwhacker]

14. His dad must spin in his grave regularly n/t

[malcolmboeing]

39. Yale

That's why I could never understand how she failed the bar exam.

[BigDemVoter]

40. She didn't.

Welcome to DU. Where are you coming from?

[malcolmboeing]

42. Clinton bar exam

I read her book years ago before I came to America and I thought she said she had failed the bar.

I am from Copenhagen Denmark. I moved to America in 2007 and I have recently become a proud American citizen. I will admit to being much more liberal then Hillary Clinton. In fact I think the crazy billionaire is more liberal then Hillary in many ways. I won't be voting for him however!

[malcolmboeing]

43. Google

I googled it and found this fascinating result: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4709795
This sure was a wild place back then.

[Rex]

7. It is all the GOP has, if Socknews was no more their party would be a small fringe group of radicals

Glad she corrected their RWing bullshit spin.

[vinny9698]

8. If Clinton can take on Wallace, why can't Trump take on Maddow.

This just shows how well prepared is Clinton. Can you imagine a Maddow/Trump interview. He couldn't handle Megan on Fox. Trump is so unprepared and refuses to even work on getting prepared. A male version of Palin.

[griloco]

11. Red Don the Betrayer is a weak, soft punk

[-Steph-]

21. Unless I've missed it, I haven't seen Trump have one single hard-hitting interview yet.

[Iliyah]

28. Because T-rump's interviews consists of belittling.

[jcgoldie]

33. John Dickerson has come closest to holding his feet to the fire but...

He's almost impossible to pin down because he turns everything into word salad and just spews nonsense stream of consciousness.

[louis-t]

41. Just like Palin was.

Certain questions are always asked of candidates, and neither was ever prepared for them. "I read all the newspapers."

[fleabiscuit]

12. K&R

[Bluestar]

13. That was a great interview n/t

[unitedwethrive]

30. It sure was!

[sheshe2]

15. KnR!

[TheBlackAdder]

17. FOX needed to use Bill O'Reilly, so he would interrupt Hillary every 10th word, like with Obama.

.


I bet you that's the reason why O'Reilly wasn't chosen, because it would give FOX very very bad optics.


.

[Wounded Bear]

19. O'Lielly doesn't interrupt every 10 words...

It's more like 5 or 6.

[jg10003]

18. Hillary is so much better at interviews and forums than she is at making speeches

[-Steph-]

20. Hillary was a class act during that interview.

Even though the questions were clearly framed in such a way to attempt to make any answer that was given look bad, Hillary handled herself very well.

[oberliner]

22. Contrast that with the Brian Kilmeade interview of Trump

"Does it bother you that everyone keeps going after you with personal attacks?"

[-Steph-]

23. It's one of the reasons why I'm so looking forward to the debates...

People are used to seeing him doing these softball interviews. Any difficult questions he encounters, he deflects/evades/lies and is rarely held accountable by the interviewer. The debates will be different and I'm looking forward to seeing him get hammered in real-time by Hillary.

[The Second Stone]

25. He won't do them. Even he has to see how highly prepared she is

and know by now that push back in the room within one minute he will look like a low energy Jeb Bush that lies like a Trump.

[-Steph-]

26. I've been reading that he's already been trying to invent issues with the debates.

I can definitely see why his team wouldn't want him going within a thousand feet of a debate against Hillary. I'm hoping his narcissistic tendencies prevail though and keep him from cowering in the corner like the little weasel he is.

[The Second Stone]

27. It's going to be a huge trainwreck. Trump is decades behind in preparation

and even Bush the Stupider will look like Cicero by comparison.

[radical noodle]

29. If what his ghostwriter of The Art of the Deal says is true

then he cannot prepare because he has the attention span of a puppy. Can you imagine trying to school someone for a debate if they can't sit still or listen any longer than a few seconds without interrupting and/or getting annoyed with the entire process?

[The Second Stone]

24. Hillary Clinton is highly intelligent and very hard working and exceptionally trained

She goes into an interview, or testimony, utterly prepared. We saw that with health care in 1993. She is the most prepared person in the room. Always. Even on the bullshit stuff. She has to be.

Fox, Wallace and the Republicans should have figured out by now that Clinton is going to destroy Trump in November, and if Trump is brave enough to go to a debate, at every debate. She is not going to do an Obama vs. Romney, where Obama was underprepared for one of the debates (sorry Bams, but you know it is true, and when he was very aggressive, you weren't prepared to deal with it). Clinton is going to be ready.

She is going to win, and Trump is going to have negative coattails. Demographics are going to end the pandering to old, white conservatives increasingly in each state, and each district, all across the country in the coming years. As a result, the unholy alliance between business and racists will come apart. Those business people will seek to dominate a different party. They will seek to dominate the Democratic Party with their money. That can be countered with actual votes and activists.

So I say to all the people who want a liberal or progressive agenda: you can't have somebody else do the organizing work for you unless you can pay them like rich people. If you are prepared to build coalitions personally, you can advance an agenda.

But be prepared to compromise and get part of a loaf today and set up the ask for the next part a few years down the road. The attitude that "my way right now or I will never participate again" will get us an invitation to never participate again. This is democracy, where we messily mix it up and "debate" vote, have our representatives mix it up and debate and vote. As Donald Trump will find out, this isn't a dictatorship. You compromise and advance. Then do it again.

[JoFerret]

44. Don't know about you but i am sick and tired

... of the repetitive and misogynist attacks on Hillary. Decades of GOP slime and about what? Zip! Zero! Nada! Nothing!

She deserves our full hearted and full-throated support. Go Hillary!

[riversedge]

31. I am glad she did the interview on Fox. It took courage. Of course her critics will never

be satisfied-but who knows--it may have made a dent in a few minds.??

[SleeplessinSoCal]

37. My Fox "News" brainwashed mother has called me 3 times since yesterday.

She probably got wind of the wonderful relationship and defense of her daughter she heard during the convention acceptance speech and this interview.

Meanwhile I watched two versions of "Grey Gardens" (documentary & HBO movie) to provide the opposite lens.

[DemonGoddess]

34. K&R!

[SleeplessinSoCal]

36. Politicususa needs to scale back their over the top headlines.

The content never comes close to meeting their promised optimism.

[TRoN33]

38. 4 years of Benghazi is apparently not enough for Republicans to get over with it...

They're too hardwired to let go of Benghazi...

Clearly Benghazi, Trump, Fox News, and even Republican itself are to blame for its epic downfall.