The Russia Investigation will eventually run its course, but despite the motivations of it, we should be willing to understand these 2016 election facts.
Hillary, in spite of her ‘fait accompli’, experience, or the many allegations, lost an important national campaign for president against a historically unpopular, politically inexperienced, misogynistic, boastful, inconsiderate, rude, willfully ignorant, and compulsive liar.
It’s not the fault of the FBI, or the Russians, that made a difference, she still could have won. What she failed to do was visit Wisconsin, hardly paid attention to Michigan, and Pennsylvania. She lost by very narrow margins in those states.Whatever your perception of the embassy attack in Libya, the fact was the attack at Benghazi went on for hours, without any outside support. As a matter of fact, the support ready and willing to go was ordered to stand down. Even if Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State didn’t issue such orders, her response when asked about her lack of being in the loop, “What difference does it make”, coupled with earlier false assertions by her and others, it was motivated by a video critical of Muslims.
Then we saw her response to using private email servers in her home, for classified government communications, maintained by a private “uncertified” tech support company, as if that’s perfectly OK. It was another demonstration of, she will do what she wants, public interests be damned.
Even if you didn’t know or care these things mattered, to many voters it did. She even lost some support within her own party after it was revealed how her campaign undermined the Bernie Sanders primary campaign. It was seen by many as, she would do whatever she thought necessary, to win. That was another blow to her credibility / integrity.
It was a campaign on the slow drip of morphine, oblivious to the impact of the activities of the Clinton Foundation, which curried favor to individuals or organizations making large donations. It was another set of denials to make in the face of mounting evidence.
So, here we are, left with someone who knew how to self promote and is now routinely attacked in the media. It’s as if the national humiliation of the woman they all thought would be the next president, could be erased, or at least the person responsible for her defeat could be shown to be as big of a scoundrel as a large number of voters thought Hillary Clinton was, and even more incompetent.
Official Government Report on the Benghazi Embassy
The report says there were no undue delays in responding to the attacks, and they pointedly rejected unfounded allegations that the U.S. response was deliberately thwarted by a “stand down” order.
“Quite the contrary: the safe evacuation of all U.S. government personnel from Benghazi twelve hours after the initial attack and subsequently to Ramstein Air Force Base was the result of exceptional U.S. government coordination and military response,” the independent Accountability Review Board concluded in its Dec. 18, 2012, report.
Note by author: Like most government cover ups, those who continued to work for it, compromised their stories to preserve their jobs and reputations. The accusation of a stand down order wasn’t about the local CIA operatives, they responded quickly. Army Lt. Col. S.E. Gibson located in Tripoli said; “I was not ordered to stand down. I was ordered to remain in place,” Gibson told the House Armed Services Committee. ” The Tripoli team arrived in Benghazi in about an hour, but it was delayed at the airport “for at least three hours,” according to the Senate homeland security committee report. They later concluded the delay was caused by operation confusion, “miscalculation”, not a deliberate effort to thwart the rescue. It wasn’t necessary to have additional boots on the ground immediately. The GRS force in defense of the compound was standing by to laser guide any support aircraft which could have been there in approximately 1 hour.
“General Ham was head of AFRICOM and Commander of the 2011 US-NATO operation to depose Gadhafi in Libya. Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette was in command of the Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3), then deployed in Middle Eastern waters during the attack on Benghazi.”
“Both Ham and Rear Admiral Gaouette reported receiving the same desperate cables for additional security and backup that Obama administration officials received and ignored from Benghazi.”
“General Ham and Gaouette attempted to launch ready response teams in the region capable of provided the much needed assistance during the seven hour long assault on Benghazi. Both were then relieved of command for their actions, described by the US Military as “allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.”
“General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready to deploy to Benghazi. Then, General Ham received the order to stand down. His response was “screw it,” – he was going to help anyway.”
“Within minutes after issuing an order to deploy his ready response team, Ham’s second in command apprehended the General and told him that he was now relieved of his command. Ham knows who issued the order to STAND DOWN as well as the order to relieve him of his command at AFRICOM.”
“Gaouette readied vital intelligence and communications operations for an extraction effort to be launched by Ham.”
“Stars and Stripes reported October 18, 2012 that General Ham is being replaced by Gen. David Rodriguez. They also reported on October 27, 2012 that Adm. Gaouette is being replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker. The Navy stated that it was “replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.”
Notes from the Pentagon Investigation:
Q: But do you think, you know, if an F-15, if the military had allowed a jet to go fly over, that it might have prevented [the second attack]?
A: Yeah, and if we had gotten clearance from the Libyan military for an American plane to fly over Libyan airspace. The Libyans that I talked to and the Libyans and other Americans who were involved in the war have told me also that Libyan revolutionaries were very cognizant of the impact that American and NATO airpower had with respect to their victory. They are under no illusions that American and NATO airpower won that war for them. And so, in my personal opinion, a fast-mover flying over Benghazi at some point, you know, as soon as possible might very well have prevented some of the bad things that happened that night.
Response to Hillary Clinton’s use of Personal Servers for State Department Email
Note by author: The use of private, personal servers for official government communications at a State Department level was one of the most glaring bad judgement calls made by Hillary Clinton. No matter what her motivations were, the fact that she wasn’t concerned about the ramifications, and to use language which attempted to portray this as something innocent, assumes great naivete of the electorate on how classified material is supposed to be handled. Many of us have served in a capacity, either in the military or for contractors which are required to handle communications in the strictest and most secure methods as required by government. The NSA has for many years posted guidelines for private companies on how to maintain security. With Clinton working as head of the State Department, she was required to uphold these regulations.
I’ve heard many excuses, or the explanation as described in the above link, “the State Department’s track record for its own email security isn’t exactly spotless”, “there’s no evidence these servers were hacked.” Perhaps that’s true, but the same couldn’t be said for the DNC, and many of it’s users were the same people communicating on the Clinton email servers.
“At the Department of State, there is accountability for the security of email systems. If we learned that State’s email servers had been hacked or left needlessly vulnerable, there would be investigations and consequences. With Clinton’s off-the-books scheme, there are only questions.”
“… there have been five separate security vulnerabilities identified with Outlook Web Access since ClintonEmail.com was registered in 2009. These security bugs include doozies like “a flaw that may lead to an unauthorized information disclosure” (2010) and “a remote attacker can gain access to arbitrary files.” (2014).