Well, well, well. It appears that Hillary Clinton and her crew have been caught in a couple more blatant falsehoods. If the same thing had happened to a leading Republican contender for the presidency, the media would have been howling for answers. Yet there’s been hardly a peep of protest regarding the silence from the Clinton camp.
The story began back in March, when the House Select Committee investigating the Benghazi attacks asked Hillary Clinton’s legal team to produce some emails from Mrs. Clinton’s private server. The committee specifically asked for documents from two email addresses: [email protected] and [email protected].
Hillary’s attorney, David Kendall, sent the committee a letter on March 27 stating that his client only used the latter email address during her time as secretary of state. His letter said specifically: “This address [[email protected]] on the account did not exist until March 2013, after her tenure as Secretary.”
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
That seems pretty clear, doesn’t it? Only problem is, it’s not true.
In a front-page story, the New York Times published several emails Hillary Clinton had sent as far back as 2011 using the hrod17 address. The Republican National Committee jumped on the story and reprinted several emails from the hrod17 account from 2011 and 2012.
Thus far, there has been no explanation from the Hillary Clinton camp about the discrepancy. Oh what the heck, let’s just call it a blatant lie. You can be sure that Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), the tough-minded former prosecutor who heads up the House committee investigating Benghazi, won’t let Hillary brush this off when he gets her under oath.
And speaking of deliberate distortions of the truth, more evidence has emerged confirming that Hillary Clinton’s State Department was lying when it tried to blame the attacks in Benghazi on a “spontaneous demonstration” against an obscure anti-Islamic video.
Judicial Watch has released a memo from the Defense Intelligence Agency that was distributed the day after that murderous assault, in which Christopher Stevens, our ambassador to Libya, and three other Americans were murdered. That memo said in part:
The attack was planned ten or more days prior on approximately 01 September 2012. The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for U.S. killing of Aboyahiye (Alaiby) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center buildings.
Please note, this DIA memo was distributed the day after the attack to many top administration officials, including then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It confirms precisely what most of us suspected at the time: Far from being a spontaneous demonstration that got out of hand, the attacks were planned well in advance, with the specific purpose of murdering as many Americans as possible.
But wait, there’s more. Check out what the New York Times reported it found in a review of some of Clinton’s emails that the State Department gave to the House committee investigating the Benghazi attacks.
One of them was a memo dated Sept. 13 (two days after the attack) from longtime Clinton ally Sidney Blumenthal, who said he had learned from “sensitive sources” inside Libya that the attacks had been planned well in advance by Ansar al-Shariah, a Libyan terrorist group with ties to al-Qaida.
According to the Times, Hillary forwarded the memo to Jake Sullivan, her foreign policy adviser, with the instruction to “get this around asap.”
So Hillary knew the truth about the assaults long before Susan Rice, our ambassador to the UN, made the rounds of Sunday morning TV talk shows on Sept. 16, claiming that the attacks were “spontaneous.”
By the way, Gowdy says he plans to subpoena Blumenthal to testify about his emails to Clinton. That should be almost as interesting as Hillary’s promised appearance before the committee.
So far, Hillary has managed to go almost a full month without deeming to answer any questions about this — or anything else, for that matter. If any Republican had tried to stonewall like this, the media would be howling for blood.
The latest revelations simply confirm the media’s hypocrisy … and Hillary’s dishonesty.
Can’t say we are surprised, can we?
Until next time, keep some powder dry.
Chip Wood was the first news editor of The Review of the News and also wrote for American Opinion, our two predecessor publications. He is now the geopolitical editor of Personal Liberty Digest. This article first appeared on PersonalLiberty.com and has been reprinted with permission.
