Concerning The Willis Hart Obsession With Rightwing Spun Fiction Re Hillary Clinton "Lying To Benghazi Families"

More Rightwing stoogery from the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart, again in service of sliming Hillary Clinton with lies.

Willis Hart: On the Fact that Mrs. Clinton Told HER Family One Thing About Benghazi (i.e., that it Was a Planned Terrorist Attack) While Telling the Families of the Four Victims a Totally Different Thing (i.e., that it Was the Result of Some Youtube Video and that the Government Was Going to Go After the Fellow Who Made it) and Has Since Implied that the Families Are ALL Lying (this Despite the Fact that the Father of Ty Woods Has an In-Time Journal Entry Which Substantiates His Version of the Story)... This woman is so venal and, while I agree with those on the left that Trump is a pecker-head, I really have to ask you here, has the man ever done anything as underhanded as this? I'm suspecting that he hasn't. (1/26/2015 AT 3:59pm).

First of all, who the f*ck does Willis think bribed (as per the definition of venal) Hillary to blame the Youtube video for Benghazi?

Secondly, Hillary DID tell her family (as well as a number of others) that Benghazi was a planned terrorist attack - and later (not "while") she DID tell the families of the four victims that the attack had something to do with the Innocence of Muslims YouTube video (IOM).

But Hillary did NOT lie! In both instances she was passing along the information she thought was accurate AT THE TIME!

Although the Rightwing "news media watchdog" Accuracy in Media goes with the "lie" BS as well.

"Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al Qaeda-like group", Hillary e-mailed Chelsea at 11:12pm on September 11, 2012 – even as the incursion raged on. At 3:04pm the next day, the then-secretary of state also spoke the truth to Hisham Qandil, prime minister in Egypt's Islamist Muslim Brotherhood government. She told him by phone: "We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film". It was a planned attack – not a protest. Based on the information we saw today, we believe that the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al-Qaeda". And yet, three days later, she flat-out lied to grieving American citizens about "an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with". (13 Hours Confirms Obama's and Hillary Clinton's Lies about Benghazi by Deroy Murdock. Accuracy in Media 1/25/2016).

This Hillary "lied" BS apparently tracks back to a Conway Daily Sun (a New Hampshire paper) article.

...she [Hillary Clinton] then told George Stephanopoulos that she didn't tell the families the attack was a demonstration about a film. (Clinton Talks Iraq and Benghazi With The Sun Ed Board by Daymond Steer. 12/30/2015).

But Hillary's "no" was in response to George Stephanopoulos asking her "did you tell them it was not the film?". To which Hillary answered "no". As in, NO, she didn't tell them it (the attack) was not about the film - she told them it was about the film (as the transcript confirms). And she told that that because that is what they believed at the time.

According to The Benghazi Hoax (an e-book by David Brock and Ari Rabin-Havt which I have read) "Reuters correspondent Hadeel al Shalchi says that she "reported what people told [her] they saw that day, all of whom she met face to face".

Hadeel al Shalchi's Reuters reporting says "there were protesters present when the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was attacked" and the assailants were described as "part of a mob blaming America for a film they said insulted the Prophet Mohammad" (Reuters' Early Report Of Protesters At Libya Attack Raises Questions by Michael Calderone. HuffPo 10/15/2012).

It is true that some in the Administration (including Hillary Clinton) originally believed that the Islamist militia group Ansar al Sharia was responsible for the attack. Because (among other reasons) Ansar al-Sharia said it was them via Facebook. But they later denied responsibility.

After which the State Department produced a report that said the attack had something to do with the IOM Youtube video. A report that was shaped by spokeswoman Victoria Nuland (a former Dick Cheney aid). Nuland insisted a reference to al-Sharia be deleted for political reasons. She says she was concerned that the inclusion of that information "could be abused by members of Congress to beat the State Department for not paying attention to agency warnings" (Benghazi Talking Points Revisions Pushed By State Department).

So, just because we all eventually found out that there was no link between the attack and the IOM video, that does not mean Hillary Clinton "lied". There is no proof she lied. And this charge that Hillary has "since implied that the families are ALL lying" is also bullshit (as the video below proves).

As noted in the 10/24/2012 Reuters' article Clinton: Facebook Post About Benghazi Attack Not Hard Evidence, "intelligence experts caution that initial reports from the scene of any attack or disaster are often inaccurate"... although, in this instance, it appears the initial reports were correct and Ansar al-Sharia was responsible. Although militia leader Ahmed Abu Khattala (the Benghazi leader of Ansar al-Sharia) did also claim that the attack was in retaliation for the video. Even though "subsequent investigations determined... the attacks were premeditated" (Source)

Maybe there was not that much "fog of war" going on as there were people acting based on politics (according to David Brooks the "CIA... went into intense blame-shifting mode, trying to shift responsibility [and] out of that bureaucratic struggle, all the talking points were reduced to mush"), but there absolutely were some questions (as the Reuters reporting shows) and surely ALL possibilities (of what/who was responsible for the attack) needed to be investigated.

By the way, I should note that the "politics" involved were not the politics others (including Willis Hart) have alleged, which woulf be that the Obama Administration went with the IOM video sparking the attack because it being an al Qaeda affiliated terrorist attack conflicted with their "al Qaeda on the run" narrative (and the truth would hurt Obama's reelection chances).

A narrative they did not have, btw. As the authors of The Benghazi Hoax point out "Obama... never sought to declare an early end to America's stepped-up operations against terrorism" (see SWTD #230 for more information. This commentary, btw contains excerpted portions of that commentary).

The bottom line here is that it is NOT a "fact" that HRC "told her family one thing about Benghazi (or anyone else) WHILE telling the families of the four victims a totally different thing", despite what the Rightwing stooge Willis Hart thinks. Which he ABSOLUTELY is acting as in regards to HRC, whom he has been bashing non-stop on his blog for awhile. Along with Bernie Sanders. The Republican candidates? Not so much.

Video: George Stephanopoulos (ABC This Week 12/6/2015) asks Hillary Clinton "did you tell them it was not the film?". Hillary's answer is NO, she did tell the families that the attack and video were linked.

See also: Rep Alan Grayson On The Republican Charge That Hillary Clinton Did Something Illegal Or Dishonest Re Benghazi (1/28/2016) DSB #31.

Supporting Document
[DSD #21] The "Small l Libertarian" Who Suffers From A Bad Case Of (Hillary) Clinton Derangement Syndrome (A catalog of MANY commentaries by WTNPH in which he criticizes HRC, including in regards to the fake Benghazi scamdal).

OST #100