Can Hillary's Hopes Survive Benghazi?

 

By Andrew Malcolm
IBDEditorials.com

Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods. (AP)

Former successful cattle-futures investor, first lady, senator, unsuccessful presidential candidate, secretary of State and presumable repeat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has reportedly sent word to the House Select Committee investigating Benghazi that she is eager to testify.

That may be another statement she comes to regret, along with her now infamous "What difference at this point does it make" outburst before a congressional committee. (Scroll down for video of that shocking half-minute.)

Clinton is following standard political protocol for damage control: To appear up front and get the bad news, all of it, over with as quickly as possible. Better 2015 than 2016.

But there's a problem. Committee Chair Trey Gowdy says he'd be delighted to talk with her -- but only 30 days after he gets all of the Benghazi documents he's requested from her old State Department. Now run by John "You've Got a Friend" Kerry, that department is also following Obama's standard protocol for damage control, called stonewalling.

Obama's done it every time he gets in trouble--Fast and Furious, Solyndra, IRS, VA, ObamaCare, Benghazi. Stretch out the process. The media will grow tired. Obama minions can claim it's old news. Given the D.C. media's lethargy when it comes to probing Democratic dirt, it's worked pretty well for Obama.

But 721 days from now President Obama gets an indelible ex- in front of his title, fortunately. Meanwhile, in 60 or 70 days Clinton wants to announce her next bid to return to the White House.

It could be very, very messy at the same time to have a former federal prosecutor like Gowdy boring in on issues so damaging to someone who wants to be elected president in 21 months: How despite the ambassador's repeated pleas could security have been so poor at that consulate? Why, in fact, was it reduced given her admitted knowledge of the gathering terrorist clouds there?

Why on a day dated 9/11, hours after the Cairo embassy was stormed, were no alert forces on Middle East standby somewhere nearby? Why was no rescue attempted or reinforcements allowed? She's mentioned the fog of war before, but we now know her department's security duty officers knew of and monitored the attack in real-time.

Where in the world did Clinton's cockamamie video excuse emanate? And why did she and Obama and Susan Rice stick with it so long after we now know it was disproven by their own intelligence people?

There are many more lines of questioning. But that's a start. And it's of major import for someone who seeks to temporarily possess the title commander-in-chief, a job that comes with those frightening 3 a.m. national security phone calls that Clinton boasted of being so ready for back in 2008.

We still do not know where Obama was that deadly night of Benghazi and what he was doing. 'I had no idea' has been his standard excuse about previous scandals like IRS intimidation of opponents and the ObamaCare roll-out disaster.

So it fell to Clinton to manage the murderous mess. If she botched that 10 p.m. Benghazi business as badly as it's looking, will enough voters in the right places trust her to become president?

More importantly, will her party still risk putting its precious White House nomination in the hands of a damaged 69-year-old candidate? There haven't been three successive Democrat presidential terms in about 70 years.

And despite her charming husband and his vaunted money-raising network, will donors remain eager to write big checks to a campaign battered daily by an ongoing Republican House probe?

Clinton's public approval poll numbers have been very strong since she left politics. But in the last month, even before her candidacy is official, they've cratered, as we listed here.

Now, comes word via the Washington Times that Clinton was the hawkish driving force behind the optional 2011 war to oust Libya's dictator Moammar Gadhafi because he might kill civilians in his fight against rebels. After months of allied bombardments, Gadhafi, who had previously submitted to Western demands to abandon his nuclear weapons program, was indeed ousted and torn apart by a mob.

But what remained was a lawless Libya which has now become like Afghanistan pre-2001, a training ground for numerous terrorist groups. including the ones who attacked the Benghazi consulate in 2012.

Rand Paul, a likely Republican presidential candidate next year, has been a vocal critic of Clinton's for that war and such careless U.S. military intervention with unforeseen consequences.

One can only wonder what lessons, if any, Iran's leaders have drawn from the consequences of Gadhafi giving in to allied demands to relinquish his nuclear program.