Where did she go wrong? How are our criticisms of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton enough “well informed”? Aren’t we at if we just compare her to whom she followed and who followed her that we are fair in reporting and chronicling that she was the worst of three?
We’ld be fools and unfairly so (and racist) if we are to ignore all the flip flops of Mrs. Clinton, however, and if to an affirming posit that it she be presumed that she was a better Secretary of State than the two most previously. Right?
We’ld be fools and unfairly to discerning differences in old white political elites and new white political elitism if to an avoidance to pare the pair of Secretaries of State of the Administration of Barack Hussein Obama. Both Clinton and Kerry brought hypocracy and baggage to the office for diplomacy - both Clinton and Kerry were inappropriate or devolutionary choices for such high office due to their personal conflicts - conflicts of interests - past positions as of entanglements.
We to start any due probative of Mrs. Clinton as a worst, at least of three, by remembering all her flip flops and too her executive decidings while crusading with the Powers of her office as First Lady. We should be aware of whom are Bedouins or Nubians and how Ja Ja Binks seems to have been cast as a new good Gunga Din. If I recall the setting correctly then it was when Lara Logan interviewed General Petraeus in Afghanistan when he spoke of then in his readings of reading Rudyard Kipling. It seems to be accounted of an if true how true that Mr. Binks was right when of parrying that if a people keep theirs sewers clear from clogging their murder rate should be lower. President Barack Hussein Obama in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech tagged the Clintons while parsing in oratory how there are dangers from inaction and avoidance (as like evident now from the Clintons’ own years of avoidance and inaction).
The Congress so far has the House nearly ready for the rendering of justice per the discovered and confirmed cover-up post Benghazi. I do not know when the Senate will also be ready. I expect due to the seriousness of any “cover-up” our Congress must soon be bicameral and in too a bipartisanship in the Senate, so charged, to also looking to how guilty Mrs. Clinton, however, and to how diabolical it is that a “cover-up” was thought her best strategy. Mrs. William Jefferson “Hillary” Clinton is the prime suspect in a commencing investigation to the extents in criminality and so that it must be now presumed that she was a worse Secretary of State than at least Condoleezza Rice.
To preserve some “innocent until proven guilty” for Mrs. Clinton, however, we should look firstly at the life and politics - war/anti-war politics of her successor Secretary of State John Kerry. We should look first at a comparative for prudence secured in “jurisprudence” to his positions re: “BOOTS ON THE GROUND” and her’s, however.
Still, and again, to be of a preserve for any innocence, despite Mrs. Clinton’s years of flip flops over boots on the ground, and indiscriminate droning warring, we can make this more about the life and story of John Kerry as of a query: TERRORIST OR PEACEMAKER? But we should behooved of another believed remembered Lara Logan interview that was with a supposed top Taliban leader - yes! before 9/11 II in Benghazi - as contradicting President Obama and Secretary Clinton with his pronouncements to it that the Taliban and Al Qaeda were now much as if one, and, yes, newly. For a sake of tonality and the horse race of this to a due fair measurement of the saddled guilt just of Mrs. Clinton let us just acknowledge that part of the cover-up relates to it that Benghazi could have been and may be a widening of the theater of war and a “counter-attack” in the Obama/Clinton war of choice in Afghanistan against primarily the (said) Taliban.
Still, and again, to be of a preserve for any innocence, despite Mrs. Clinton’s years of flip flops over boots on the ground, and indiscriminate droning warring, we should be organized as a posse for truths, and too bicamerally in a new bipartisan, yet recognize the evidence that she has set her self (themselves in Clinton) up as if the bad guys in a season of SOPRANOS. We can’t just jump on her successor if to keeping prudence in jurisprudence for she however measured for her guilt is still of her years as FLOTUS where she did go into rivals turf and incite with incendiary imperialist rhetoric the locals, however tribal, and to such inflaming that those radical already were more radicalized and pushed into corners as if called out by Mrs. Clinton, so, in a pride to a need to “respond.”
So about how bad a Secretary of State John Kerry is, and, too to how he was a most inappropriate selection for any high office in foreign affairs regarding the Middle East, and due to his past pulling of the rug out from under any real potential for success in OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM, and so from near the very day and hours the country, with President George W. Bush, had become “committed” with boots on the ground - committed beyond the point of quiet return:
Secretary of State John Kerry while the primary ANTI-WAR SENATOR did do more than any other in the known world to undermine the potential and any ready success for OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM. Mrs. Clinton can hardly have to shoulder all the blame for so much that went wrong much do to the betrayal in a late response as a revival in ANTI-WAR demonstrative tonality, but for her own flipping and flopping fickleness to prudence and loyalty to a committed administration too. Senator Kerry and Representative Murtha were a tag team that did by their politics so partisan (interpartisan too) were to being those, even more than the Clintons, that did put the lives of all with boots on the ground in Iraq into their unexpected greater peril. At the time Senator Kerry and Representative Murtha started their ANTI-WAR REVIVAL it was no longer appropriate to take issue with the matter Congress had already voted with, and however Senator Clinton is remembered for admitting that she herself didn’t read the intelligence reports regarding such before her vote.
Mrs. Clinton yet cannot escape that the cover-up seems still to have been necessary to save the cover-up of the culpability and negligence of the Administration of the Clintons. As it is the known “Benghazi Lies” seem of the worst case scenario need for the dangerous strategy of cover-up, and by Mrs. Clinton who had worked on the committees to impeach Nixon and as of the Clintons’ own Lewinski cover-up, arguably and in an seeming evidence based deciding for if not, as the lies of the Clintons’ cover-up were failing, only lies about their lack of intelligence and understanding about Al Qaeda, at least, needed more lies to preserve any chance of future electability of the Clintons for a retaking of the The White House.
Right! This is supposed to be an attempt to transfer Clinton guilt, presumed, unto her successor Secretary of State John Kerry, and however as necessary by a looking deeply back at least at his “politics” of his ANTI-WAR REVIVAL as causal to such that maybe can be said to be more, at least, of a Kerry negligence than a Clintons’ gross negligence.
We, if of the lay, should behooved to let the Federal Bureau of Investigation profilers and Defense Department Armed Forces Psychological operations experts take the lead to explaining how devastating Senator John Kerry’s ANTI-WAR REVIVAL, from hour one, was to moral and cooperation of the Iraqi people. We should expect that experts will be called to parse the level of negligence, at least, to the full measure of at least the guilt of Mrs. Clinton, however, and even towards passing the buck if passable to her successor for his past own culpability for lighting the fire of a belief that the U.S.A. was, due to his lead, ready to CUT AND RUN - REALLY!!!
RIGHT!!! Still, Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton, just for the impeachment and disbarrment of the half she supposedly is the better half too, and however of a “great man” she supposedly the “great woman” behind, is even without her experience as Hillary Rodham Clinton of the committees to impeach President Richard Milhous Nixon like the political figure of the modern United States of America whom best should know cover-ups are to be avoided but in worse case political scenarios - She is whom seems best knows how bad things must really should be thought as bad if and when a cover-up is the uncovered strategy. That Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton herself chose to front with a cover-up does itself suggest so much guilt and a necessity that it may not matter how much blame we can yet transfer to her successor or continue to project upon the Bush Administration. SEEMS!!!
Where did she go wrong? How are our criticisms of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton enough “well informed”? Aren’t we at if we just compare her to whom she followed and who followed her that we are fair in reporting and chronicling that she was the worst of three?
The sheer tonality of the remarks from Secretary of State Clinton since the Benghazi lies started did, despite her strategy to run out the clock with Congress, yet have her of self-incrimination and even much that was admitting of ignorance and incompetence at least as to her (like the Administration of the Clintons’ too) as lacking in intelligence. It seems Congress has her already fit for orange and is now only ready for the House to assess its duty to a determination as to how long she should be fit to only wear orange - however a pants suit or jumpsuit.
NOTE: There is much to a much longer list if and when to looking only at Mrs. Clinton, however, and of the when-evers, to how that she risked a cover-up over her culpability for the keep of State per the Benghazi consulate, and personnel, that to must reach with the long arms of justice, by the charge and reach Constitutional of the Congress, straight to and also through Mr. William Jefferson Clinton, and any and all of his “foundations” and “initiatives.” It must be presumed due to a cover-up strategy that Mrs. Clinton while responsible for State & USA oversight of CGI likely was as a spouse afraid to incriminate herself for such seems naturally to also implicate her spouse for his “HOWEVERS” and “WHEN-EVERS” — and for just as long.
However, a STAR WARS defense a greater defense now for the Bushes and Reagan, it seems fair to illicit an imagery for the Clintons as now it seems of them of: A HOUSE OF CLINTONS WITH THEIR SEWERS CLOGGED!
RIGHT!!! It to Secretary of State John Kerry’s benefit that Mrs. Clinton is taggable, and mashable, and hashable as too much of: MRS. CLINTON LIED AND SOLDIERS AND DIPLOMATS, AT LEAST, DIED — SHE WAS MOST INDISCRIMINATE IN DRONING WARRING AND AS IN LIEU OF BOOTS ON THE GROUND PARITY OF MISSION.
NOTE: FOR MORE HISTORY & “BACKGROUND” SEE SORTED BY “CARNEGIE HALL” @ http://bit.ly/ChubbyHubby. Please get past confusion of voluminous thread opening yet with this same column as its lede or leading piece.