In response to:

Hillary Clinton's Dodgy Testimony

Kachina27284 Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:37 PM
One of the most important concerns about Benghazi is what was Stevens and the CIA doing there before the attack. The difference, Mrs. Clinton, is option 3, terrorists attacked and killed Stevens for a reason. So, yes, it does make a difference. If Stevens was really still a CIA agent, was he and others running guns to radicals in Syria and running a rendition prison? If that is the case, then she and Aobama woukd not want that probed in the open. Of course, the one time that a question about the annex was raised, she brushed aside that question that it should be directed to the CIA, but too late. They already had their shot at Patreaus and blew it. Face it, folks. They got away with it and are rubbing your face in it.
Kachina27284 Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:40 PM
We're those weapons being run to Syria going to the Mus Bros to ultimately be used against Israel? Sort of like jet fighters and tanks that they are buying from us with our money?

A lot of people in Washington apparently forgot how good Hillary Clinton is at not telling the truth.

Wednesday, in her testimony before both the Senate and, later, the House, Clinton brilliantly fudged, dodged and filibustered. Of course, she's a pro. Clinton was slow-walking depositions, lawyering up and shifting blame when many of her questioners were still civilians down on the farm.

Aided by a ridiculous format, she outfoxed most of the Republicans with ease.

Meanwhile, the Democrats, almost uniformly, seemed singularly interested in celebrating Mrs. Clinton as a global diva who somehow manages to carry the burden of her awesomeness...