Hillary: "... no Americans were killed in Libya"

[left-of-center2012]

"... the cozy 'get a room' love-fest viewers saw tonight during Clinton’s town hall with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. Matthews did pause the flirting to ask Clinton about her foreign policy, and that’s when she made the stunning claim that Libya isn’t perfect after U.S. intervention, but at least no Americans were killed."

http://twitchy.com/2016/03/14/hillary-clinton-admits-libya-isnt-perfect-but-we-didnt-lose-a-single-person/

[onecaliberal]

1. Quick someone tell that to Ambassador Stevens, parents.

[blm]

15. Why? He wasn't there when Quaddafi was overthrown. twitchy is a RW site and they

would never consider applying context to the statements made by any Dem - but, why are DUers accepting their propaganda and furthering it?

[onecaliberal]

18. Oh for fucks sake are you saying they misquoted her?

Enjoy the dust bin

[blm]

55. They ignored the context she said it. I know why twitchy ignored context, but, why do you?

.

[onecaliberal]

63. It's a fucking republican ad in the waiting. Do you honestly think they give two shits about context

She doesn't think before she speaks.

[blm]

66. So she shouldn't have answered Matthews question about overthrowing Quaddafi because

if she spoke to the context of the question, she should have known that it would be taken out of context and used to pretend she was referring to Benghazi. Right? And that Sanders supporters like me would be put in the position of advising other Sanders supporters to NOT accept the RW propaganda smears and distortions that ALWAYS comes after EVERY STATEMENT THAT ANY DEM CANDIDATE MAKES, no matter what.

Right?

[leveymg]

77. An old rule of rhetoric: don't cite an opposition source unless you want the message attacked

It would have been enough just to say "heard on Tweety yesterday."

[Lizzie Poppet]

26. Poisoning the well fallacies aside...

...it doesn't matter if the context of the quote alters the meaning. We're talking perfect bumper sticker fare versus a detailed explanation that requires some thought. If you think the latter can compete with the former in American politics, you're daft.

This is (yet another) brainfart, another unforced gaffe. If Bernie can't turn this around, this is the candidate the Democratic Party is going to stake what might be as many as three SCOTUS seats on? That's a bleak picture...

[blm]

57. So your choice is to SURRENDER to the RW propagandists because their bumperstickers

scare you?

Glad I fight for truth and accuracy because it should matter.

[Lizzie Poppet]

61. Straw man fallacies aside...

...I'm simply pointing out that it represents execrable judgement to hand your enemies a bat to beat you over the head with. This is not the sort of judgement I think voters have a right to demand of their president. My point has nothing to do with the accuracy of the inevitable RW bleating about this.

I should have thought that was obvious...

[blm]

64. Your bottom line is the same as surrendering to RW propaganda.

I would hope that more people would fight the RW machine by exposing their lies and exposing them as liars - not clicking on their sites and furthering their propaganda.

I fully expect this same machine to be focused only on lying about and distorting everything said by Sanders when he pulls ahead. And I hope you finally decide it is worth it to you to defeat them then.

[Lizzie Poppet]

68. Spare me your condescending prattle.

I'm a far-left independent progressive (thus my glaringly obvious choice of candidate...). I don't need your fallacy-drenched condescension to "help" me do the right thing, thankyouverymuch. Coming from someone whose critical thinking skills are clearly in need of an overhaul, that's both ironic and intolerable.

Buh-bye.

[Lizzie Poppet]

73. Yet another vacuous straw man, and a slanderous one.

Bless your heart.

Welcome to ignore, Sparky.

[onecaliberal]

78. Uhm, Clinton has been the only one to do that to Sanders. Just saying. And yeah we do expose their

lies, problem is the stupid will never hear it.

Oh Edit: There is only 1 candidate on the dem side who seems to have a truth/trust issue with the American people, and it isn't Senator Sanders.

[Dem2]

31. Anything to smash Hillary and try to disqualify her

It doesn't matter how right-wing the sneer is or how trivial the accusation is.

[peacebird]

2. Former Sec of State removes Hondouras coup from her paperback? Doesn't remember Benghazi?

Admits her vote can be bought, even a vote to send American troops in harms way?

This is really who some of you want to be our standard bearer???

[polly7]

3. Did she mention the Qaddafi loyalists hung in the streets, the migrants kidnapped,

raped and burned alive by the 'friendly rebels' and for whom HRW begged to get noticed? What good did the west's lying use of Nato's R2P do them? Anything at all about the hundreds of thousands of people in the region desperate to escape, toddlers washing up on beaches because of IS created by the vacuum of regime-change? I didn't see it, so don't know if she mentioned anything of those people.

[mylye2222]

4. Yeah... So no Ambassador was killed on Benghazi attack?

Hillary, is your memory OK?

[peacebird]

5. #HistoryByHillary

[Trust Buster]

6. You didn't read the whole source article, did you ?

.

[left-of-center2012]

9. "Hillary, is your memory OK?"

And she forgot Bernie stood with her for health care reform in the '90s.

[blm]

11. Em - the context was the overthrow of Quaddafi where no US lives were lost.

You know me, Em, as someone who is NO fan of HRC's. But, I'm not going to lie and validate RW propaganda in order to oppose her. November means TOO much, especially in my state.

[ibegurpard]

17. you know as well as I do

That they will link THIS quote with the Ambassador's death...timeline be damned. It was another STUPID unforced error in a never-ending string of stupid unforced errors. Whether we talk about it or not is irrelevant.

[vintx]

21. A never-ending string of stupid unforced errors that will doom us in the GE if she's the nominee. nt

[blm]

32. Yes, they will - and, apparently you will validate that tactic and FURTHER it for them.

Because you don't think accuracy matters.

I do. Sanders does. Stop validating and furthering RW propaganda. You don't choose to accept it instead of choosing to call them out for the lies.

[ibegurpard]

34. when you have to explain

You've already lost. She stepped in it AGAIN. And will keep stepping in it all the way to November. And Democrats continue in their lemming - march off the cliff to nominate her.

[blm]

67. Good thing Sandrs has supporters like me willing to fight RW propaganda every inch of the way.

Sorry you don't feel the obligation. I do. Fortunately, I will continue to fight to EXPOSE the RW propagandists just as I have for over 20 years.

[mylye2222]

23. OK. I get it .

[WDIM]

25. The overthrow of Quaddafi led to Benghazi.

The neoconservative model of regime change has led to nothing but chaos death destruction instability and disorder. Hillary's support of neocon regime change has no excuse. She is as much a war criminal as Bush.

[marshall]

7. "...we didn't lose a SINGLE person."

The actual quote is a lot different in meaning from the paraphrased one, and is technically true. We did not lose a "single" person--we lost four persons.

[yeoman6987]

80. Really? Is that what you get out of that? I don't believe 3 percent of Americans will get that

out of that sentence.

[marshall]

81. That's the point of equivocation

Most people won't get it, and for those that do there is a plausible explanation.

[blm]

8. twitchy is a RW site. Also, the context of her statement was the OVERTHROW of Quaddafi where

the US involvement was in the background and no US military was killed.

In our support for Sanders we need not further the Republicans' lie about the context of the statement.

We don't NEED to do it.

[NWCorona]

13. Sorry but this was a huge screw up for Clinton

It's not like we are spinning her words

[blm]

19. Yes, you ARE spinning her words and so is twitchy. By eliminating CONTEXT of her

statement in regard to the US' background involvement in the overthrow of Quaddafi.

Of course, you are welcome to provide me the proof you have that that the consulate was attacked DURING the overthrow of Quaddafi, but, I am certain you cannot provide that.

[NWCorona]

22. Sorry

But I disagree. You can frame it how you want but Hillary said we didn't lose any lives in Libya.

[blm]

33. In the OVERTHROW OF QUADDAFI the US role did NOT yield any US casualties. Why further the RW spin

on this when it is clear they are not using her words in the context they were spoken?

[NWCorona]

36. As much as you might want that to be how she framed it

That isn't so
“Libya was a different kind of calculation. And we didn't lose a single person."

[blm]

41. The calculations involved in their role during the overthrow. Why do you pretend otherwise?

Why do you want the RW propaganda to be accepted instead of the exact context of her remarks addressing the calculations behind the US background support for overthrowing Quaddafi?

[NWCorona]

45. That is a stupid talking point.

I have 23 friends and comrades who've lost their lives in Iraq. 9 happened after the fall of Sadam and 3 after elections. All 23 are included in the same total number of military lives lost in Iraq.

So again I'll stand by my point.

[blm]

58. You apparently don't have the courage to fight for TRUTH against this bit of RW propaganda.

In fact, you find it easier to go along with the propaganda and further it here at DU.

Why?

And why is the truth about Benghazi as a covert CIA operation led by Petraeus and manipulated into an attack on Clinton even seen as just a 'talking point' to you when it is an UNDENIABLE FACT?

[ibegurpard]

39. we could all shut up right now

And it wouldn't make a difference. She fucked up AGAIN. And I'm certainly not going to defend her. I think she's a disaster.

[blm]

43. So we should all give in to RW propaganda and accept it because fighting for accuracy is not

what you feel like doing?

Good thing I and other Sanders supporters don't all think like you. We fight RW lies and propaganda because it is the RIGHT thing to do for our country and all those citizens who desperately need and depend on Democratic victories in their state.

[Aerows]

65. As ibegurpard said

She screwed up again.

You have to be careful in politics. If you say something that sounds wrong, your opponents are going to point it out. That's how politics is.

Do I wish that things were different and that the American public was more informed than it is? Yes. Does that change the fact that it was not the brightest way to word her statement? No.

[blm]

69. That should not translate into US here at DU furthering the RW propaganda FOR them.

Because imagine what they have planned to distort if and when Sanders pulls ahead. Strengthening these RW sites and their credibility now is NOT what DUrs should be doing at any point, let alone during an election cycle.

[Tom Rinaldo]

60. You are right. But she gave the right an easy opening here unfortunately. n/t

[WDIM]

20. I still find her comment offensive

So I guess only American lives matter to Hillary. Nevermind all the civilians brutally murdered and maimed due to all of her foreign policy failures.

Iraq failure
Libya failure
Syria failure

All the chaos and bloodshed due to her support of neoconservative war mongering and regime change is unjustifiable. Her blood money she receives from defense contractors will never buy back her soul. She is a war criminal and unfit to hold office.

[Dragonfli]

30. Kissinger taught her well.... /nt

[blm]

35. Now THAT is fine to say, but, why is DU furthering the RW propaganda for RW sites

who are deliberately conflating the attack on the Benghazi consulate with the overthrow of Quaddafi in order to lie to their readers?

Is RW propaganda acceptable to you if you think there is an advantage to using it?

[WDIM]

48. anti-war is leftwing

The instabilty her neocon policy on Libya caused resulted in the Benghazi attack. Libya is still unstable Iraq unstable Syria unstable and it all goes back the the Neocon PNAC agenda that has been fully adopted by Hillary.

She and the neoliberals and neocons want instability and want war because its big money. She has no care about the lives lost. She has no respect for human life at all. And to say hey no Americas were killed and that is suppose to make everything okay is repulsive. Americans were killed and it was the direct result of her failed foreign policy.

Hillary is the lie and if it be leftwing or rightwing sources she should be called out on her lies.

[blm]

54. You don't further RW lies and call it OK because it suits a purpose.

No matter what. Your reasoning is EXACTLY why RW propagandists have a 100 million dollar funding from GOP strategists for their internet attacks this election cycle.

[tk2kewl]

10. "George Bush kept us safe" and "Hillary Clinton kept us safe"

please make her go away

[ibegurpard]

14. She is going to get slaughtered on this quote

They will bring up Ambassador Stevens. And regardless of the lawyerly timeline explanations it will stick.

[Lizzie Poppet]

24. Exactly.

It's a detailed explanation that requires some mental effort versus something that fits on a bumper sticker. Anyone with even a hint of a clue about how American politics works knows which of the two is more effective...by a mile.

[themaguffin]

29. Yeah same site posts this: http://twitchy.com/2016/03/13/april-fools-day-proud-of-obamas-presidency-

[earthside]

16. A huge gaffe ... this will do real damage.

I already heard the audio clip of Hillary's answer as a headliner on a radio newscast this morning.

Now, I personally think this Repuglican obsession with Benghazi is all about politics and has little merit in the facts.

However, Hillary was going to be the target of this because she is Hillary Clinton and running for President from the moment the tragedy occurred.

That may not be fair, but politics ain't beanbag.

"What difference, at this point, does it make?"

“Libya was a different kind of calculation. And we didn't lose a single person."

I doubt the Sanders campaign will use this, but the Repuglicans are going to have a field day with it; what a gift Hillary gave to them.

Frankly, it sure looks like when the pressure is on, like it has been for her in the last week on the campaign trail, she chokes and becomes gaffe prone.

[blm]

37. Sanders wouldn't use it because Sanders is not a liar who accepts and repeats RW propaganda

in order to further his cause.

[themaguffin]

27. http://twitchy.com/2016/03/13/april-fools-day-proud-of-obamas-presidency-trend-reveals-the-failure-i

[NWCorona]

28. This gaffe

Along with the fact that Hillary was the first to leave the action room that night, before his body was recovered to confirm death will be huge in the general.

[blm]

38. Now you are REALLY pushing RW propaganda reBenghazi. Why?

Why do the actual FACTS not matter?

[NWCorona]

42. What am I saying that's wrong?

Also as a former military person this topic matters to me.
So spare the RW BS

[blm]

47. It IS RW bullshit, and intended to further the RW propaganda reBenghazi.

Benghazi was a covert CIA operation under the direction of Gen Petraeus who had dozens of his agents and operatives on the ground there before, during, and after the attack. The effort to smear Clinton as the person solely responsible was always a RW strategy to protect Petraeus from the fallout as they piled on with the perception that Clinton was the one most responsible for the failure.

Oh - you mean your 'military' experience couldn't see through the GOP's deception?

More like you are fine with RW propaganda and see no problem sharing it and furthering it here at DU.

[NWCorona]

49. What does the CIA have to do with this

You talking points are getting wild. The fact is we lost people in Libya. Period

I'm new here but I'm on record as to saying benghazi is bullshit but that doesn't change the fact that Hillary missed up on this statement.

[blm]

59. What does CIA have to do with Benghazi? EVERYTHING - it was a covert CIA operation

and if Benghazi mattered to you as much as you are claiming on this thread you wouldn't be surprised that it is being brought up.

Would you? You'd know it as a fact by now.

[NWCorona]

71. Again what does the CIA have to do with Hillary's answer?

I'm not denying that the CIA was active in Libya.

[blm]

74. Her answer was specific to military's background involvement in overthrow of Quaddafi

and the attack on Benghazi in later years was specific to Gen Petraeus, operation that was ongoing there. Conflating the death of 4 Americans in the Benghazi consulate that was being used as Petraeus' HQ for his covert operation, with the military's involvement in the background of overthrowing Quaddafi where no US military lives were lost is a boon only to the propagandists who succeed in getting more of the public to accept their 'analysis' as credible.

Like you are doing here.

[nichomachus]

40. Maybe we'd know better if we saw the transcripts nt

[AgerolanAmerican]

44. "isn't perfect"??

That's the even bigger whopper. Libya is as far from perfect right now as it is possible to be. The country is in ruins, in civil war, something like a half-million people died from the war she started, and it's not "perfect"?

Is she freaking kidding us?

[JTFrog]

46. It's pretty embarrassing to see DUers driving revenue to right wing sites with click bait.

It's either lazy or malicious. If you can't find a legitimate source, there is probably a good reason for it. If you didn't even try? Well, I'm not allowed to post what I really think about that.

[blm]

72. Thankyou - it feels like DU has turned into Free Republic this election cycle.

And the rationalizations I am seeing are beneath this site and its purpose.

[tularetom]

50. "No Americans were killed in Libya during the filming of this commercial"

[Jester Messiah]

51. How is she so incredibly bad at this? n/t

[thereismore]

53. Right? I am beginning to think that she is not very smart. The empress has no clothes. nt

[Lizzie Poppet]

56. Smart...but no goddamn sense.

Smart isn't enough to make up for no judgement (and sketchy character).

[thereismore]

52. As long as her buddy Blumenthal is safely home with bags of money, all is good.

This kind of stuff ranks up there with Cheney's "There were no terrorist attacks in this country under Bush administration" (paraphrase).

[TipTok]

62. Good lord but she is dense sometimes...

[Lizzie Poppet]

75. Now that my Ignore list is updated...

...this thread's more usable.

Anyhoo...the huge issue with this latest gaffe isn't that she actually said something that isn't at least technically correct. It's the piss-poor judgement it represents in handing the GOP opposition a big ol' club to beat her with. It's the perfect brainfart statement to inflame the teahadist idiots who have been changing "Benghazi" like a moron's mantra ever since the incident. It's simply not a presidential quality act.

In isolation, not that big a deal. In company with her multitude of similar gaffes, it's revealing. Hillary Clinton may be well-qualified on paper to be president; she is not suitable in terms of her judgement under pressure.

[Mike Nelson]

76. I watched the interview...

...it was clear, to me, what she meant. Of course, people can take the quote out and shout, "Liar! Murderer!" Isn't that the Republicans' job?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

79. Translation: There were no fatalities to the firing squad at the execution(s).

[Ferd Berfel]

82. She meant, no one that matters