In my May 25, 2015 post, “Questions I would ask Hillary,” I mused about the opportunity to ask Hillary Clinton about her role as secretary of state. My first question concerned her failure to recognize the series of warnings facing the Benghazi consulate over a five-month period leading up to the attack.
If looks could kill. This is the look I could imagine if I had the opportunity to ask her any questions. (Getty Images)
Continuing with the focus on Benghazi, Madam Secretary … and again, please excuse my lengthy lead-in to my question.
As evidenced by documents recently released, prior to the attack, you and your staff were busy behind the scenes developing a scenario that would make success in Libya a notable accomplishment of your tenure at State.
Just one month prior to the attack, Jake Sullivan, your deputy chief of staff, wrote of your leadership on Libya, citing your “ownership/stewardship of this country’s Libya policy from start to finish.” You were being touted as “the public face of the U.S. in Libya.”
You advocated the overthrow of Moammar Qaddafi within the administration and with NATO, even though he had been quiet since the Iraq war. And when he was killed by a mob, you were left with a “now what?”
It’s unfortunate that you were more interested in your Libyan legacy than the security issues your people were facing in Benghazi.
I am reminded, Secretary Clinton, of the findings by your Accountability Review Board on Benghazi, in which they referred to “gross mismanagement among senior leadership at the State Department.” Incredibly, the ARB did not view your lack of leadership in Benghazi a breach of duty.
I’m sure had things turned out differently in Libya, your campaign would be touting the success there. With this obvious lack of leadership and poor judgement, and the absence to any solid accomplishments at State, how are we to believe you are suited to be president?
Cartoon courtesy media@limitgov.org
