What senator stood up to more than 90 countries, successfully defending U.S. sovereignty before the Supreme Court? Answer.

Please use the PayPal button above to donate to The US Report.

Subscribe with Kindle

Search the US Report. 

Please visit The US Report bookstore!

Need a speaker for your next event? Contact us.



 The US Report, an indie publisher, features stories about politics, public figures and government. Learn more about The US Report  and the credentials of our contributorsHelp us keep TUSR online; use the PayPal link in the right column.



Durbin uses tirade about Iraq WMDs to run interference for Clinton

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told Clinton he'd have fired her over Benghazi. (Photo: Still shot snipped from video at The Daily Caller)Illinois senator Dick Durbin is a perfect illustration of why we need term limits on senators. The Democrat delivered a tirade during Senate hearings about Benghazi on Wednesday, attempting to run interference for Sec. of State Hillary Clinton.

Before the hearing ended, however, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) neutered any defenses Democrats could mount, even the silly attempts made by Durbin.

Durbin has been in Washington for 30 years, serving in the House before he garnered a plum Senate seat that propelled him to the number two position in the body.

Therefore seasoned political observers knew exactly what Durbin was doing when it was his turn to speak.

Durbin offered Clinton the customary praises, just as most Republicans did. Praising someone who has completely botched foreign policy should be grounds for hearings, but who has the time?

Durbin ranted about not finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and he provided a platform for Clinton to harp on funding because that’s all she’s got. Besides, Democrats routinely blame Republicans for whatever happens, just as Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) tried to do during House hearings on Benghazi.

What Durbin didn’t mention was that President George W. Bush got congressional approval for the War in Iraq. President Barack Obama, on the other hand, didn’t consult Congress when he decided to intervene in Libya.

Dems have asserted lack of funding caused the security shortfall in Benghazi. That assertion came after they blamed an unknown filmmaker eventually perp-walked and carted off to jail by the Obama administration whose politicos dismissed the First Amendment in the interest of catering to Islamists. That perp walk and the assault on the First Amendment should go down in history as another "Day of Infamy."

Sen. John McCain did grill Clinton before Durbin got on the stump. The Republican from Arizona wanted to know why the administration is refusing to provide the full text of emails related to attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. McCain said, “Here we are four months later and we still don’t have the basic information.”

He also pointed out we haven’t been able to talk to people who were evacuated on the night of the attacks. “The American people and families [of those killed] still have not gotten the answers they deserve,” said McCain.

You can bet the nearest donkey Benghazi had nothing to do with funding. If Obama had really been concerned about the war he injected the U.S. into in Libya, he could’ve simply issued a presidential directive just as he did in January, 2012:

Executive Order (EO) 13597 on travel and tourism, issued January 19, 2012, establishes as U.S. policy that “a coordinated policy, consistent with protecting our national security, is needed to support a prosperous and secure travel and tourism industry in the United States.” It instructs U.S. government agencies to aggressively expand the nation’s ability to attract and welcome visitors while maintaining the highest standards of security.

After all, we built new interview windows in China and Brazil. Perhaps Obama and his team are challenged by setting priorities.

If a Republican was in the White House, you’d never hear the end of the Benghazi cover-up, a cover-up accomplished with help from most media eager to carry water for any liberal talking point. Dead Americans don’t matter to U.S. media unless the bodies can be used to further a liberal agenda.

As the Senate hearing progressed, Clinton repeated her meme of making sure U.S. personnel are safe and continuing her efforts at reforming State. She also got Obama’s buzzword in, a buzzword appearing in just about every taxpayer-funded, liberal effort on local, state and national levels:

“I also hope we’re looking forward.”

McCain said something that should resonate with Democrats who claimed to care about the dead. He said Ambassador Christopher Stevens told him on July 7 that he had “deep concerns about the security in Benghazi.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) didn’t pull any punches. He said he’d have fired Clinton and he pointed out what State did spend money on─$100 thousand (taxpayer) dollars to send three comedians to India. You can’t make this stuff up, but it gets worse. State spent money to send visual artists to local communities abroad as well.

How much did State spend on those artists? $1 million taxpayer dollars. Meanwhile, Dems are still lobbying for tax increases.

House hearings on Benghazi are scheduled to start at 2 p.m. Expect fireworks.


Related Articles at The US Report

Despite hard times, US will spend $1 million to send 15 visual artists abroad

Rep. Cummings should read GAO report—State budget didn’t cause Libya meltdown

Congressman wants answers on fugitive set free by State Dept.

(Commentary by Kay B. Day/Jan. 23, 2013)


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

« Obama’s war in Libya: Once again, Michael Scheuer’s words prove prophetic | Main | Hillary’s day in the Benghazi spotlight: Don’t get your hopes up »