Depending upon your political partisanship, Hillary either came away looking good at the conclusion of Thursday's House Select Committee on Benghazi or she didn't. She certainly had the Democratic members of the House Committee running interference for her at every turn and in every imaginable and highly selective manner possible.
The way the Democrat committee members tortured language and selectively threw in every non-issue into the fray was monumental in its scope and irrelevancy, but that's liberal progressive "new speak". It reminded me of how Bill Clinton tortured the language of the definition of "is" in front of his impeachment charges two decades ago.
Liberal progressive "new speak" is designed to the end that people become confused and confounded and liberal progressives thus win the day in the public forum of low information voters who simply don't understand the issues and their meanings.
Now, whether Hillary won, lost or tied this epic event in the minds of the public is almost irrelevant. What has gone unsaid is what the FBI investigators can or will use from Hillary's testimony in the furtherance of their criminal investigation over her use of a private email server that was unsecured and which has to date been shown to contain classified documents in contravention of federal law. The Benghazi scandal is simply the most prominent and emotionally engaging issue that Republicans are pressing at the moment.
The results of the House Committee hearings may well be few from a legislative standpoint. However, every word that Hillary has uttered or will utter in this hearing, or its aftermath, will matter far more in the FBI investigation, that what can be tangibly had as a result of the House Benghazi hearing.
Investigators, and ultimately prosecutors, are always looking for inconsistencies and contradicting statements given by the principal of an investigation. It's one thing for Hillary to verbally engage in political polemical performance before the House Committee and another thing to eventually have to answer to conflicts in testimony given before the House Committee and other previous public pronouncements, when charges are brought in a federal court.
Expect to hear legal experts opine on this possibility in the following days as an analysis of every word of Hillary's testimony is gone over in detail.
No comments:
Post a Comment