Is the White House throwing Hillary under the bus on the Benghazi attack?

posted at 4:44 pm on October 12, 2012 by Allahpundit

My guess is no, they wouldn’t dare, but the Daily Caller and Tom Maguire make a fair point. In the span of about 18 hours, we’ve had Biden and Carney each insist that blame for Benghazi’s security failures lies outside the White House. It’s State that’s responsible for protecting U.S. diplomats in the field, which means if the buck doesn’t stop with Obama here, then it must stop with you-know-who. Normally that wouldn’t be a problem, as cabinet members are expected to take the heat for the president when something goes badly wrong. But in this case you-know-who has her eye on running in 2016 — possibly against (heh) Biden himself — and surely doesn’t want Benghazi staining the foreign policy credentials she’s worked hard to build.

Throw Bill Clinton, official Obama campaign surrogate, into the mix and we’ve got the makings of a nuclear clusterfark of ego, ass-covering, presidential ambition, and Clintonian drama. Edward Klein says the chain reaction is already in motion:

In fact, since the convention, Clinton and Obama have had a serious falling-out over two issues: the president’s preparation and lamentable performance in his debate with Mitt Romney, and the question of who should be assigned blame — Obama or Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — for the intelligence and security screw-up in Benghazi, Libya…

My sources tell me that Clinton is working on a strategy that will allow Hillary to avoid having Benghazi become a stain on her political fortunes should she decide to run for president in 2016.

Bill Clinton has even gone so far as to seek legal advice about Hillary’s liability in terms of cables and memos that might be subpoenaed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which this week launched an investigation into the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The committee will also examine the apparent Obama administration cover-up that followed the Benghazi attack.

Finally, I’m told that Bill is playing with various doomsday scenarios, up to and including the idea that Hillary should consider resigning over the issue if the Obama team tries to use her as a scapegoat.

Mickey Kaus sees the plot potentially thickening:

I’m skeptical that O would hang Hillary out to dry, for four reasons. One: She’s the most popular member of the administration, far more popular than even The One himself. Her husband, who’s out on the trail for Obama as I write this, may be even more popular than she is. Why would O want to alienate the Clintons at a moment when he’s desperate to maximize turnout among Democrats? Doing that would damage his re-election chances more than a perfunctory “the buck stops with me” statement on Benghazi.

Two: She’s leaving soon anyway. She said earlier this year that she’ll serve four years at State and no more. Why pick a fight when they’ll benefit from the perception of new leadership at State in three months anyway? Just play out the string, be nice to her, blame “miscommunications” at the Department for the breakdown in consulate security, and let her ride off into the sunset.

Three: How are Obama and Biden going to scapegoat the most famous woman politician in America for a security breakdown at a moment when they’re counting on a decisive gender gap to deliver them a second term? After nine months of the “war on women” and Sandra Fluke and the three-day salute to abortion that you and I know as the Democratic convention, they’re going to freeze out … Hillary Clinton? C’mon.

Four: Even if O thought he could get away with scapegoating Hillary without fear of reprisal from women voters and the Clinton machine, it’d make him look pathetically weak. He likes to talk about how, as president, he bears responsibility for everything, but when you try to pin him down on specifics, he thinks he bears responsibility for almost nothing — be it the economy (Bush’s fault), Fast & Furious (DOJ underlings’ fault), the Benghazi horror (the Mohammed movie’s fault, now State Department underlings’ fault), etc. In fact, my hunch is that Hillary might secretly relish the chance to take a “buck stops here” line herself on Benghazi notwithstanding the danger it poses to her foreign-policy cred, since the public would respect that someone in the administration was willing to stand up. That’s a dangerous contrast for O: If you thought he looked weak before, imagine how he’d look if he tried to push this off on his Secretary of State — and former rival — and she turned it somehow into a demonstration of political courage and accountability. There are already plenty of people who think they nominated the wrong Democrat in 2008. He doesn’t need any more.

Exit quotation from Maguire: “Will this Obama/Biden message of ‘We killed Osama but they forgot to remind us about the blowback’ really carry them past the election?”

Update: An excellent point from Karl:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

Ah, that’s better.

WisRich on October 13, 2012 at 4:38 PM

I’ve been running scenario’s through my head as to the endgame.

Some factors to consider:

-Hillary is (or at least Bill wants her to) considering a 2016 POTUS run.

-Hillary is planning on resigning at the end of the first term.

-If Hillary becomes the fall guy(gal), then 2016 is toast.

-Whether Obama gets reelected or not, he’s gone after 2016 and she has a clear path.

-Hillary don’t trust and shouldn’t trust obama.

-Obama wants to cover this up until after the election to cover his behind.

Conclusion:

Obama plans on blaming Hillary for the whole episode right after the election whether he wins or not, but especially if he wins. She’ll be on her way out and he doesn’t want to take the blame for this scandle. She’ll have no way to fight back because she’ll be out of power.

Therefore, its in her best interest to get this scandle moving and out in the open before the election. She’ll be in a better position for 2016 if Obama losses.

And as we all know, the Clintons always do what’s in the best interest of the Clintons.

They plan on nailing Obama to the wall on this before the election in a manner that won’t get their hands dirty.

WisRich on October 13, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Okay Hil – when does the push back start? My popcorn is getting cold.

johnnybgood on October 13, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Some solid points on Hillary’s cover & reasons for avoidance of blame. But we are looking at a group of lower order blunderers, bottom of the barrel incompetents, and fools of historical proportions, Obama and his inner circle of the morally & intellectually deprived and depraved,virtually created by a media just as bad. Put shortly, they can figure out a way to make an unnecessary hash of it.

arand on October 13, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Who in the White House or State Department first came up with the idea to blame it all on the video tape trailer about Mohammed?

albill on October 13, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Bill Clinton is the only link to moderate Democrats Obama has. If Clinton disowns him, that’s another ten points off Obama’s poll numbers.

logis on October 13, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Is it possible that the ‘unrest’ and ‘rioting’ at all those locations were planned with the consent of the regime? were they supposed to be a cover for what was going to happen at Benghazi? The Ambassador was there completing an arms deal, was going to be ‘hels hostage’ and the Bamster was going to ride to the rescue as part of the October surprise while cementing his world wide street creds? and the 2 SEALS came to the resue and it all went horribly bad?

red131 on October 13, 2012 at 6:58 PM

I want to throw my toupee in with those who believe that Obama will run in ’16 if he loses in ’12.

goatweed on October 13, 2012 at 10:04 PM

I’ve been running scenario’s through my head as to the endgame.

Some factors to consider:

-Hillary is (or at least Bill wants her to) considering a 2016 POTUS run.

-Hillary is planning on resigning at the end of the first term.

-If Hillary becomes the fall guy(gal), then 2016 is toast.

-Whether Obama gets reelected or not, he’s gone after 2016 and she has a clear path.

-Hillary don’t trust and shouldn’t trust obama.

-Obama wants to cover this up until after the election to cover his behind.

Conclusion:

Obama plans on blaming Hillary for the whole episode right after the election whether he wins or not, but especially if he wins. She’ll be on her way out and he doesn’t want to take the blame for this scandle. She’ll have no way to fight back because she’ll be out of power.

Therefore, its in her best interest to get this scandle moving and out in the open before the election. She’ll be in a better position for 2016 if Obama losses.

And as we all know, the Clintons always do what’s in the best interest of the Clintons.

They plan on nailing Obama to the wall on this before the election in a manner that won’t get their hands dirty.

WisRich on October 13, 2012 at 4:54 PM
………………………………….
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2944272/posts

The shiite is definitely hitting the fan and a lot to it started here last night.We are still at it this morning as well.
If you can wade through the above most of the answers are here.
IT starts with Col. Hunt on Howie Carr’s radio show pointing out that dozens of people watched the Stevens and cia guys slaughtered in living color for 6 hours. All the excuses are just more carp.

It’s gonna be hard for the regime to get rid of or throw Hillary under the bus before the election. They need bubba to keep campaigning and if they bus over Hillary that all goes away.
when they lose the election all bets are off.
Problem is if the Chicago mobsters go around taking out other dems they lose any and all credibility in the party and could well self -destruct.
Its gonna be popcorn time and soon.

rodguy911 on October 14, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Hillary is the bus.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 14, 2012 at 11:13 AM

The Clintons are in a tough spot. If they blow apart the Obama campaign allowing Romney to win, they will be resented by the partisan base. So far they’ve been rattling sabers (let it leak out that they were establishing a “legal team” to protect their reputation in this matter), but if they do a lot more, this could backfire on them in a big way. They could get blamed for an election loss the way Nader was blamed in ’96.

Obama has been in a tough spot, also. In retrospect, it might sound like his blaming the Muslim film for the Benghazi attack and death of our ambassador was foolish, but the alternative was worse. The alternative was to admit that Al Kaida is still around and damaging the U.S. in important ways. Even low-information voters understand that Obama can’t run on a record of military achievement when something like the worst terrorist attack on the U.S. since the original 9/11 just occurred.

So Obama had to just hope that he could bluff and lie his way out (as he did fairly successfully with Fast and Furious) and that the media would carry his water. And the MSM have tried to do just that. As a result, a lot of people were temporarily fooled. If the election had only taken place last month, Obama might have pulled this off. But the story has legs and isn’t going away because the event is so simply understood and devastating that even the MSM can’t help him at this point.

I don’t view anything Clinton and Obama have done politically in this matter as irrational.They have done their best to slip out of the mess they’re in, and it almost worked. In my opinion, conservatives have been fantastically lucky that a scandal this big occurred at this time, a scandal so large and obvious that even the MSM hasn’t been able to distort it. This, on top of the astonishing recent debate performance is a perfect storm that seems to have been created at just exactly the right time. Thank God is all I can say.

Burke on October 14, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Whether the Clintons like it or not, anyone in any administration, from Cabinet heads to lower level functionaries, knows that thre may come a time when you fall on your sword to protect the President. It is in the job description.

Sheerq on October 14, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Gee, BillyJeff might just get píssed off at BHO – again.

Methinks that this sorry episode will not bode well for the P-in-C.
IF Hillary had any smarts, she would jump ship ASAP. So would Leon Panetta, but he’s just a mindless, incompetent political hack who needs the job – for now.
HOWEVER, if both Hillary and Leon leave before the election, as well as assorted other Cabinet members, well, it might just be the beginning of a movement:
The “Alice’s Restaurant Massacree” in full part harmony.
And once again, all will be right with America. We can again celebrate Thanksgiving.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on October 14, 2012 at 12:10 PM

what the hell did she think would happen when Barry BAMSTAHHHHHHH!!!!! YOU DA MANNNNNNNNNNN BAMMMMMMMY BABYYYY!!! LOVE YA BARRY OL BUDDY OL PALLLLLLL!!!!!! YAHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pork012 at 3 PM

cableguy615 on October 14, 2012 at 3:56 PM

One good thing about throwing it on Hillary: the Clintons have a history of slipping out of knots. How many years was B. Clinton president and even now, no one knows, and the MSM still does not care, who hired Craig Livingston, and where the FBI files ended up, not to mention the Rose Law Firm files carried out of Hil’s office by her aide as witnessed by a WH guard

If they stick it on Hillary, she will have Bill for cover. Bill has a better team than the WH.

IF the ball is tossed to the Clintons, it may be batted back and land on some State Dept chump, or some poor mil sap monitoring security videos

However that would still leave marks on Mz Clinton. If I were her, I would be very very angry. She was cheated in the primaries and the MSM dropped her like yesterday’s news. To keep her followers in the fold, Hil got Sec of State and a lot of face time for her future image. But she had to represent a WH filled with fools, and she had to make cover for them, at her expense.

On the other hand, she got some good table dancing time in Cartagena

This is the problem with making a deal with an idiot. The idiot is going to carry out his part of the deal like the idiot he is. Not to mention the fact the idiot is a churlish narcissist who probably resents the success and privilege accorded the lady

entagor on October 15, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5