Via the Free Beacon, isn’t this interesting. Watch the first few minutes of her exchange with Jim Jordan at this morning’s hearing. If Hillary knew right away that “Innocence of Muslims,” the YouTube video that was being protested in some Islamic countries at the time, had nothing to do with the Benghazi attack, how do we explain this statement two days after it happened?
I also want to take a moment to address the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries. Let me state very clearly – and I hope it is obvious – that the United States Government had absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its content and message. America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. And as you know, we are home to people of all religions, many of whom came to this country seeking the right to exercise their own religion, including, of course, millions of Muslims. And we have the greatest respect for people of faith.
To us, to me personally, this video is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.
She didn’t explicitly name the video as the key motive in Benghazi but that’s the conclusion you were supposed to draw. Chris Stevens and three other Americans had been murdered less than 48 hours before; the media was consumed at the time with deciphering what had happened. The movie was the White House’s way of protecting Obama’s record on counterterrorism two months before the election by suggesting that an unforeseen catalyst had inspired the attack. It wasn’t garden-variety terrorism that the White House normally should and would have been prepared for. It was a mob of Muslim civilians driven into a rage by blasphemy that had overrun the compound. Surely that can’t be held against Obama, right? Two weeks later, O was still talking about the movie in some of his pre-election TV appearances.
But it gets worse. Remember this post? Charles Woods, the father of former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, who was killed in Benghazi, claims that none other than Hillary Clinton told him after the attack, “‘We will make sure the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.’” According to the document Jordan mentions in the clip, she knew the whole time that the movie was a red herring. Why was she still telling people, including family members of the fallen, things to the contrary when she was telling Chelsea Clinton in e-mails the day it all went down that an “Al Qaeda-like group” was responsible? (And why, for that matter, did she think the U.S. government should or could arrest and prosecute a man for making a film it didn’t like?) Did some other intelligence come to light later suggesting that the movie was a motive for the Benghazi attack? If so, how come Hillary didn’t mention that to Jordan today?