All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 10, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:39
October 10, 2012, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 247 Podcast.
So let's see.
Martha Raditz, who is going to moderate the vice presidential debate on Thursday night between Paul Ryan and Joe Bitmey, uh hosted Barack Obama at her wedding.
She used to be married to the FCC commissioner, Julius Jynikowski.
Raditz Jenikowski and Obama all went to Harvard.
Who didn't in this regime?
And uh ABC's doing everything they can.
It doesn't matter.
What do we want another to see here?
What does that mean?
Well, how about she tell us who she voted for in 2008?
And how about she tell us who she's gonna vote for uh in November?
So it's it's it's at least nice to know this.
And ABC, they knew it, and they were trying to do everything they could to keep it from being discovered.
Did you know that Susan Rice, who is our UN ambassador, is married to a producer at ABC News?
Susan Rice, what's this guy's name?
His name is Ian Sonigur.
Ian uh Ian Cameron.
He's a producer for ABC News this week.
She's one that's one of the shows that she went on and lied repeatedly about the video being responsible for the riots in Benghazi.
Do you realize an American was arrested because of this lie?
An American citizen.
I know he was arrested ostensibly on a on a on a bank fraud payroll violation.
And everybody knows that's a crock.
The death of our ambassador and three other Americans chalked up at a UN speech for eight days after or longer to a video that nobody ever saw.
And now the State Department has essentially said we didn't link Libya attack to video that we didn't do that.
That wasn't us.
State Department said yesterday it never concluded that the consulate attack in Libya stemmed from protests over an American-made video.
So some some top officials at the State Department folks are unwilling to fall on their swords and take the blame for the lies about the Benghazi attack.
The uh administration press, the AP reporting the State Department officials have briefed reporters about what really happened at the U.S. consulate there, and they say they never linked the attack to anti-Muslim video.
By the way, the State Department had a conference call yesterday that neglected to invite Fox News.
Imagine that.
It was an oversight.
It's an oversight.
Jay Carney, the White House spokes kid, has not faced the press in over a week and a half.
There hasn't been a White House press briefing.
I'll tell you, I I'm getting the sense the wheels are falling off.
Something else that's happening.
Jack Welch came out among many and said that the unemployment number last week had to something wrong with it.
It had to be irregular.
Um it wasn't right.
And of course, everybody jumped on his case.
The regime, even some conservative commentators, said Jack, Jack, don't go there.
There's no conspiracy here.
And Jack Welch is doubled down.
He's got a piece in the Wall Street Journal and said, I damn right about this.
I'm not backing down.
There's something highly unusual about this.
It was noted in a piece of the American Spectator today that you don't need Jack Welch.
You got me.
I predicted a year ago that this unemployment number would be reported at this time under 8%.
How did I know?
Because it's not an economics issue.
It's all political.
One of the easiest predictions I've ever made that the unemployment, all I had to learn was that no incumbent ever been elected, re-elected with the unemployment rate over 8%.
Well, guess what's going to happen?
In the month leading up to the election, the unemployment rate's going to be under 8%.
With this bunch in the White House, you'd be fooled not to predict that.
Greetings, my friends.
Great to have you here.
L Rush Ball behind the golden EIB microphone.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program, 800 282-2882.
Email address, L Rushball at EIBNet.com.
A lot of people also in the in the media, some some uh left-wing bloggers are starting to scratch their heads about the inability of Obama And other members of the campaign in the regime to stop talking about how badly he did in the debate.
Okay, you had a bad night, forget it, move on.
Why keep talking about it?
Why keep reminding people how badly Obama did?
An Althouse in Michigan has an interesting theory about this.
And I'll paraphrase her.
Essentially, the reason the campaign will not let go of how poorly Obama did is that they want everybody to think that's what happened.
It wasn't that Romney was good.
It wasn't that Romney was anything special.
The reason that debate happened the way it did, because Obama had an off night.
Obama was the shock and surprise.
Obama was off his game.
Obama was pathetic.
Obama was pitiful.
And you keep repeating it over and over and over again because you don't want people to realize how great Romney was.
That's her theory, and I like it.
It's unique.
It's uh it's great thinking.
And there's another analysis out there that uh that says that the regime has been totally preoccupied with making sure every week that they are the front runners, that they are in the lead.
You do this for for momentum, you do it for attitude, you do for fundraising, and that the debate's thrown that all out of whack.
Uh the momentum is not with the regime in Obama.
Uh they're not perceived to be leading now.
All the polling data, there's a clearly the polling data trending toward Romney now.
And it particularly in independence, and there's a polling group.
Let me find this, Suffolk polling.
Suffolk polling has pulled out of North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida.
Romney has won those states, in their view.
They're not even going to waste any more time or money polling.
Not on I've never heard of them.
I don't think, but they're there, and they have been actively polling and they've decided to pull out.
And they say that Romney is going to win North Carolina, is going to win Virginia, going to win Florida, and we're not, we don't need to poll anymore.
We know this.
If that's true, if that's true, there really, really is something going on out there.
And I, folks, if you have been listening regularly, to me, you know that I think there has been something big time going on out there for a long time.
Uh talked a little bit yesterday about I don't believe these wild gyrations and fluctuations in the polls.
I mean, I don't think massive numbers of Americans shift their opinions multiple times drastically, as the uh as the polling data would indicate.
But the big story today is the State Department throwing Obama under the bus.
And at the same time throwing Hillary Clinton under the bus, which is a not much discussed aspect of this.
But I'm gonna say these guys in the Obama camp can't even, I don't even think they can do a cover-up well.
This is it's it's it's uh it's amazing how incompetent they are at a cover-up.
But this is a huge story because you have the State Department now basically saying that Obama was lying, that Jake Harney was lying, that Hillary Clinton was lying, that Susan Rice was lying, and anybody else from the regime who went out and tried to blame what happened to our ambassador at Benghazi and in Cairo on this video lying big time.
Top officials at the State Department unwilling to fall on their swords and take the blame for the lies.
The AP, administration press, reporting State Department officials have briefed reporters, all except Fox, they weren't invited about what really happened to the U.S. consulate there, and they say that they never linked the attack to the anti-Muslim video.
That was not our conclusion, and that the question about linkage is for others to answer.
Which, if the State Department says we had nothing to do with it, where else did this lie originate?
Where else could it have originated?
The White House, which is quite telling.
And if there this is a major falling out here between the radical left State Department, the radical left White House.
The State Department has thrown everybody at the regime overboard under the bus on this.
This ought to be the lead story.
This ought to, this, you know, I mentioned yesterday or the day before in a brief monologue about how I think the current acceptance of all of this economic deterioration as the new norm is directly traceable to Bill Clinton and his moral failings and our being told that we had to accept that as the new norm.
I made the point here that – This is it's unprecedented.
This is bigger than Watergate.
If Watergate were to happen today and it was a Democrat president, it would be tolerated.
It would be applauded and praised as brilliant political strategizing and foresight and thinking if the Democrats did it.
This, folks, this is an American citizen was arrested.
An American ambassador is dead.
Three other Americans are dead.
One of them, by the way, Mitt Romney, we got the audio coming up if you haven't heard this, knew.
One of the SEALs, dead, killed in the Benghazi attack.
Met him by accident.
Romney showed up at the wrong house in his neighborhood for a holiday party.
He showed up at the wrong house.
They let him come in anyway, and in the process in that house, he met a seal, admired him greatly.
It turns out one of the four killed in Benghazi.
The audio coming up.
You'll hear this.
Remember that picture of the filmmaker all covered up, being dragged out of his house by sheriff's deputies out in California?
Trundled off to jail.
Obama at the United Nations, Obama everywhere apologizing for this citizen apologizing for our First Amendment, apologizing for freedom of speech, blaming the death of our ambassador on the video.
And we all knew the first time we heard that that that was a lie.
We all knew the video wasn't responsible for what happened in Benghazi.
The regime said that there was a protest at the consulate, and the protest got out of hand, and we didn't have the right proper security to handle it, that's too bad.
And it just escalated, and it was all brought on by the video.
No, there was no protest.
That's the next thing the State Department says.
There wasn't a protest.
There wasn't anything that started innocently and got out of hand.
It was a terror attack from the get-go.
And the president and Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton and Jay Carney and whoever else they threw out lied for eight to ten days, maybe two weeks.
And I put together audio montages of all of this for you to hear.
We'll get started with that when we come back.
Greetings and welcome back, Rush Limbaugh here, the distinguished and prestigious Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Do you remember?
The administration spent $70,000 running a television ad campaign in Pakistan, featuring Hillary Clinton, featuring Obama, apologizing for the video.
Obama went to the UN and apologized to the world for the video.
The producer of the video, a nobody, nobody has any idea now who he is.
Arrested.
At 1.30 in the morning.
Plenty of cameras there and Lights on a bank fraud payroll violator parole violation.
$70,000 ad by television.
We played the audio for you from that ad.
Where is Hillary Clinton?
I haven't seen her.
Nobody died in Watergate.
Let alone an ambassador.
This is this is outrageous.
It is unreal what has happened here.
Knowingly blaming a video and insulting everybody's intelligence in thinking that people would buy this.
And in the process, what was Obama actually doing exonerating terrorists?
The terrorists who killed the ambassador who attacked our embassy consulate in Benghazi exonerated.
Wasn't their fault.
It was the video.
You know why that is.
Well, because Obama killed Osama, and along with that, he killed Al Qaeda.
If Al Qaeda couldn't have done this, it had to be the video because Obama, why, he killed Al Qaeda.
Oh, Obama's our hero.
He's a dragon slayer.
He got rid of the bad guys.
There are any more terrorists.
Uh-oh, terrorists just killed our ambassador and attacked our country.
Uh oh, no, no, video did that.
From the administration press, the AP, Al Qaeda making comeback in Iraq, officials say, right?
On schedule.
Obama proudly proclaims the war in Iraq over.
We're out of there.
It was an unjust and unnecessary war, and Al Qaeda making a comeback in Iraq, Al Qaeda making a comeback in Egypt, Al Qaeda and the Taliban making comebacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
And the President of the United States blames the American Constitution, the First Amendment.
And a guy makes a video that was on YouTube in June.
Here's the first of several montage sound bites about all of this.
I don't care how offensive this video was, and it was terribly offensive.
And we should shun it.
This video is disgusting and reprehensible.
It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.
Let's be clear.
These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.
You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character, who is an extremely offensive video.
The unrest we've seen has been in reaction to a video.
It was a crude and disgusting video, sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.
It was a spontaneous, not a premeditated response, a direct result of a heinous and offensive video.
I know there are some who ask, why don't we just ban such a video?
And the answer is enshrined in our laws.
Our constitution protects the right to practice free speech.
You heard President Obama, you heard Hillary Clinton, you heard Jay Carney, who has not been heard from in a week or two.
No White House press briefings.
You heard Susan Rice who said it was a spontaneous, not a premeditated wrong oh.
State Department.
Now you might say, well, why is the State Department coming clean?
They're showing up under oath today in front of a congressional committee.
They will be under oath.
They are decidedly not going to commit perjury for Barack Obama.
I guess they couldn't find Bill Clinton.
And I couldn't find Bill Clinton because he's out in the campaign trail.
Telling everybody that will listen that the real Mitt Romney was not the guy at the debate.
The real Mitt Romney is the guy we're putting in the ads.
I don't know who that guy was.
I mean, I uh uh I was opposed as a as uh as a great impersonator, but that wasn't real Mitt Romney.
The real Mitt Romney is one you've seen in our ad.
So they couldn't find anybody to lie under oath.
Clinton's on a campaign trail.
State Department says, uh, we're not doing it.
Video had nothing to do with it.
There was no protest.
It was premeditated by Al Qaeda.
Let's go back, Barack Obama, September 25th.
United Nations General Assembly.
That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks as a crude and disgusting video, sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.
Now I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video.
And I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.
It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.
They have to be laughing themselves silly at us.
They have to be laughing themselves silly at Barack Obama.
If they're not laughing at Obama and instead applauding Obama that we got a bigger problem than anybody thinks.
So we hope that the terrorists around the world are laughing at the guy, not applauding him.
But my friends, Senator McCain, like my friends.
This is almost indescribable, the scope of this.
This is a scandal.
I mean, there nothing happened in the bush, and he approaches this.
Watergate doesn't approach this.
On and on and on lying about a video arresting an American citizen.
$70,000 ab buy in Pakistan to advertise the lie.
We'll be back.
Ladies and gentlemen, another reason that this scandal is so big and so important is because not only after the terror attack did they deflect blame to the maker of some video nobody saw, and then arrest the guy without bail, keeping him in jail.
And going on television and running ads and blaming the video for a week and sending everybody out.
Fact of the matter is there were threats.
There was intel.
There were a number of uh threats, terrorist activity, planned attacks against our consulate and the embassy in Libya.
They were ignored by the administration.
Ambassador Stevens, now deceased, begged for help.
We know this now.
We know that he knew or felt, thought because of Intel that an attack was imminent.
He wanted a barbed wire fence.
It was refused.
There was no acknowledgement that the threat was real.
There was no effort made to protect the ambassador, no effort whatsoever made to prepare for an attack.
All that happened was on the day of the attack, our embassy in Cairo issues an apology before anything happens.
An apology for this video, hoping that the apology for the video, which nobody had seen.
And frankly, few knew what the embassy was even talking about.
I didn't know that this video existed when they apologized for it.
I'd never heard of it.
99.9% of people in the world had never heard of it.
Yet they're apologizing for it.
And we're told, well, that we we just want to make sure that they know that we're not the enemy, and we don't wish them any ill harm, and we don't want them to attack us.
Right.
Conflict resolution 101.
Express your guilt, and then say you're sorry, and then beg them not to do any more to you, and all they do is laugh at us.
Now the uh was uh U.S. News and World Report is uh saying that there's a damage control meeting in the White House afternoon between President Obama and Mrs. Clinton.
The Washington Post story today, a Benghazi attack may cloud Clinton's legacy.
A fatal attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound of Libya last month to become a test of Hillary Clinton's leadership and a threat to her much admired legacy as America's top diplomat.
What much admired legacy?
This woman is the biggest hype job I have ever encountered next to Obama.
From the smartest woman in the world, she'd never done anything.
Everything she's put her hand to has ended up being blown to smithereens or boxed, Hillary Carey, you name it.
And the way she handled a bimbo eruptions with Clinton, vast right wing conspiracy on today's show.
Now this.
If she got time to meet with Obama, how come she didn't have time to go up and answer questions before the Congressional Committee today?
Anyway, it was a damage control meeting, big meeting.
Obama and Hillary.
And figure out what lie they're going to tell later today to explain all this.
You've got a rogue State Department saying, it wasn't us.
And it wasn't a video, and we never said it was a video.
Robert Gibbs, the former White House spokesman, before the spokes kid Jay Carney.
What was there?
Somebody between Gibbs and Kearney.
Maybe not.
Doesn't matter.
Gibbs was the first one.
Robert Gibbs is saying, well, Susan Rice, the ambassador to UN went on all the Sunday shows, she wasn't lying.
No, no, no, Susan Rice wasn't lying.
She was relying on intelligence briefings.
Now here's what to bear in mind about that.
The State Department is part of U.S. intelligence community.
There's a State Department Intelligence Division called the Bureau of Intelligence and Research.
The BIR, the BIR works closely with the CIA.
The Directorate of National Intelligence, the National Security Council, especially on intelligence matters related directly to the U.S. diplomacy.
Now, if the State Department is now saying they never put out any info, saying the movie caused the attack in Libya.
And that's what they're saying.
There wasn't any video.
We never said that.
And they're also saying this was not spontaneous.
There was no protest here that led to this.
State's part of the intelligence community that puts out intelligence briefings.
How are we supposed to believe that Susan Rice was relying on intelligence briefings?
There wasn't any intel that made this absurd movie claim.
That's what the State Department's saying.
The State Department is part of the intelligence community.
Robert Gibbs, in an effort to protect Susan Rice, who's married to a producer at ABC this week, by the way.
Ian Cameron.
I tell it, town's incestuous.
So they're out there saying that State Department, which is part of the Intel community, never said there was a video.
They never had Intel saying there was a video.
So how are we supposed to believe that Susan Rice was relying on intelligence briefings?
Gibbs, it's just another lie on top of another lie.
These people are amateurs at cover-ups.
You know why?
Because they've never had to cover up anything.
They've had the media willing to do it for them.
But the media, it's interesting.
The media is turning on this bunch in a couple places.
The media is fit to be tied over the regime's use of the big bird ad.
They're embarrassed.
And from their standpoint, you kind of have to understand it.
You can see why.
They've gone out of their way to call Romney a felon.
He doesn't care when some guy's wife dies of cancer, that he's not particularly fond of people that have less money than he has.
You know, all this stuff.
They've done it every, they've done carried the water every which way.
And Obama's not stepping up.
Obama phones it in at the debate.
They have to cover for that by asking what went wrong.
He's the smartest guy in the world, what happened, and they make up all the phony.
And then as as a means of trying to reclaim lost ground, they run a big bird ad.
And to top it off, there was a tweet.
This is this is.
I thought this was a joke when I saw this yesterday.
I ran this down to make sure this actually was said, and it was.
There's a White House or campaign press secretary by the name of, I think, Jennifer, Jen Psaki.
And when the hubbub over the big bird ad hit yesterday, you know what she said?
President Obama is the only candidate in this race who is going to continue to fight for Big Bird and Elmo.
In the midst of all of this, in the aftermath of Obama's dismal debate performance.
The media turning on them.
The big bird ad.
That's chump change.
It's small stuff.
I can't believe that they're turning on him on that.
And they're having a problem with the State Department business.
Anything they can't save him from is a problem.
Anything they can't cover up themselves is a problem.
So if they can't do the cover up, then it's left to Obama to do it, and I tell you these people are a bunch of amateurs.
Because now they want to say that Susan Rice wasn't lying.
She got bad intel.
Well, the State Department, just to walk you through it again, State Department is part of the Intel community.
They get briefed, along with all the National Security Council people and all this, CIA.
They have their Bureau of Intelligence and Research, that's their intel unit, and they're saying publicly there was no intel, suggesting the video had rankled emotions in Benghazi.
And they didn't ever say so.
So Gibbs has to be lying when he says that Susan Rice wasn't lying, she had bad intel.
The State Department says we didn't have any intel like that.
We didn't put that intel out.
Gibb says she got it from the State Department.
State Department doesn't want to lie because they're going up under oath this afternoon before a congressional committee.
So there were there was no intel that made this absurd movie claim.
The White House made it up, folks.
The White House made it up, and then they gave it out as marching orders to Susan Rice and to Jay Carney, who again hasn't been seen in a couple weeks.
Hillary Clinton, I run the ad in Pakistan, got the audio from that coming up just to remind you.
There was no intel that made this absurd movie claim.
So Gibbs is lying about that.
White House made it up.
So see, Obama had a choice.
Blame the movie or blame the utter failure of his policy in Libya, and he decided to blame the movie.
Because what we have here is an utter failure in Obama foreign policy in Libya.
And you know what's based in?
It's based on pure liberalism, based on the phony concepts of liberalism, which states if you make friends with bad guys, the bad guys will love you.
Obama, we got rid of Qaddafi.
Libya hated Qaddafi, Ergo, Libyans love Obama.
Not the case.
Not everybody in Libya hated Gaddafi, but certainly not everybody in Libya loves Obama.
Probably quite the opposite.
So Obama assuming, like he assumes here, everybody loves him.
And everybody is in awe of him, the one.
So he rolls the dice.
The Libyans love him, they won't do anything.
The Libyans behave the Al Qaeda behaves as Al Qaeda will.
Snake's a snake, scorpion's a scorpion.
You've heard the story.
And we have another breakdown in foreign policy, and Obama can't say, you know what?
My policy was really bad, and I'll get better.
Nope.
Blame it on an American citizen and nothing to do with it, the maker of an obscure wacko.
Amateur-ish video.
Make sure the guy gets arrested.
Apologize all over the world for it.
And it all unravels because the State Department won't fall on the sword for the one.
Still not through with the audio sound bites on this.
Sit tight.
We're coming right back.
And we're back.
Rush Liball behind the golden EIB microphone here at 800-282882.
Your phone calls are coming up.
Back to the audio sound bites.
This is President Obama at the United Nations, September 25th.
The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.
It's time to heed the words of Gandhi.
Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.
The future does not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam carrying on this lie, this cover up.
That all of this slander of the Prophet of Islam led to the death of our ambassador.
Here's more.
In 2012, at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offensive views around the world with a click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete.
This is pathetic.
It's a speech before the United Nations General Assembly.
And it continues this mirage, this myth that a filmmaker is responsible for the death of an ambassador.
This is this is profoundly embarrassing.
We are surrounded by incompetence.
Lie?
I I don't know what, but it's it's embarrassing.
Here's the ad.
We were attacked in 9-11.
State Department, again, just to reiterate, there was no protest that did not spontaneously erupt.
It was a pre-planned terror attack.
We never had any intels that a video had anything to do with this.
And yet, this nation, President United States Hillary Clinton, voice a television ad broadcast in the Muslim world in Pakistan, apologizing for the video.
Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.
We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.
But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.
None.
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.
What does she think?
Everybody in the audience is five years old or something in the way she's speaking.
But anyway.
This is a coordinated lie continuing to be told, planned, and executed by the administration to cover up for an absolute failure of American foreign policy.
Failure of Obama foreign policy.
So he brings Hillary in and they discuss how to do this and they corrupt everybody.
Well, I think this bunch is corrupt before they got there.
Jay Carney, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, any number of other Democrats who joined the chorus that it was the video.
Folks, I'm making a big deal out of this because this is a huge deal.
The State Department I can't believe this has happened.
The State Department throwing Obama under the bus.
There was no video.
We didn't say it was a video.
We had no intel blaming the video.
There was no protest.
They they State Department say everything that the administration has told you.
They made it up.
We have to assume that.
Here's Susan Rice, by the way.
She was all over the Sunday shows on September 16th.
This is Meet the Press, David Gag Gregory, in a question.
You talked about this as spontaneous.
Can you say definitively that the attacks on our consulate in Libya that killed Ambassador Stevens and others was spontaneous?
Was it a planned attack?
Was there a terrorist element to it?
What happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous uh reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, uh almost a copycat uh of uh of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, uh, which were prompted, of course, by the video.
Oh, of course.
Oh, of course, prompted by the video.
And Robert Gibbs saying today that, well, yeah, she wasn't really lying, she just got bad intel in the State Department.
Again, the State Department has their own, they're they're part of the Intel community.
They've got their own Intel division.
They say we didn't have such intel.
Folks, I mean, literally just making this up.
I want you to hear this montage again of all top-level regime figures spreading the lie that's now been exposed.
I don't care how offensive this video was, and it was terribly offensive.
And we should shun it.
This video is disgusting and reprehensible.
It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.
Let's be clear.
These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.
You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character, who is an extremely offensive video.
The unrest we've seen has been in reaction to a video.
It was a crude and disgusting video, sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.
It was a spontaneous, not a premeditated response, a direct result of a heinous and offensive video.
I know there are some who ask, why don't we just ban such a video?
And the answer is enshrined in our laws.
Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.
If they will lie to us this brazenly, this blatantly, in the face of contradictory evidence, what else will they lie about?
What else have they been lying about?
Ponder that as we take another holy prophet timeout.
TheHill.com on September 20th reported that Mrs. Clinton met with members of Congress to try to tell them that it was the video that led to the death of the ambassador at Benghazi.
▲
Export Selection