Hugh Hewitt
1/6/2014
HH: …so you had A.B. Stoddard, Van Jones, and Kevin Madden on today. And you were talking about Hillary. And I think that whenever Hillary comes up, and a partisan like Van, and I’m a partisan for the Republicans, so it’s okay to be a partisan, is sitting there, the question has to be answered by them. Where was Hillary on the night of Benghazi? And what was she doing? Because the Kirkpatrick piece on Benghazi from last week that stirred up everything didn’t even talk about Hillary. How in the world does she run with the Benghazi timeline on the Etch-a-Sketch that’s been shaken?
JT: Well, I don’t, obviously, she can’t. I mean, if she makes the decision to run, there will have to be, and I’m sure her advisors know this. They are smart people. There will have to be some questions answered about it, if not in one big, long, meaty piece, then over and over and over again. I think it is something that there are a lot of questions that remain about it. For me, specifically, you know my coverage of Benghazi has been focused on the State Department’s refusal to take seriously enough the requests for added security from diplomatic and security experts on the ground in Libya throughout the year leading up to the Benghazi attack. So there are a lot of questions, and I’m sure if she runs, she’ll have to answer them.
HH: Yeah, my argument is…
JT: But obviously, a guy like Van Jones isn’t going to bring it up. But you know, what was interesting, I thought, is that Van Jones is salivating over the idea of Hillary being challenged on the left.
HH: Yeah, I saw that.
JT: He’s for Brian Schweitzer to run against her.
HH: I thought to myself…
JT: He’s excited about a more populist Democratic Party, and he does not see her as part of that.
HH: Yeah, Brian Schweitzer is just, I’m happy. I’m with him on that. Kevin Madden said the same thing. Hoorah. Bring it on. But I do see that as a useful way for the left, who realize that she is the inevitable nominee to deflect away this. To me, if you want to be the commander-in-chief, and the one night that you’re in charge in an international crisis in Benghazi and you won’t answer questions about it, I’m just going to keep coming back to that…
The entire transcript is at HughHewitt.com
H/T Breitbart.TV Listen to audio at the link.
Related: There’s more at HotAir.com
Alternate headline: Jake Tapper removed from debate moderator consideration…
The truth about Benghazi Does a former U.S. Ambassador actually believe a film was responsible for the terrorism in Libya on 9/11/2011?
Wrong Again by Stephen F. Hayes
…It’s hardly surprising that the New York Times would find the New York Times the final word on an issue.
But for the rest of us, rational and irrational alike, this revisionist account is neither authoritative nor definitive. The central thesis of the piece is wrong, and the sweeping claim the author has made in defending it is demonstrably false…
