I didn’t have high hopes for Greta Van Susteren’s interview of outgoing Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, but I didn’t expect a total whiff on the one question she asked about Benghazi:
Van Susteren asked, “In light of what’s happened can Americans now
feel safe or satisfied that we are moving to secure all our consulates
and embassies?”Clinton said that the Accountability Review Board
made a set of recommendations and the State Department is “implementing
all of them and making sure that we apply them.”While Clinton stated that “It’s not all a question of money,” she added, “Ever since the Bush administration,
our requests for security money from Congress have not been met. So
we’ve had to make priority decisions and it’s been difficult.”
Would you believe she didn’t ask a follow up to that?
Something as basic as, “why were existing resources removed from Libya in the months before the attack when you knew that there was a growing security risk?”
Or “say, shouldn’t that billion-plus dollars in State’s budget designated for a
global-warming initiative, and other wasteful projects be better spent on basic security?”
Or “why did Charlene Lamb, the State Department official who fielded security
requests from the Libya U.S. diplomatic officials, tell the House Oversight Committee back in October that money
wasn’t the reason for the lax security in Libya?”
At a bare minimum, at least one of those questions should have been asked, but Greta just let it go, and went on to the next subject.
Gah!