Trump Said ‘Ask The Family’ Of A Benghazi Victim About Clinton’s Judgment, So Someone Did

by John Prager –

“Be careful what you wish for” is an age-old adage. Earlier this month, Donald Trump tweeted that “if you want to know about Hillary Clinton’s honesty and judgement,” all you need to do is “ask the family of Ambassador Chris Stevens,” who died in the horrific terrorist attacks in Benghazi on September 11, 2009.

So, someone did

On Tuesday, after the House Benghazi Committee released its report on the attacks — a report that once again exonerated Clinton and confirmed that the numerous hearings are simply a waste of taxpayer dollars aimed at smearing the 2016 Democratic nominee — Ambassador Stevens’ sister spoke to the New Yorker about the hearings, and Trump has likely dissolved into a steaming pile of seething rage over her remarks.

Dr. Anne Stevens, who serves as her family’s spokesperson, made it very clear that no matter what Republicans say, Hillary Clinton is not to blame for Benghazi. In fact, she says the blame lies with Republicans in Congress.

“It is clear, in hindsight, that the facility was not sufficiently protected by the State Department and the Defense Department. But what was the underlying cause?” she said. “Perhaps if Congress had provided a budget to increase security for all missions around the world, then some of the requests for more security in Libya would have been granted. Certainly the State Department is under budgeted.”

Prior to the attacks, the GOP cut embassy security — a move Clinton warned would be “detrimental to America’s national security” back in 2011:

For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department’s Worldwide Security Protection program — well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration’s request.) Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected.

[GOP vice presidential nominee Paul] Ryan, [Rep. Darrell] Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions. Under Ryan’s budget, non-defense discretionary spending, which includes State Department funding, would be slashed nearly 20 percent in 2014, which would translate to more than $400 million in additional cuts to embassy security.

Stevens goes on to drop the hammer on any words Republicans want to put in the mouths of her or her family:

I do not blame Hillary Clinton or Leon Panetta. They were balancing security efforts at embassies and missions around the world. And their staffs were doing their best to provide what they could with the resources they had. The Benghazi Mission was understaffed. We know that now. But, again, Chris knew that. It wasn’t a secret to him. He decided to take the risk to go there. It is not something they did to him. It is something he took on himself.

Stevens says that the recently released report concluded absolutely nothing new, and that Clinton did her best to keep people safe even in spite of fierce opposition from Republicans:

She has taken full responsibility, being head of the State Department, for what occurred. She took measures to respond to the review board’s recommendations. She established programs for a better security system. But it is never going to be perfect. Part of being a diplomat is being out in the community. We all recognize that there’s a risk in serving in a dangerous environment. Chris thought that was very important, and he probably would have done it again. I don’t see any usefulness in continuing to criticize her. It is very unjust.

Stevens says that the GOP’s investigations are nothing but a witch hunt conducted “purely for political reasons.”

“With the many issues in the current election, to use that incident—and to use Chris’s death as a political point—is not appropriate,” she adds, explaining that “everyone did their very best in response to this event.” In fact, her brother had a lot of respect for Clinton and her “ability to intensely read the issues and understand the whole picture.”

Could this be the final nail in the coffin of the GOP’s ridiculous, money-wasting witch hunts? Probably not, unfortunately.

 

Reprinted with permission from Addicting Info