Hillary Clinton: No regrets for ‘what difference does it make’ comment

Hillary Clinton: No regrets for ‘what difference does it make’ comment

In an interview that aired on ABC News Monday night, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Diane Sawyer she has no regrets for telling Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., “What difference, at this point, does it make?” during a Senate committee hearing on Benghazi.

“That’s right,” Clinton said.

“Doesn’t make a difference?” Sawyer asked, appearing to be taken aback by Clinton’s January 2013 statement.

“In the moment, it did not,” Clinton said in response.

Trending: A coup is dead. Now for the counterintelligence investigation we really need

“What we had to be focused on was saving American lives,” she added. Clinton, however, did not say which lives she was trying to save.

Sawyer gave Clinton a chance to revise her now-infamous 2013 statement, asking if it “makes a difference, now?”

“Do you want to change that?” Sawyer asked

“No, no,” Clinton said. “No, I don’t.”

She went on to suggest that her answer was justified due to a “fixation” on “talking points” used by White House operatives like Susan Rice, who famously told multiple network news programs that an obscure YouTube video was the reason for the attack that saw four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, killed.

“What I said at the time was, you know, if you’re gonna stay fixated on things like talking points or fixated on whether or not everybody was affected or not by the video, you’re missing the larger picture,” she told Sawyer.

Although Clinton defended the comment that will forever be connected to her name, she told NBC’s Cynthia McFadden that Benghazi would be her one “do over.” As for cooperating with a congressional probe, however, Clinton had a different attitude, telling McFadden investigators can read her book if they want to see her notes.

According to the UK Daily Mail, a full chapter of her book, “Hard Choices,” is devoted to defending her reaction to Benghazi. While she told Sawyer that she takes responsibility for what happened there, she made it clear that it was State Department personnel who underestimated the situation in Benghazi.

“I take responsibility, but I was not making security decisions,” she said.

“But,” America Rising asked, “did Clinton actually need to be a security expert to have done more personally?”

The PAC went on to highlight several incidents that led up to the Sept. 11, 2012 attack, and noted that Clinton’s State Department received and denied several requests for additional security. Clinton said she’s “not equipped to sit and look at blue prints,” but the PAC said that given the recent history, she did not need to be a security expert to see there was a problem.

“Any leader – blue print expert or not – who was looking at these facts could see that that individuals stationed in Benghazi were at increasing risk,” America Rising added.

Related:

Be sure to check out Joe’s other articles at his blog, the Conservative Firing Line, and also check out his Facebook page, here.

For your convenience, you may leave commments below using either the Spot.IM commenting system or the Facebook commenting system. If Spot.IM is not appearing for you, please disable AdBlock to leave a comment.

Joe Newby

Joe Newby

Joe Newby is an IT professional. He has written for Conservative Firing Line, Examiner, NewsBusters, and Spokane Faith and Values.


Commenting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.