Thread: Fire Hillary Clinton for she was in charge

I do not understand why others have been fired for not getting more help to the Ambassador in Libya when help was needed far before the killings took place. Now I see that 4 top administration officials are being fired but wait a minute, Hillary was in charge of everything so why isn't she being fired as well? This is a travesty of justice all around by using other lower ranking employees be scapegoats the problem is still there with Hillary. I know she is being replaced but still she wasn't fired or even reprimanded as yet while others take the fall for her negligence and shortsightedness. Then again the President was ultimately in charge and yet the press does not condemn him at all, that to is not a very good way to handle this fiasco.

Hillary seems to have a lot of political mojo right now, maybe in part because Bill Clinton campaigned for Obama. I read where her popularity is sky high, and she is the leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016. However, for the life of me, I can't see what she has done to merit the popularity.

She should have taken the blame and stepped down but now everyone sees what she is made up of.

Originally Posted by cosmictraveler

She should have taken the blame and stepped down but now everyone sees what she is made up of.

Does everyone really see that? These people seem to be covered with Teflon. (Cue comments comparing the evils of G. W. Bush.)

Considering the Congressional report found no one at fault, or negligent it would have difficult to use it as grounds for any action. It also directly refutes most of the disproportionate claims made by faux news and others about the events that night.

Rather than beat a dead horse that doesn't exist, the republicans would better spend their time figuring out how to attract enough voters to beat Hillery in the next presidential race.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox

Rather than beat a dead horse that doesn't exist, the republicans would better spend their time figuring out how to attract enough voters to beat Hillery in the next presidential race.

I'm not a Republican. Just so ya know.

That said, Hillary Clinton has about as much running on a Presidential Bid as Ross Perot.

And...... Since this is your first post, my response clearly made no implication that you were.

I am a life long republican who's fed up with the wasted energy that the party has put into distorting events in Libya. The call to fire Hillary is just one more example from the like of Krauthammer etc. It's completely ridiculous. Perhaps next year Congress will actually fix one of the most direct conclusions from their own report--that underfunding of state department security created a climate within that organization that mis-prioritized $ over people.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox

And...... Since this is your first post, my response clearly made no implication that you were.

I wasn't saying you did. I was just giving a heads up. 'Cuz I'm anti- Hillarious Clinton.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox

I am a life long republican who's fed up with the wasted energy that the party has put into distorting events in Libya.

It's not just Libya.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox

The call to fire Hillary is just one more example from the like of Krauthammer etc. It's completely ridiculous. Perhaps next year Congress will actually fix one of the most direct conclusions from their own report--that underfunding of state department security created a climate within that organization that mis-prioritized $ over people.

On all of this I agree- even though I could go off topic about the Republican party- I could just as easily do so about the Democratic party.
The partisan wars are the biggest distraction to politics, yet an inevitable result.

If nothing went wrong why then were 4 officals fired today yet not one thing was mentioned about Hillary.

No one was fired yet. The four you mention were put on adminstrative leave pending further decision making. They decided to resign their post rather than face possible further action.

So like I said they were fired because no one is asked to just be put on leave unless they know the axe is going to fall on them. Hillary has no responsibility for putting these officials on leave? If not then who put them on leave and why not her too? This is just a real fine mess they got themselves into and she is trying to make it look like the others had done something wrong and getting rid of them while she stays on looking like she did nothing . If nothing was wrong why did those officials get put on leave then quit? Very perplexing.

If those officals are no longer there do they have to testify, that may be why they got rid of them so they won't testify.

Resignation doesn't protect them in anyway from Congressional subpena.

Hillary never did have any executive qualifications, other than being married to a governor and president. Bill put her in charge of his health care task force, which was a spectacular failure. Remember Hillary's health care bus tour?

So she was put in charge of the State Department, and they had a big screwup. Normally the executive in charge would bear some responsibility for their department, but in the wonderful world of politics, that's not necessarily the case.

Giving her credit where due- she did step up when it happened. Later, Obama stepped up.
I don't think either one was directly responsible for the events. I don't think she was qualified for the job, however.

Originally Posted by Harold14370

Hillary never did have any executive qualifications, other than being married to a governor and president. Bill put her in charge of his health care task force, which was a spectacular failure. Remember Hillary's health care bus tour?

So she was put in charge of the State Department, and they had a big screwup. Normally the executive in charge would bear some responsibility for their department, but in the wonderful world of politics, that's not necessarily the case.

You know it's all about getting a woman into office. Too bad Condi Rice isn't able to position herself for it. It's ironic. Electing her would be an even stronger social statement than electing Hillary, but Condi isn't a Democrat, so odds are it will never happen.

Hillary already fell flat on her face trying to run in the 2008 Primaries didn't she? I don't think she'll do much better on a second try. She was too forgiving about Bill's misdeeds. It makes her too weak of a role model for female voters. They might applaud her while she's being Secretary of State, but they'd never make her their president. And for male voters, she's 1)- Still married, and 2) - Comes off kind of as a man hater.

Hillary never did have any executive qualifications,

What counts as executive qualifications?

Clinton, Rice, Powell, Albright. All super clever, super high achievers in their various policy and legislative backgrounds. I don't see what's especially inadequate about Clinton. She's done pretty well for the years leading up to this incident.

Originally Posted by adelady

Hillary never did have any executive qualifications,

What counts as executive qualifications?

Clinton, Rice, Powell, Albright. All super clever, super high achievers in their various policy and legislative backgrounds. I don't see what's especially inadequate about Clinton. She's done pretty well for the years leading up to this incident.

Executive qualifications would be being in charge of something, supervising people, building an effective organization, holding employees accountable, getting the most out of employees. When you say Hillary has done pretty well, what do you mean by that? Yes, she has gotten elected to the Senate, based largely on Bill's reputation.

Originally Posted by Neverfly

Giving her credit where due- she did step up when it happened. Later, Obama stepped up.
I don't think either one was directly responsible for the events. I don't think she was qualified for the job, however.

When it happened she sais it was something unexpected , which we know now wasn't at all true because we found out that the Ambassador had repeatedly asked for more protection and was very animate about how things there were deteroriating very fast. That was sent months before this incident ever happened and yet Hillary never addressed this plea for help.

I wonder why we don't hear much about Hillary on the witness stand trying to defend herself in her actions? It seems that the news doesn't want to shed light on her grievous errors in judgment do they,why not?

Originally Posted by cosmictraveler

I wonder why we don't hear much about Hillary on the witness stand trying to defend herself in her actions? It seems that the news doesn't want to shed light on her grievous errors in judgment do they,why not?

It was all over the news that night, including many segments of the exchange. It's still continuing in some echo chambers. We'll probably see it hit the news again after the FBI completes its full report in a month or two.