Ten questions Hillary Clinton should be asked but probably never will be

Ten questions Hillary Clinton should be asked but probably never will be

Hillary Angry 1

Here are the 10 questions Hillary should have been asked but unfortunately never will.

1. In March of 2012 US Embassy in Tripoli Security Officer Eric Nordstrom requested extra security for the first time for the Benghazi Consulate and received no response. Three months later Nordstrom asks a second time, and still no response. Why didn’t your State Dept. send extra security to Benghazi when it was requested?

2. Don’t you think if security details were granted when they were first requested that maybe the Benghazi attack might never have happened and four Americans would still be alive?

3. Why after repeated requests for security did your State Dept and the Administration remove three six man security teams and a sixteen man elite special forces team from Libya?

4. Why did you purposely make the situation in Libya more dangerous by repeatedly denying requests for extra security?

5. With your lackluster performance in the Senate and your abysmal record as Secretary of State why do you think voters should trust you as President when your record clearly shows you are unfit to lead?

6. Have you personally spoke to the families and loved ones of the four men who were brutally murdered on your watch? And if so, when they questioned you on your inaction did you tell them, “What difference does it make!”

7. Why are you, the President, and the entire administration forbidding anyone with first-hand knowledge of what really happened in Benghazi from testifying? What is it that you and the administration have to hide?

8. When you had a chance to label Boko Haram as a terrorist group during your failed stint as Secretary of State, you didn’t. Why then should the American people ever trust you with their national security?

9. Did you decide to do this interview because your book is not quite meeting the expectations you had hoped for? 

10. You titled your book “Hard Choices”. Did you name it that because it will be a hard choice for voters to support you if you run in 2016? Or did you name it hard choices because that is what you were faced with as Secretary of State and failed to make? SOURCE

If American Conservatives don’t fight hard against this OLD WITCH, if the members of Congress don’t start to take the TEA Party seriously, if my own Congressman, Pete Sessions (TX-32) and his cohorts don’t do everything they can to come to terms with the TEA Party and rally the very best the GOP can come up with, these questions truly will not matter.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

This entry was posted in America 1st and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Ten questions Hillary Clinton should be asked but probably never will be

  1. Mark says:

    It has become clear in the last few months that Bill was close associates with a known Pedophile. Considering Bill’s visits with him, are you concerned about Bill’s own acts pf pedophilia and will you continue to stand behind him in spite of his war on women and family values?

    • the unit says:

      What the Hill are you saying? Say again as I could have missed it.

      • the unit says:

        Apologies to you Mark. Misinterpreted who your comment was directed toward. Now realize it was to the one who used to have lady parts.

  2. TomR,armed in Texas says:

    Why do you hate America? Bitch.

    • Wayne says:

      Tom, she stood on the stage during the primaries with bo and the rest of the demonrats and declared ” I am a progressive” and that my friend should say it all. People I speak with about the progressive movement don’t really know what a progressive stands for. You would think a person with a computer would go online and do a little research. They laugh when I call her a Marxist as if I don’t know what I’m talking about. She better not get into the W.H. or wee’l all find out too late.

      • BobF says:

        Unfortunately, there’s not a lot of information out there about the American POW’s during the Korean War who were Progressives and how they collaborated with the North Koreans while in captivity. This link has an article with some information on them:
        http://www.cyberussr.com/hcunn/e-asia/korea-pow.html

        The Chinese Communists hoped, and Americans feared, that “brainwashed” POWs, especially the “progressives,” would remain susceptible to Communist influence after the armistice, when they were returned to the USA…The Communists put special emphasis on meetings of “progressives” in the last few weeks of captivity, hoping they would maintain their “progressive” network back in the USA. Once the POWs returned to the USA, however, the “progressive” organization disappeared without a trace.

        The Progressive Organization disappeared because the took over the Democrat Party.

        • Wayne says:

          Just read the link Bob. I can’t imagine what these soldiers went through. Torture and deprivation are surely powerful motivating forces to do things that I think no amount of training or instruction can prepare a human being to endure. I plan to look for that book in my public library. War is hell.

  3. Tom Haycock says:

    If This totally unqualified woman does get the Democratic Nomination and 90% of the female voters vote for her as the black voted for Obama we will have more of the same in the future and this great nation will crumble. Race, Religion, nor Gender should ever be a reason to vote for a candidate. It will never be “Time for a _____ President” based solely on Race Religion or Gender. What it is “Time For” is a President who will do what it takes to represent The Majority of Americans.

  4. Abigail says:

    Another question for she whom i am tired of already: Do you agree with your daughter when she said: “the importance of having a woman president, absolutely it’s important, for, yes, symbolic reasons — symbols are important; it is important who and what we choose to elevate, and to celebrate.” In other words, do you believe it is more important that the White House should be occupied by symbols we elevate and celebrate or by qualified individuals with brains and experience working for the best interests of the country? If so, then doesn’t the presidency risk becoming a prize awarded to the next minority group as a symbol? Because what is next, elect a transgender or a gay or gender neutral for ‘symbolic reasons’? Do you, madame former sec. of state, really believe that is what the Founders had in mind when they created the Office?

    • Capt Ron says:

      Agreed. Please don’t take this badly; there will be a time when a woman as President will be a good thing, but not now. And, not another Progressive. We need a Conservative who will stand on the Constitutional principles set forth to run and lead our country. Anyone for Cruz/Rubio, or maybe Rubio/Lee?

Comments are closed.