Engaging in some pre-nomination diplomacy, Susan Rice and acting CIA Director Michael Morell sat down this morning with Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte, hoping to clear the air on the Benghazi attack. How'd it go? Not well.
For those who can't watch clips online, Graham told reporters, "Bottom line: I'm more disturbed now than I was before." He added, in reference to the intelligence community's talking points written just four days after the attack, "I think it does not do justice to the reality at the time and in hindsight clearly was completely wrong. But here's the key, in real time, it was a statement disconnected from reality."
Let's unpack this a bit, because it's awfully difficult to take Graham's complaining seriously.
When Rice appeared on Sunday shows the week of the attack, she explained that it was too early to draw "definitive conclusions," but the "best information we have to date" suggested the violence "began spontaneously ... as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo" in response to the anti-Islam internet video.
The ambassador then added, "But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that effort with heavy weapons." Asked about a possible al Qaeda role, Rice said this was unclear, explaining, "I think this is one of the things we'll have to determine."
Why did she make these comments? Because the CIA prepared talking points, reflecting the combined judgment of the intelligence community, which told her and others this was the best available information. Rice stuck closely to the CIA materials, and embellished nothing.
What Graham argued this morning, in effect, is that Rice shouldn't have believed the intelligence community -- indeed, he thinks the intelligence community shouldn't have believed the intelligence community -- and everyone involved had all of the knowledge they needed four days after the attack to understand exactly what happened.
What's more, this may be inconvenient timing for such details, but for all of Graham's huffing and puffing about the intelligence being "completely wrong" and "disconnected from reality," maybe now is a good time to point out that the talking points have actually stood up pretty well. We know more now than we did two months ago about the events in Benghazi, but the week of the attack, the intelligence community said the anti-Muslim video helped lead to violence, the attack was hardly planned out well in advance, and extremists seized an opportunity, exacerbated by inadequate consulate security.
And do we know now? As Joe Klein explained:
There were two attacks in Benghazi that night. The first was a spontaneous response to the anti-Islamic film that had caused similar protests in Cairo and elsewhere. That is important: there would have been no terrorist attack if the film hadn't provided the opportunity for mayhem. Most of the protesters were members of local salafist militias, who quickly realized that the security at the consulate was nearly nonexistent. They organized a second attack with heavier weapons, including mortars. And so we have four essential facts that do not contradict one another:
1. the attack was a spontaneous reaction to the film
2. it was followed by an organized attack.
3. both attacks were populated and organized by terrorist militias, with loose ties to Al-Qaeda.
4. security at the consulate was inadequate
In other words, what the CIA told Rice and other officials four days after the attack looks pretty accurate with the benefit of hindsight.
So what is Graham so "disturbed" about?
Leave a Comment:
Graham is from South Carolina. Rice is an African American. Republicans lost the election despite getting the majority of the white vote. Someone has to pay.
yes and EVERY AFRICAN AMERICAN that has worked for Obama has been 'challenged' by the GOP...no racism THERE.
Plus, she's a woman.
And Graham is a bitchy old white woman. Sorry. I really cannot stand him/her.
But more important than all the other comments we must all realize Rice is not only a black, female but she is heads above both Graham and McCain combined in intelligence. I would strongly suggest that just because you have been elected by your local machine that fact makes you intelligent is the wrong assumption. I would also respectfully request that both gentlemen shut their mouths on this subject.
I won't be Susan Rice! Maybe they should try Mitt or Rove!
Let Miss Graham go mince his/her way back to the state "too small to be a republic and too large to be an insane asylum." Miss Graham does a good job, working in the 300-year South Carolina tradition of treason.
So, first, maybe this explains the Graham/McCain outrage:
However, the other thing I've noticed is that misogynists have nothing but glowing and chivalrous respect for women--AS LONG AS THEY KNOW THEIR PLACE!! But let a woman show that she's smarter than them or doesn't grovel at their feet and they'd stone her if they could get away with it. Well, I say it's time to grow up and get over it.
I've been so impressed with the *courage and character* of Susan Rice during this affair, and John McCain and Lindsay Graham look like a couple of petulant little boys. Tsk-tsk. . . .
So much for the hopes that a decisive victory over the GOP would chasten them and they would return to sensible norms of governance. Obama version 1.0 believed that representatives like Graham and McCain coming from deep Red states like South Carolina and Arizona would return to sanity. He truly believed they would hew to principles of comity and the age old art of governance- of rational parties finding common ground. What Obama said on the campaign trail in 2012 was that Obama 2.0 would be different. That he has learned that Washington will not be changed playing an inside game.
Though the President does not yet believe it, a great hyperpartisan war is the only solution left. The central question for progressives then becomes determining the new order that the war would be fought for. What would the new governing order look like after the GOP obstructionists are crushed to dust?
First, it is important to get a grip on the reality of the politics in play. I don't think Graham and McCain are pursuing obstructionism due to racism. I think they would be doing the same to a Muskie proposed by a Gore. I'm not saying that it is not fair game to attack Graham's and McCain's de facto racist stance- Without question Graham is playing to racists in his base.
What I am saying is that it doesn't get at their true rational- it explains the popularity of their attack with their base but it does not explain why these intelligent men chose to persist in what they know to be an intellectually dishonest attack. The reality is they don't care what the CIA chief told them. The facts are beside the point. They know the President has 6 months in which he can spend political capital from the election. They are running out the clock, and want to focus national attention on a controversy they know is specious, they know they will lose, and will still pursue because it serves the purpose of keeping the attention of the White House and the nation not on real needs- like real Wall Street reform, meaningful Climate Change legislation, and deep cuts to unneeded defense spending.
Obama was right. There are no red states or blue states. He is correct that there is significant unheard support for Blue policies in the Red States, and squelched support for Red policies in Bue States.
The trouble is that those voters are disenfranchised. Graham and McCain are free to ignore those voters, and free to obstruct democrats rather than compromise. They are free to vigorously oppose any negotiated path towards Unity that Obama 1.0 favored.
What is Obama 2.0's approach to this obstruction? Will he wield OFA like a cudgel, or will he pursue the more conventional bully pulpit- whistlestop take-the-campaign to the people strategy? I don't think he has made up his mind. Relentless hyperpartisan warfare would stand in stark contrast to the policy advocated by Obama 1.0 at the 2004 convention:
Obama realized he was wrong, and this latest episode with Graham and McCain underscores it. It is not the pundits who drive the disunity. It is GOP policy that began with Gingrich's Contract on America, and language and tactics of uncompromising extremism. He hoped that a decisive victory by him and over Senate seats would do the trick of showing the GOP that their extremism was ineffective.
Nothing of the kind has been achieved.
The problem is that the blue voter in South Carolina has no power- they forever shall be silenced by the structure of highly polarized representation. As a radical, I oftentimes advocate direct democracy- like the electorate being able to register direct electronic votes on legislation in Congress. But we have seen where the direct democracy has taken California with their Initiative mechanism. The idea of a republic- of representation is not the problem- legislation is complex and understanding it is a full time job that citizens cannot undertake while holding down their day jobs.
So what to do about polarized representatives like McCain and Graham who refuse to give up on obstructionism? Is the solution escalation to hyperpartisan civil war? At the end of the civil war, there were supermajorities that could impose the new order on the South.
What would peace look like after the campaign? Would it be perpetual hyperpartisanship? Do we believe that a monopoly on power is the solution to America's problems? That is the path to despotism.
Persuming there is the supermajority needed for an amendment, we need to think about what peace would look like after the GOP met its Armageddon at the hands of OFA like organisations.
Perhaps we could have some segments examining these utopian "Day after Armageddon" plans for Reconstruction. My preference would be proportional representation to restore the voting franchise to voters whose ideological positions are in the minority in their states. If 10% of the voters in the US are libertarians, then it is fair that 10% of the Senators be libertarian. If 15% are on the environmental Left we call the Green Party, then 15% of Senators should be Green.
National proportional representation would tend to fragment the major parties and would give voice to radical voices without allowing them an obstructive power since they would only command a minority blocks of Senators. However such factions could find common ground, as the libertarians and Greens do on radical cuts to military spending. Such issue oriented coalitions could unite with major parties to deliver overwhelming votes on legislation. Note this is not a system of radicalization of US politics, but towards normalization- and the unwinding of polarization driven by modern media which re inforce narcissistic bubble realities of extremism. Proportional representation would allow centrist leaders like Gerald Ford, Nelson Rockefeller, and Jon Huntsman to retain seats in Congress, allowing them to weather trendy backlash of extremism.
That is the answer to the Red State Blue state puzzle. Voters are disenfranchised because the US has declined to upgrade its republic to a system of proportional representation. The US has declined to accept the notion that the ever more diverse US electorate prefers a choice of more than two colors.
A concise parsing of the situation. Thank you!
Dale, if you are talking to me, thanks. You can always count on John "three full pages of conciseness" Messerly. My children are equally appreciative of the volume of words. They have no need of sleep aids.
I read it.
but you said it...
To answer the question, Graham was disturbed that Susan Rice is a black woman and a democrat. That disturbs him most.
Basically, though, they didn't hear what they wanted to hear: that it was all a conspiracy by the White House to cover something, anything, up.
EXACTLY!
My question is - why did Rice and the Obama administration even bother?
Haven't they learned anything?
When I first heard about the meeting it sounded like a bad idea.
You don't control bullies by appeasing them - you control them by whupping their rear ends.
Look at the Obama Cabinet in 2013: Susan Rice, Secretary of State, Eric Holder, Attorney General, Jacob Lew, Secretary of Treasury, Barack Obama, President and, oh yes, Joe Biden, Vice President. Of the top positions in the whole country, only one is of the same color as many of the voters Karl Rove intends to appeal to in 2014. They tried to get President Obama and failed to defeat him but did succeed in having him viewed negatively in enough states to have Romney and the Republicans prevail. They have already gone after Holder and had a phony contempt of Congress vote passed in the House. Now it is Susan Rice's turn, attack her so she will be viewed negatively by the Rove voters. Jacob Lew may escape because he is not black. Joe Biden is considered non-white by many of the Rove voters. Listen to Hannity a time or two and you will see who are his newest Pastor Wright and Bill Ayres. He can't get enough of BENGHAZI.
McCain, Graham, Ayotte are just the mouthpieces. Notice how similar their responses were. They had read today's "talking points." I wonder what the Koch Brothers are thinking about how well Rove's plan is working?
Lindsay Graham was one of those haters who led the impeachment of Bill Clinton for getting head in the White House! Enough Said!
Graham is making a circus out of our esteemed Halls of Congress! -Kevo
I remember a long time ago, roughly around the Clinton impeachment time frame, when I still used to watch the idiotic Sunday political shows, when Graham was supposedly this reasonable Republican. I never -- NEVER -- ever could understand what the hell he ever did or said that could even remotely earn him that designation. It was always the David Brooks, Douthat act: say a few things that sound somewhat reasonable and then weasel around to be able to always make the case that whatever the Republicans wanted to do was the exact right thing to do.
Graham knew before he spoke with Rice exactly what he was going to say today coming out of the meeting with her. Exactly.
What a fraud Graham is, and what an idiotic, stupid press and media we have.
As disgusted as you. Whoever is left still watching the Sunday political shows and for that matter, any other “stupid press” segments, need to stop. It's time for a boycott and a flood of e-mail complaints to the networks so viewer ratings are below congresses approval ratings and they're drowning in complaints.
Exactly jst1voice , that would be a great gig for OFA , I'm in
DWIA , Graham says he is for raising taxes , then says , " only if it comes from closing loop holes and lowering rates " , and the press acts like this is some kind of break thru for the GOP...FACEPALM.....He is just as bat crap as the rest of them
Actually, Patango, what Graham said was worse than that. He was for new revenue but only by closing loop holes and ONLY if the Dems were ready to negotiate "entitlement" cuts. And then the press goes ga ga and praises the turd as standing up to Norquist. Pretty sickening to have a press that damned stupid.
what he said was he'd
"... do what was right for the country but only if democrats [cut] entitlements."
what a POS
Mr. Graham was quite clear about his state: "I'm more disturbed now than I was before"
That is the only explanation.... It is an obsession!
The thing that disturbed me most about Sen. Graham's remarks (and it's not on this clip was that he characterized Ambassador Rice as "being involved in Benghazi".
She was speaking on the Sunday morning shows as a representative of the administration using their prepared talking points. As the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Ms. Rice was never in any way, shape or form "involved" in Benghazi.
MindBend . . . Yes, I keep trying to figure out WHY these folks think that the U. N. Ambassador would have any particular knowledge of events that evolved quickly in a faraway part of the world. She's not connected to the State Department or the CIA. Nor was she an administration insider.
Gee, I wonder what the Ambassador to Japan knew about Benghazi . . .?
Mr. Graham was quite clear about his state: "I'm more disturbed now than I was before"
Seems as though Graham has made the big step in getting help, he realizes he is disturbed and has a problem.
ObamaCare has a mental health provision.
I suggest the Republican take advantage of this provision.
Gee, I wonder what the Ambassador to Japan knew about Benghazi . . .?
Thing is, if Stevens had lived he wouldn't have been able to tell us what happened, who did what and what groups were involved.
The big Right Wing bubble got burst on 6 Nov, now there are players trying to remain relevant by growing their own bubbles, without realizing whatever is going on in their bubbles seem large but their bubble is a small part of America.
.
.
Disturbed in more ways than one!
MPGUY , I am very weary of calling out bigotry on the gop , because they just hate ALL democrats , period ....But in this case I feel people are right in suggesting that her being a black female sends these people into a frenzy , she represents everything they hate about dems , it is obvious obama likes her and has put her on the forefront ..And to me this does explain their complete melt down on the subject , this is all about HER , not Libya or the people that were killed there
Graham, McCain and others are brain dead.
The most active intellect on the Right is Rush the Limpy.
I just threw up a little .
.
"I just threw up a little." -- Me too!
I can't help thinking this wild overreaction to Benghazi is a smokescreen to prevent any focus on an inconvenient truth: that the offensive video was made, translated into Arabic and uploaded by Coptic Christians with ties to the Republican far right with the express purpose of sparking violence in the region and bolstering their meme that Obama is a weak and ineffectual "Jimmy Carter" president. In the infamous 47% tape, Romney made a strange reference to just that, saying that if Obama made any "mistakes" in the Middle East, he (Romney) was prepared to "take advantage" of them. Now, with McCain screaming about a cover-up, any prospect of linking the video to the Romney campaign (and indirect responsibility for the deaths of four Americans) is effectively preempted.
I think that you've nailed it. The whole video story hasn't been told. It does look like the far right in this country had a hand in it. They're absolutely freeking nuts! They also don't care who gets hurt while they push their religious totalitarianism.
As Conspiracy Theories go, this does have a moderate "Level of Probability".
That said, I doubt that Republican politicians are that focused to carry out such a complicated plot. (Shiny objects being as distracting as they are!)
Mr. Graham I could not agree with you more both you and McCain are disturbed.
That's a VERY interesting theory--wonder which journalistic sleuth would be willing/able to investigate it. Maybe if McCain keeps screaming, he'll inadvertently blow some of the smoke away. "Methinks thou dost protest too much."
I don't think it had to be that complicated. We had an FBI agent who turned over evidence of Petreaus' affair to Eric Cantor. A similarly inclined CIA person is all it would have taken to send Willard out to make his ill-timed statement.
@Dalloway & ohgoodgrief
Excellent points, especially since the retaliation against Coptic Christians in the region has been under covered in the media as well.
Considering Falwell and Robertson supported radicals in Israel in order to hasten Armageddon I can't put much past the Radical Christian.
.
I'll say it , it would not be shocking at all to find out that willards PAC team had a hand in financing the film just in time for a reaction for the election season , the fake movie film has " gop conservative idiot film production " written all over it
Sens. McCain, Graham, Ayotte: Yes, you are correct in stating that you are even more disturbed now; in fact, you are all at a critical junction where your state of disturbance is getting out-of-control. PLEASE, GET HELP!! Use your taxpayer-funded insurance and get counseling--you three are ALL in serious need of it. Kindly cease subjecting the rest of us to your unbridled venom. Again, PLEASE GET HELP!
I make them all unfit to serve, being as disturbed as they REALLY are.
All they are doing is making sure their terms end in 2014. Can anyone say chicken little?
Looks like the Dems made the mistake of assuming the presentation of "facts" and "logic" directly to the face of Repubs would make this go away. What the Dems seem unable to grasp is that facts and logic hold no weight with the conservative right.
And don't even think of bringing socialist "math" to the discussion.
They think al Gebra is a terrorist organization with weapons of math instruction.
You stole that from Bad Teacher...
I was watching Thomas Roberts right after the meeting. He and his guest both commented on how weird that entire interview was. Lay money... one, if not, all three will show up on Fox News today to elaborate.
What I noticed is how they all looked like deer in the headlights when they came to speak.
Ayotte... there strictly for show. Her comments... how many times could she repeat things? Guess her Republican Battery Pack was losing energy. Then McCain, so fake in how mad he was. Best of all... bitchy old queen Graham.
Yes, it was a tragedy... But... things are still being investigated... right?
Innocent before proven guilty? Aren't these "lawmakers"?
These actions of the Republicans further show... they are not willing to change... or work together. Or, be mindful of their less than perfect past.
The real tragedy... ALL of the lives lost due to war and terrorist attacks. Not to mention the people that die EVERY day in this country. Oh, I might I add, in the states these three "Americans" represent. I am sure they don't shed a tear for them.
Off my podium.
I got the impression that they had just received some pretty distinct information that would make it hard for them to continue on with their political attacks and they wanted to make sure they got out in front of it by being overly aggressive. Of course you have to take into account that it would only make it hard for them if they actually made their decisions on political attacks, based on coming up against factual reality. Acting CIA director Michael Morell must've delivered something pretty distinct and bright to make these three wide-eyed from the headlights. The only option they have left is to get louder and louder. As frustrating as it is have to continually hear from these three, I know when the full investigation is completed by the professionals we will learn the operational secrecy that had to be maintained to protect the brave actions of our men and women still working to bring justice to those who deserve it.
And just like when FAST AND FURIOUS was found to be complete fiction , the msm will be not be there to point out how completely full of it the gop are about 100% of the things they whine about , they always get a pass
But by god obamas birth certificate got major coverage
Sen. Graham said it clearly: he is definitely disturbed, and it's getting worse by the hour.
Since South Carolina is "... too big for an asylum" we'll have to find him the help he needs elsewhere.
This reaction was pre ordained.
Admit the hype or double down? The lack of credible complaints and the Faux news drumbeat of hysteria made this reaction inevitable.
Punks be punks be punks...
South Carolina didn't secede from the United States!?
Not lately, but stay tuned . . .
Can we make him secede? Wouldn't even have to be the whole state.
I think Lindsay Graham and John McCain are disturbed persons. They overreact to everything. I wouldn't trust their judgement as far as I could throw it. They are looking for trouble and they are going to find it even if they have to invent it.
Ms Rice's problems with Mcirrelevant and Little Lindsay are twofold. One, She's right on the facts. Two, she's Black.
While attacking Susan Rice seems ill-conceived, Graham and McCain is doing a huge disservice to the CIA that may have repercussions in the future. If McCain and Graham can discredit the CIA intelligence, then that can leave way for representatives to open doors to very dangerous consequences that could impact the US and other countries. On the other hand, these two are feeling guilty for voting down the request for extra money to attain better security where it was needed and so are using Susan Rice as a smokescreen to hide behind. They obviously don't care about the damage they are inflicting on the CIA or Ms. Rice as long as their own butts are covered.
The gop has already messed up ongoing operations by the careless release of confidential information in the House "hearing" on Benghazi.
I was hoping that Dir. Morell would explain to them that the information they are seeking is classified beyond their security clearance.
If Lindsey would come out of the closet, he wouldn't have so much bent up frustration with Amb. Rice bc she is a "real woman." He's utterly disgusting!
A common mistake is to think Graham is disturbed (emotionally). He is not. He is simply doing his best to create or find some scandal. He obviously does not have a leg to stand on so he's flailing about, not unlike someone whose rug just got yanked out from under them.
The real question is when these provocateurs will be laughed off of Television.
The sad thing is that they won't be laughed of television. Graham's been going on there ever since he got in the Senate, and they still take this mental lightweight with grave seriousness.
Did people actually vote for these wingnuts?
It's South Carolina. They also elected Jim DeMint.
The only sane people to come out of South Carolina are Stephen Colbert and James Pettigrew ((who came up with the quote that "South Carolina is too small to be a republic and to large to be an insane asylum")
The only thing that this pandering d-bag is concerned about is a possible primary challenge in 2014.
When it comes to defending Susan Rice and even going on offense against Republicans on the Benghazi tragedy, where are the Democrats from the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services? There are 13 of them on the committee including Independent Joe Lieberman who, although is normally on the other side of these fights, has refused to stand with John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte. Why aren’t any of these elected Democrats stepping up to the mic to counter the Three Stooges monopolizing coverage? I would rather see all of these people working to solve problems instead of looking for TV time but you can't let Republicans monopolize the time and control the argument. Obviously Pres. Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should not lower themselves to get into a daily battle with Republicans engaging in an entirely baseless and useless political attack surrounding the Benghazi tragedy, but where are their spokespeople? Why doesn't the Beltway press have anyone else but Republicans on? At a minimum the Beltway press has a duty to ask Republicans, the same level of equally challenging questions their asking about Susan Rice. Steve Benen has done a great job of presenting some of the details Republicans should be pressed on. Since it seems pretty obvious the Beltway press won't ask questions, why in the world aren't there more elected Democrats going on offense and attacking Republicans with questions. There are plenty of them.
Why have you displayed far more aggression towards Susan Rice than the terrorists who killed four dedicated Americans?
Are you focusing on Susan Rice more than the security failures in Benghazi, because you're concerned about the fact that you would not provide the necessary funds requested? If you are concerned about the lack of security we had in Benghazi, how come you didn't research what sort of security was needed and being requested, before you determined not to supply more funding for security? If you're calling for investigations and hearings regarding the statements on one single day about an evolving situation, are you also going to call for investigations and hearings regarding congresses failures to understand the actual security situation before they denied funds for it?
Given the fact that Susan Rice was exactly relaying the up-to-date declassified intelligence information, isn’t your problem with the intelligence agencies who formulated the talking points for her interviews? If your problem is with the intelligence agencies, what is your exact problem with what they did and did not declassify?
What is the political benefit of hiding something that the administration knew everyone would know in a short period of time, well before the election was over? Isn't the most logical reason for not declassifying the specifics that terrorists were involved was to protect ongoing operations and the pursuit of these terrorists? If your main concern is the protection of these pursuits why would you engage in political attacks demanding answers that would compromise these efforts? Is it because you just didn't think about it?
Given that you supported Condoleezza Rice's Secretary of State Nomination, what other disqualifying actions has Susan Rice demonstrated that surpass Condoleezza Rice's actions? If there are no others, do you really believe that her interviews on one Sunday morning entirely disqualify her from advancement, given all of her extensive accomplishments?
Given that Susan Rice repeated almost word for word the declassified talking points that intelligence agencies prepared for her interviews, isn't it you, who owes her an apology?
Brilliant, I have often wondered who advises these Senators, when something so obvious gets completely overlooked. Just two or three days of pounding these questions on these cretins from our side and the whole issue would go away. Why do they remain silent? It makes no sense. Maybe we could get your questions to Alan Grayson...
P.S. Rachel if you or your staff are reading this why not have some Democratic Senators or Congresspeople on to ask them about this? I am sure my Congresswoman, Karen Bass, would be interested...
These clowns think national security is a reality TV show. They think they have a right to ALL the details, regardless of the damage that could have caused.
Hypocrite... He says he's for America and wants the Truth While the whole World is being lied to even now... Why don't he say something about How the POPE is LAUNDERING Money at The Vatican for American Banks like thde J. P. Morgan Account that was closed by the SEC when the POPES BUTLER Whistleblowed?
NOOOOOOOO... He watched with all America as the Vatican threw the Book at the whistleblower of that CORRUPTION... And, Corrupt Business continues while the GOP wants BAIL-OUT's and TAX BREAKS to continue goes forewards... When they did not even put the PEDIFILES on TRIAL they went for a simple Copy Machine user...
THE GOP IS SO CORRUPT!!!
"So what is Graham so "disturbed" about?"
His irrelevancy?
Senator Graham and McCain need to stop and leave UN Ambassador Susan Rice alone. They are not letting the Justice system do their jobs. They need to be working on the Fiscal Cliff and Jobs BILL. President Obama won the election and it is time for them to move on.
Lindsey Graham supported Condoleeza Rice for Secretary of State, even after she gave "bad information" about WMD in Iraq with her infamous "mushroom cloud" statement. What a hypocrite.