CrazyHorse Loc: Kansas

Hat Tip, WND (World Net Daily) News


Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told a radio interviewer today he doubts former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s claims about not having knowledge of weapons t***sfers when asked about the matter during sworn testimony in a Senate hearing on B******i.

During the hearing in March, in response to a question from Paul, Clinton stated she did not know whether the U.S. mission in Libya was procuring or t***sferring weapons to Turkey and other Arab countries.

Those weapons t***sfers were allegedly intended to arm the rebels fighting in Syria.

Yet a New York Times report claimed that since early 2012, the CIA has been helping Arab governments and Turkey obtain and ship weapons to the Syrian rebels.

“I’m concerned about the veracity of how she responded,” Paul told “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio.

The alleged arms t***sfer actually mirrors one the Times reported in February as being proposed by Clinton herself. The Times described Clinton as one of the driving forces advocating for arming the Syrian rebels via Turkish and Arab cutouts.

The Times reported Clinton and then-CIA Director David Petraeus had concocted the plan, which called for vetting rebels and arming Syrian fighters with the assistance of Arab countries.

If Clinton knew about the arms t***sfers at the time of the hearing, she may have committed perjury during her B******i testimony.

Paul told Klein the Times article shows “Hillary Clinton was the big cheerleader for arming Syria when there [were] two factions within the Obama administration arguing this. Hillary Clinton was the one cheering them on to get weapons.

“She was the hardliner that wanted to get involved in the war in Syria, and yet in the hearing she says, oh, she never heard of this,” Paul said. “I find that hard to believe.”

Continued Paul: “And after Clapper’s coming to Congress and lying because he said it was classified, my question to Hillary Clinton is, ‘Did you lie to Congress simply because it was a classified program, or were you telling the t***h?’ And I really kind of doubt the secretary of State has no knowledge that the CIA is facilitating weapons to Syria.”


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/rand-paul-suspects-hillary-lied-under-oath/#de1dwMjVXCDh2JHb.99

What the Hell difference does it make

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

Of course she (it) lied. And when she was required to testify about the Ben Ghazi attack, she had a convenient accidental fall and suffered a convenient concussion that prevented her from being required to testify. Does anyone of reasonable intelligence believe she really did suffer a fall and concussion?

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

Of course she lied. She always lies. It is her default position. If she speaks, she lies. There are even worse things she has lied about and gotten away with it, and as long as she is in public life she will lie and no one will do anything about it.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Her lies to Congress were told while she was the Secretary of State and that makes her liable for her lies. Once she is proven a liar she will have to answer for it and that will do more damage to here p**********l aspirations than telling the t***h would have.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

What you say is how it SHOULD be, but I tend to think that no matter what she does, she can get elected by the imbeciles in that Party. They lie, too, and lying is no big deal to progs if it serves their purpose. You know that, Roy.

bahmer

A more startling headline would be Hillary tells the t***h! Now that would shake up the world. She and OIllegal are and you might as well throw in Jay Carnival are all born liars. Non of them show any emotion at all while lying through their teeth. I guess that the demoncrat party should remove God from its parties statement. Most of them today would be very uncomfortable in good old bible believing church or at least should be.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I understand what you say and I have been afraid of the woman since about 2002 but I still think that once someone in the House subpoenas her and forces her to talk she will be seen by many people who would have v**ed for her. They just don't have enough time to piddle around, though.