Students argue Hillary Clinton’s email scandal won’t get in the way
Max Bickley – General Assignment Reporter
In 2012, a United States ambassador and three other Americans were killed during an assault on the United States Embassy in Benghazi, Libya. Since then, there has been a long standing series of allegations, which have surrounded Hillary Clinton who was Secretary of State at the time. The allegations included intelligence failure regarding the incident and delay in sending rescue teams or military rescue, thus pinning the blame on Clinton and her staff during the event.
This past Thursday, a hearing was held for Hillary Clinton wherein she was questioned by a committee of Republican lawmakers for nearly 11 hours. According to Michael Shear, a reporter for the New York Times, the committee had a shift in focus from the issues to partisan conflict.
“Republicans focused mostly on accusations that Mrs. Clinton had ignored security needs in Benghazi in the months before the attacks, a charge she repeatedly rejected,” said Shear. “Throughout the day, Democrats on the committee portrayed Republicans as the leaders of a Partisan crusade against Mrs. Clinton, while Republicans responded angrily that Democrats were seeking to block a legitimate inquiry into fatal security lapses at an American diplomatic outpost.”
With the Benghazi attack being an event in recent memory, the discussion is almost always linked when politicians or news broadcasters discuss Hillary Clinton. Especially now, given her candidacy for president, this has been brought up consistently, but sophomore Kanita Mote doesn’t see it as impeding her career.
“I don’t doubt her abilities as a politician,” Mote said. “The militias are to blame for the attacks and were condemned by Clinton and Obama. However, it’s a situation in which we have 20/20 hindsight. If only we had more security, if only we were sensitive of the nearby civil disorder, etc.”
In response to the hearing, Mote felt that the only point of the hearing was to subject the tragedy of the attack to the bipartisan bickering of politics.
“It was essentially a tokenization of the Benghazi attack for the sake of Republican vs. Democrat debate, or in reality, the Republican vs. Clinton debate,” said Mote.
The knowledge and discussion of these events, and the recent hearing, also are brought into first year inquiry classes, according to freshman Gina Holmes.
“Yeah, we talked about this in our INQ class today, actually. I find it really interesting that it has come this far with her emails being demanded for and now this hearing,” Holmes said. “However, I have to say I am impressed with how she presented herself and kept very calm with everything going on.”
Holmes also thought that the eventual bickering which became the hearing, was asinine and nothing more than trying to slander Clinton.
“Really nothing else was found that they didn’t already know,” Holmes said. “There was no point to it except trying to slander Clinton in her race for president. It can’t be helped though, the attack did open a lot of questions she couldn’t answer, but now we know with this hearing that there’s not much else to know.”
The hearing itself concluded at 9 p.m. Thursday evening, with The New York Times Chief Washington Correspondent, Carl Huse, summing up the hearing as a method of not only going after Clinton, but also the subject to Republican self-interest and partisan fighting.
“For lawmakers, a media moment in a high-profile hearing like the special Benghazi committee showdown with Hillary Rodham Clinton can really enhance a career…” said Huse, “And there was plenty of political ambition on display in the Longworth House Office Building on Thursday as seven House Republicans took on Mrs. Clinton, and five house Democrats took on seven House Republicans.”
Photo Credit: Hillary for America