“WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jan. 26, 2013) — Since outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s testimony to two congressional committees on January 23 over the security breaches which led to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012, the mainstream media has characterized her responses to criticism and praise as empathetic, responsible and remorseful.
CNN described Clinton as “choked with emotion” during her testimony and said that “security challenges in North Africa” were “daunting” for the State Department. One apparently supportive website presented what it said were Clinton’s “better, or at least funnier, moments.”
In what could be a satirical piece masquerading as news, a writer in the New York Magazine depicts Clinton as conveying various messages during her testimony by the way she touched the black eyeglasses she was wearing. Whether or not the author possesses any medical or psychology knowledge is not indicated.
On Friday, Clinton’s glasses were the subject of numerous mainstream reports, with all outlets stating that her eyeglasses were worn as a result of her alleged concussion suffered last month following a bout with a stomach flu. Each news company quoted a medical specialist in displopia, a condition often developed by concussion sufferers, although none of the physicians quoted is reportedly treating Clinton.
Bloggers picked up the mainstream reports and reposted parts thereof or links to them. While such articles admitted that State Department spokesman Philippe Reines gave no details about Clinton’s eyeglasses or her current health, they appeared to have asked no questions of him.
What are the chances that all major media outlets would publish a story on the same topic on the same day without any coordination?
Clinton was reportedly looking through a Fresnel prism, which is often used following a concussion to assist with double-vision problems. However, no doctor treating Clinton appears to have confirmed the speculation published by the mainstream media as accepted fact.
Are they attempting to convince the public of something?
The office of Washington, DC mayor‘s office has failed to respond to The Post & Email regarding a FOIA appeal to obtain a transcript of the presumed 911 call made when Clinton allegedly suffered her concussion during the second week of December. An initial request to the Metropolitan Police Department was denied based on “privacy” concerns.
During her testimony on Wednesday, Clinton threw her arms up in the air in frustration after freshman Sen. Ron Johnson asked her why she “purposely misled” the public about the cause of the attack on the Benghazi compound. Clinton exasperatedly exclaim, “What difference does it make?” to Johnson’s observation that what had been initially characterized as a protest by Clinton and United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice had actually been a terrorist attack which killed the ambassador and three other public servants.
Because certain publications are presenting an increasing number of advertisements, “articles” and videos which contain offensive, vulgar and suggestive material, The Post & Email will no longer be utilizing them as sources or providing links to them. Such websites include The New York Daily News, The Huffington Post, TPM, and the Fox Nation.
The mainstream media continues to devote considerable attention to Hollywood celebrities’ lifestyles and activities instead of reporting on government activity, which it is delegated to perform by the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Have they asked tough questions about what Hillary Clinton knew and when she knew it in regard to the Benghazi attack?
On Wednesday, Clinton testified to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she “did not know” whether or not gun-running was occurring between the Americans posted in Benghazi and Syrian rebels fighting the regime of Bashir Assad, who the Obama regime wishes to depose. It has been reported that the Obama regime is transferring arms to known Al Qaeda-linked terrorists in its effort to remove Assad from office, and Obama has clearly been friendly to members of The Muslim Brotherhood.
Large media companies with the resources to do so have refused to investigate the results of a law enforcement investigation which report that the image released on April 27, 2011 by the Obama White House is a “computer-generated forgery” as sycophants attempt to convince the public that Obama’s documentation is legitimate. His Selective Service registration card and Social Security number have been reported by the new media to be fraudulent after two private investigators found that the Social Security number, which originated in Connecticut, appears to have been assigned to a man born in 1890.
The media has failed to report that members of the military have accused Obama of treason.
The tough questions have been left to the new media to ask and answer.