Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, testifying in January 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations committee, said "...what difference at this point does it make?" Clinton was speaking about the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans. 

Well, Hillary, it does make a difference, as we are now finding out.  A report of findings of a Republican led committee accuses Clinton of "...seeking to cover up failures by the State Department that could have contributed to the attack last year that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans."

But why was the attack successful?  Why was there not adequate security at the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya?  As it turns out, it was Hillary Clinton who denied adequate security.  Page 2 of the report has:

Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the Department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel.

On page 5 of the report is this little nugget of information: "Prior to the Benghazi attacks, State Department officials in Libya made repeated requests for additional security that were denied in Washington despite ample documentation of the threat posed by violent extremist militias."

We get, on page 7 of the report, this: "...in a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi."

The report also makes this point:

Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. This fact contradicts her testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on January 23, 2013.

The House of Representatives Oversight Committee, chaired by Darrell Issa (R-CA), will, in May,  resume hearings on the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.  Said Issa:

"Next month, the Oversight Committee will convene a hearing on the Benghazi terrorist attacks to examine evidence that Obama Administration officials have attempted to suppress information about errors and reckless misjudgment.  The American people still don't have the full truth about what happened both before and after the murders of four brave Americans."

So, Hillary Clinton, after signing a document she swore she never saw, lied to the Senate Foreign Relations committee.  As Rick Moran said, "The fact is, the White House and President Obama have successfully stonewalled the truth about Benghazi and despite ample proof that they lied, no one in the media seems very interested in calling them out for it." 

Even in the face of proof, somehow the MSM seems to have missed Hillary's antics.  Could their miss be on purpose?  Could the fact that Hillary has a "D" after her name and the report was prepared by people who have an "R" after their names have anything to do with the MSM's miss?

Dr. Warren Beatty (not the liberal actor) earned a Ph.D. in quantitative management and statistics from Florida State University. He was a (very conservative) professor of quantitative management specializing in using statistics to assist/support decision-making. He has been a consultant to many small businesses and is now retired. Dr. Beatty is a veteran who served in the U.S. Army for 22 years. He blogs at rwno.limewebs.com.