January 30, 2013 --

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got predictable support from The New York Times, January 24, when, appearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, January 23, she rebuffed a comment from GOP Senator Ron Johnson that the American people had been misled into believing the Benghazi incident, last September, was a spontaneous protest.

The Times editorial cited Clinton's response as follows: "'With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,' Mrs. Clinton said, her voice rising in anger. 'Was it because of a protest? Or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they'd go and kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?'"

This editorial described Mrs. Clinton as "professional and authoritative."

LPR has a somewhat different perspective. The Clinton reply to Senator Johnson was not responsive to his comment. There was no protest; and the killers of four Americans were not "guys out for a walk one night who decided they's go and kill some Americans."

This was a planned attack that apparently took the Obama administration by surprise and, in immediate response, the Obama administration chose to place responsibility for the attack on a video and get the producer thrown in jail.

If Secretary Clinton does not know that misleading the American people makes a difference, she learned nothing from her experience as staffer on the Senate Watergate Committee--unless, of course, her lesson taught that misleading the American people makes a difference depending on the politics of the misleader.