tv The Intelligence Report With Trish Regan FOX Business October 22, 2015 2:00pm-3:01pm EDT
that is buoying the mood on wall street. we saw couple hours ago, 15 minutes before this hearing resumes. i want to update you as well. we do have issue about a speaker, finding one. it looks like paul ryan has a key conservative group, republican study committee endorsement. it appears he has the votes he needs if he is so interested in the job. we have trish regan. >> hey, neil. day that could make hillary clinton's presidential run. welcome to "the intelligence report." former secretary of state is being grilled today. lawmakers want to know why four americans were killed on attack in compound in libya when there were repeated requests for more security and why hillary clinton and administration tried to blame attack on video that supposedly sparked an uprising and new emails just uncovered result of this investigation,
suggests she was telling people one thing and telling something else to her close inner circle, something jim jordan, congressman from ohio highlights. watch night email you sent to your family. here's what you said. at 11:00 that night, approximately one hour after you told the american people it was video, you say to your family, two officers were killed today in benghazi by an al qaeda-like group. most significantly, the next day, within 24 hours, you had a conversation with the egyptian prime minister. you told him this. we know the attack in libya had nothing to do with the film. it was a planned attack, not a protest. let me read that one more time. we know, not we think, not it might be, we know the attack in libya had nothing to do with the film. it was a planned attack, not a protest. you knew the truth. but that is not what the american people got. and again, the american people want to know why.
why didn't you tell the american people exactly what you told the egyptian prime minister? >> well i think if you look at the statement that i made i clearly said that it was an attack. >> calling it attack like saying the sky is blue. of course it was an attack. >> there was a lot of conflicting information. trish: all right. joining us right now for analysis we have kt mcfarland and retired lieutenant colonel ralph peters. kt, i will start here with you. the idea that she's emailing her family one thing and telling the american public something else entirely. that is something that jim jordan took issue with, something you take issue with. >> she was lying. she was telling her inner circle, her family and diplomats, foreign diplomats, we know what it was, in front of the american people and families of four fallen, it was out of control demonstration in response to youtube video. had nothing to do with the youtube video. we don't endorse it, don't
condone it. didn't happen. trish: basically blaming video for political spin, we were getting into election cycle? >> yeah i think it was couple things. it was to avoid blame for hillary clinton, state department, administration, why did these people die? how could we prevent youtube video that had nothing to do with us. there was second reason. that attack was just before american election, his campaign rhetoric, reelect me, i killed osama bin laden, al qaeda is on the ropes,ed tide of war is receding, vote for me. how can tide of war receding and al qaeda on the ropes if al qaeda killed four americans. trish: exactly what else is out there, colonel peters? we know, she had her own server. she had her own server. she said she turned everything every and pertinent to the investigation. but one can never entirely be sure. this is something that may have been in a way highlighted by representative brooks. listen to her talking about how
much chatter there was in emails, you know, earlier with libya and then what started to do happen around 2012. here it is. >> in this pile in 2011 i detailly updates. sometimes hourly updates, from your staff about benghazi and chris stevens. when i look at this pile, in 2012, i only see a handful of emails to you from your senior staff about benghazi. i can only conclude, by your own records, that there was a lack of interest in libya in 2012. trish: colonel peters was lack of interest or maybe we don't have all the emails we should have? what is your thought? >> i think part of it was a lack of interest. short attention spans but, it is curious to me in that particular matter is the obama administration, including certainly secretary clinton, they made the error they accused
george w. bush of making, when he got to baghdad in 2003, there was no real follow-on plan. there was no occupation plan. for the obama administration and for secretary clinton, once they got rid of qadaffi, there was no plan. same scenario peace and love would break out. age of aquarius an age of democracy were coming. i think it was, congressman jordan i believe who did really hit the point that, and kt just raised it, this was really about it being success story. they have to get through the election. libya is success story, which they had already taken their eyes off the ball. they would do it took to get through the election. trish: even if it meant coming up with some story. peter barnes joining us from outside of the testimony, everyone. ii want to know more about this email that hillary clinton sent to her daughter, chelsea, the night of the attack. what can you tell us? reporter: that's right, trish.
this is newly-released email from the committee. it was referenced by congressman jordan in that exchange that you had at the top of the show and it is from secretary clinton to her daughter chelsea, who used a pseudonym, diane reynolds. the email is dated that day, september 11, 2012. it was sent at 11:12 in the evening to, from secretary clinton to chelsea and, in it there is an exchange of why it appears chelsea could not reach her mother. in the email it says, quote, two of our officers were killed in benghazi by an al qaeda-like group. and this is what congressman jordan is now saying, shows that she knew that it was not a video that may have inspired some of the attackers at the compound in benghazi. trish? trish: yeah, certainly sounds like that. she knows one thing but she is -- there is the email, everyone we are talking about
it. find it interesting that chelsea clinton goes by diane reynolds? interesting in and of itself. you need to have pseudonym if you're here. back to the issue of the why would she be, why would she so blatantly lie? it came down to politics? >> because it works. >> she didn't think she would get caught, remember? she would release emails she wanted to release. that is where the whole ball of wax starts coming apart, those emails may have been recreate. the ones she thought -- trish: do you blame her, colonel peters for this? you think about the security at the attack minimal compared to that summer. they had as many as 38 secure officers there at the compound. by the time this attack happened they begin dilled down to nine. this is despite repeated requests to the state department by ambassador stevens for additional support when it came to securing the compound? >> well, i'm surprised nobody on
the panel has raised the old military dictum, that has to apply throughout government, that a leader is responsible for everything, his subordinates, do or fail to do. ultimately for the state department, the bucks stops with hillary. the idea that suddenly she wasn't paying attention after such paying such close attention, that really begs for a little tougher look. but i think it is important, for us to recognize, trish, important issues are being raised today but, what zooms important to us inside the beltway or inside of the cable news or news world, doesn't necessarily register outside of the beltway. so i feel that you know, i hate to say it because i'm not a hillary fan but so far the republicans aren't scoring any touchdowns here. trish: to that point, we have a lot to talk about because i want to talk about donald trump and iowa poll that just came out, first before i let you go, i want to add to that point what you just said, this perception
some americans may see her really being under attack, they may not like it. she did strike somewhat emotional note when she fired back there at congresspeople for saying, look, i have had to deal with this, i've been thinking about for some time now. >> look, i would imagine i thought more about what happened then all of you put together. i have lost more sleep than all of you put together. trish: again, back to what you were saying, colonel, some people hear that and see that, look she is repenting to certain extent. >> that is beautifully rehearsed answer. hillary has done her homework. she is smart. democrat, coordinated questions, obviously ones coordinated with sanchez, probably all coordinated with sanchez was most blatant. hillary clinton will get up there and lie and play the violin she does pretty well. people know she is a little bit
of a phony but bottom line, so far the republicans they haven't scored any touchdowns. i think most people, most voters, minds are already made up about hillary clinton. pro or con. trish: that's a good point. >> one more thing if i may. trish: -- that hasn't taken a bigger bite out of poll numbers. thank you, guys. we'll be going back to washington when the testimony begins again as lawmakers grill hillary clinton on capitol hill. i want to turn to this new poll though after celebrating 100 straight days of topping every single one of them out there, donald trump finds himself in unfamiliar territory. he is number two, at least in one state. dr. ben carson is surging in iowa to take a wide lead over the republican frontrunner, 28%-20%. marco rubio continues his move to the front of the pack, going from 5% last month to 13% today. again, just one poll. just one poll. but, you know, if anything, you could take away from it, how
popular dr. carson is. we've been seeing him run a close second to donald trump in most polls? why is he doing so well? what about dr. carson outsider exciting everyone so much. we have ford o'connell and chris hahn. nice to have you guys here. ford, seems like a nice guy. a nice man. talked to him. spent time with him. very nice and humble but is nice really enough to get you elected? >> when you have 89% likability rate and considered trustworthy by people in iowa that is worth its weight in gold. almost no one doesn't like ben carson. his other strength is very conservative voters and doing well with republican female voters. not a shock that in iowa 60% are evangelical ben carson is doing well. i think he is major obstacle to donald trump if he wins iowa. trish: is it religious thing, chris?
he is very much into god, therefore i can relate to him? he is my guy? >> absolutely. i think evangelical numbers says it all. ford hit nail on head. the guy is very likeable. i don't agree with what he says but comes across likeable to me. i imagine evangelicals are agreeing with message he is saying will like it over especially donald trump who comes across loud and obnoxious. they call it iowa nice for a reason and he seems nice. trish: this fascinates me as we watch dr. carson there, climbing in the polls, usually second. now in this particular one, topping trump. you can't get any two more different than these guys. >> right. trish: you said it, right? one is loud and brash. the other is understated. what is it that voters are finding appealing, aside from just being nice? is it the thought that he has got to be smart? he is a neurosurgeon? what else is there?
i don't know that nice gets you to the white house? >> one of the things a lot of iowa voters in particular like about dr. carson he cares about issues they care about which actually donald trump seems to care about issues as well but dr. carson for them comes across much better. i do want to say a couple things about dr. carson. two things i don't know about him and unsure about his long-term staying power. he is gaff had of prone. as we get later that might be effect and we don't note depth of his caucus and you have to have people on the ground that are fire eaters. >> we're still in the introductory phase where candidates are getting a quick glance from voters. in a couple weeks they will start thinking about who they will vote for. i don't think trump or carson survive what i call the scrutiny phase where voters dig in a little bit more. trish: okay, this is interesting to me. this is very interesting because this is what people sort of said all along, right? when it really push comes to shove people aren't going to vote for donald trump. >> right.
trish: however, however, i think, as we see these polls continually proving him out on top, there are some republicans that are admitting, within their inner circle he could very well could be the republican nominee. >> well i absolutely he actually could be the nominee and i've been saying this for two months on your show, trish. trish: i know you have. >> let me say this, here's the deal. when you're lead in polls for four months straight, that psychological warfare starts to set in. frankly what shocks me with donald trump 42% of republicans think he will be nominee. >> right. >> what is more amazing 43% of the republicans think he gives the republicans best chance to win general election. as long as donald trump hits on themes and citing polls over and over it won't matter substance. >> that is scary number. ford, i know you're a republican. that should be very scary number for you. if he is nominee he will be very bad for the republican party. >> i'm going to have, i can't believe this. i will defend trump.
i will say this, when he first got anyways questionable. but i will say this over the last four months he has become the best political strategist among the group. actually improved the best over time compared to rest of -- >> what does that say about the groups though, ford. >> chris you can peddle the propaganda all day long. this is very strong group. donald trump knows how to work media. in all honesty today that is very huge. what is shocking here that ben carson don't know how to bork media. >> he is a great media strategist. right now, what they're asking the people that are asking are not likely voters. when they change it to likely voters in about five weeks, i don't see either two of those twice say staying on top. >> remember, barack obama was great media strategist you always come every week and love having you here, in a few weeks we'll play this clip, with both of you here we'll see who is right, all right. >> wait a minute? where is my joe biden clip? that was very consistent. trish: thank you.
more breaking news to get to, huge rally up 237 points, off highs of the day but nonetheless nice strong triple-digit gain. we have more what is behind this including a series of good earnings reports giving people some optimism. hillary clinton just got back in her seat. she is just getting back in her seat as benghazi hearing resumes in washington. we'll continue monitoring it. looking at live picture. we're back with more after this. ♪
opinions. there's no shortage in this world. who do you trust? whose analysis is accurate? how do you make sense of it all? a simple, unbiased stock score consolidated from the opinions of independent analysts... is that too much to ask? nope. equity summary score, powered by starmine, will help you execute your ideas with speed and conviction. and it's only on fidelity.com. open an account and find more of the expertise you need to be a better investor.
tand that's what we're doings to chat xfinity.rself, we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. trish: okay, everyone, the benghazi hearings featuring former secretary of state hillary clinton, they are back underway right now after an hour-long lunch break. secretary of state clinton is defending her role during the 2012 at cac there in libya that killed four americans. now over three hours of
testimony and a whole lot of questioning so far this morning. she is pretty much kept her cool. the most heated portions actually came from some of the congressman versus themselves. we'll continue monitoring all of this for you. kt is on set. colonel peters is in d.c. we have a lot of questions. we'll watch that. i want to get to the market which is up 226 points thanks to string of positive earnings out of likes of mcdonald's and ebay. i'm joined by art hogan and our very own ashley we can sister down at nyse. nice rally. we haven't had one of these in a while up 220. it was better a moment ago, up 300, ashley. >> not bad at all, trish. we have three reasons. strong economic data especially in the housing market. we have strong earnings reports as you pointed out, face it how high is the bar on earnings reports? that's another issue. we heard from the ecb today.
president mario draghi hinting oh, yeah, maybe we will print more money to offset the slowing euro economy and combat a slowing global economy. here is the result as you can see, people loving it and jumping into the market. trish: art, to your credit you've been bullish all along. i don't know how long this will hold but you're a little more on tis tick with me, let me hear the best-case scenario for the market. >> trish, last time we talked i said two headwinds this market faced, uncertainty over the fed. we talked about that quite a bit. and china story, at best is stablizing. that may be good enough. stablization and economic data out of china. fed march or april for the lift off. i think they could pull forward to this year. that is a great thing. ashley's point, the bar is very low for earnings. what happenses this ear ins season everything is compartmentalized.
what i mean if somebody misses not taking whole sector down. we saw that with chipolte and mcdonald's doing better. trish: what the heck is the fed going to do as we look at environment where china, it is not going it turn around overnight. we saw the latest gdp read, 6.9%. nothing like what we used to see. even if you believe it. ashley, you and i have our doubts on that. i don't know how the fed can possibly move in the new environment where it's a race to the bottom. everybody is out there printing, doing various forms of qe. will we find ourselves, ashley, your thoughts on this, in potential qe4 situation down the road? do we need to print more money. >> i hope not. trish: to inject life into the economy. i hope not too, but i wouldn't be surprised if these guys looking at it. >> people talking more about that possibility, trish. certainly is there rate hike in works end of the year? probably not. you push that back into march.
to your point as we get stuck in the malaise there is very little else fed can do other than print more money. i hope they don't but always a possibility. trish: guys, thanks so much. i do want to go back to washington, d.c. where we are listening to congressman gowdy who has been quite critical of hillary clinton throughout this. let's listen in. >> i have this contrast in my mind. ambassador is newly in place. it's a day after an attack on our facility. your deputy chief of staff is sending you an email from sidney blumenthal to take time and read and react to it. then the best of my recollection, that is forwarded to you. so, help us understand how sidney blumenthal had that kind of access to you, madam secretary but the ambassador did not? >> mr. chairman, because i think
that your question does help to clarify matters. chris stevens evident mailed regularly with jake sullivan, one of my closest aides in the state department. he could have emailed to mr. sullivan knowing that it would have been immediately responded to on any issue that was of concern to him, and he did not. raise issues about security on that day or other days. and i think it's important to recognize that when an ambassador is at post overseas, especially one as experienced a diplomat as chris stevens, he knows where to pull the levers, where to go for information, where to register concerns. and i think he did exactly as one might have expected. he dealt with security issues through dealing with the security professionals who were ones making the assessments and
i think that ambassador stevens understood completely that that's where the experts were and that's where anything he requested or anything he was questioning should be directed. >> speaking of experts, who is victoria nuland? >> a very experienced diplomat. she served as our ambassador to nato, appointed by president george w. bush. she served as one of the advisors as a foreign service officer, delegated to the white house for vice president cheney. she served as spokesperson for the state department during my tenure and she is currently the assistant secretary for europe undersecretary kerry. >> she wrote this to the ambassador on june, 13th, 2012. that is a week after the facility was attacked. it is only a handful of days after he was turned down on
request, specific request for more security. chris, i know you have your hands full but we'd like your advice about public messaging on the spate of violence in lib over the past 10 days. she is asking him for help with public messaging. jake sullivan, which is the other half of the question i don't think we got to. i understand that chris stevens was a rule-follower. i understand that. i've got no qualms. my question was actually not why chris stevens didn't contact you, but why did jake sullivan send chris stevens a sidney blumenthal to read and react to on the day after the facility was attacks the same day he was denied request for more security? instead of email traffic back and forth about security, it is read and react to a blumenthal email? >> well i think any ambassador, if one were sitting before the committee, would say that they
handled a lot of incoming information and requests, some of it was about what was happening in country. some of it was about what was happening back in the united states and chris felt strongly that the united states needed to remain in and committed to libya. so he was concerned that there might be a feeling on the part of some either in the state department or elsewhere in the government that we shouldn't be in libya. he was adamantly in favor of us staying in libya. part of discussion with him and, jake sullivan and other was the, you know, how do we best convey what the stakes, the united states has in staying involved in libya would be. and i thought that was, you know, very much in keeping with both his assessment and his experience. trish: >> i appreciate your perspective madam secretary. let me share with you my perspective. if you need to take time to read a note i'm happy to pause.
>> no, i'm just being reminded which i think is important, that you know, remember chris spent the vast majority of his time in tripoli, not in benghazi. so a lot of what he was looking at how you deal with not only those in authority positions in libya, who were based in tripoli at that time, but also representatives of other governments and the like and i think it is fair to say that anytime you're trying to figure out what's the best argument to make especially someone like chris stevens trying to put together to make the best argument about why the united states should remain committed to libya, and others as well, he is going to engage in conversations about that. >> well, with respect, madam secretary, no matter what city he was in libya, having to stop and provide public messaging advice to your press shop and having to read and respond to an
email sent by sidney blumenthal doesn't matter what town you're in. he needed security help messaging the violence. he needed actually help with the violence. you have said several times this morning that you had people processes in place. i want to ask you about, an email sent to you by another one of our aides miss huma abedin. that is exhibit number 70 in your folder. she emailed to you that libyan people needed medicine, gasoline, diesel and milk. do you know how long it took you to respond to that email? >> well, i responded to it very quickly. >> yeah. four minutes. my question, and i think it's a fair one is, the libyan people had their needs responded to directly by you, in four minutes. and there is no record of our
security folks ever even it making to your in-box. if you had people and processes in place for security did you not also have people and processes in place for medicine, gasoline, diesel, milk? >> you know, mr. chairman, i've said it before, i will say it again, i'll say it as many times as is necessary to respond. chris stevens communicated regularly with the members of my staff. he did not raise security with the members of my staff. i communicated with him about certain issues. he did not raise security with me. he raised security with the security professionals. now i know that is not the answer you want to hear because it is being asked in many different ways by committee members. but those are the facts, mr. chairman. ambassadors in the field are engaged in many different tasks.
they are basically our chief representative of the president of the united states. so they deal with everything from you know, foreign aid to security, to dealing with the personal requests for visas that come from people in the country they are assigned to. and chris stevens had regular contact with members of my staff and he did not raise security issues. some may have been despite what was inmplied earlier, there was a good back and forth about security and many of the requests that came from embassy tripoli, both for tripoli and for benghazi were acted on affirmatively. others were not. that is what an ambassador, especially a diplomat as experienced as chris stevens would expect, that it would be unlikely to be able to get everyone of your requests
immediately answered postively. so, yeah, he had regular contact with my aides. he did not raise security with me and security questions and requests were handle by security professionals. >> madam secretary, with all due respect those are two separate issues. who chris stevens had access to is one issue. who had access to you and for what is another issue. because you have said you had people and processes in place. you also have people and processes in place for people who want to send you meaningless politicalled vice. you have people and people and processes in place that want to inquire about milk, diesel fuel and gasoline. you also have people and processes in place for people who want to provide insults towards folks you work with in the a administration. all of that made it directly into your in-box, madam secretary. that is my question. my question is how did you decide when to invoke a people
and processes and who just got to come straight to you? because it looked likes certain things got straight to your in-box and request for more security did not. and while you're answering that i want to inform why i'm asking that. you mentioned arb on number of occasions today. this is the not the first arb. we had one after kenya an tanzania. that arb could not have been more specific. the secretary of state should personally review the security situation of our embassy facilities is. that arb put responsibility squarely on you. so with respect to that previous arb recommendation, and in contrast what did make your in-box versus what did not, did you personally review our security situation as the previous arb required? >> well let me see if i an can
answer many part of your question, mr. chairman personal email came to my work-related account an personal email did as well. i also relied on number of my aides and staff members and as well as experienced foreign service officers and civil servants who were similarly engaged in gathering information and sharing it. and as i said and i will repeat. chris stevens communicated with a number of people i worked with on a daily basis in the state department. as far as i know he did not raise any issue of security with any of those people. he raised it where he knew it would be properly addressed. if he had raised it with me i would be here telling me you had. he did not. i think it is important to try to separate out the various elements of your question, mr. chairman. and i will do my best to
continue to try to answer your questions. but, i have said before, and i repeat again. sid blumenthal was not my advisor official or unofficial about libya. he was not involved in any of the meetings, conversations, other efforts to obtain information in order to act on it. on occasion i did four ward what he sent me to make sure that it was in the mix. so if it was useful, it could be put to use. and i believed in response to the email you pointed out originally from, ambassador stevens, he actually said it rang true and it was worth looking into. so i think it's important that we separate out the fact that mr. blumenthal was not my advisor. he was not an official of the united states government. he was not passing on official information. he, like a number of my friends who would hand me a newspaper article.
or. i am listening to you. carefully. i have to say, i was kind of surprised. finally getting you up here to testify. we spent almost $5 million we interviewed witnesses. when they finally got the chance to question you, they ask you -- trish: listening to hillary clinton testify on capitol hill. she just answered a ton of questions. joining me with more. kt, first over to you. this is one step in the process. we investigate exactly what happened in terms of benghazi and also how it is maintaining
the private server throughout all of this. this is one of the things that has come to light as a result of these hearings. you made a point to me that really we need to be keeping in mind that there is another investigation going on. a criminal probe by the fbi. there is lots more that may be coming out. >> behind the curtain. it was interesting. we were all fascinated with this. the real action was a special prosecutor. it ultimately uncovered the cover-up of richard nixon. we know the fbi. we know they are trying to re-create them. they have a reputation, the only guy in washington that has a reputation of being a straight shooter.
he was asked today, what do you think of these. that is what is really happening. trish: what is it that they are looking for? >> did she miss handled security did she do it inadvertently? i think their real potential smoking guns, i do not want to be a conspiracy theorist about this, but where did they start creating e-mails. ey fd out that there was some connection between the clinton foundation and secretary of state's decision. >> we have seen a lot of reports that it did not look good. it could have been the issue there. thinking back to ups. clients cleared from fbi. hillary clinton intervening on
behalf of ubs. meanwhile, bill clinton collect did his biggest steam off of ubs. 1 million a half dollars to go in and speak at that bank. to kt's point, you could start to potentially re-create a pretty fat scenario. >> i think that the foundation could you potentially damaging to secretary clinton. with respect to this hearing, unless she pulls her top or trey gaudi comes out with smoking guns, it is very hard to see how these hearings will damage her. there is a lot to follow here. republicans are down in the weeds. blocking and tackling. trying to keep her viable. no matter what. they will stop at nothing. trish: how are you rating her
performance here? >> great. i think every time they bring up cindy blumenthal, they dig deeper into the hole that kevin mccarthy started digging for them. i want to offer a little bit of perspective politically. did any of us really think that joe biden would have dropped out of this race had he thought that the fbiinvestigation was going to go anywhere? he is not going because it's not going anywhere. >> he knows that the other three hobbits cannot win the nomination, only hillary clinton can. he is there to break last. >> if our three are hobbits -- [laughter] trish: pretty valid points. it has not derailed her campaign. granted, she is struggling a little bit.
it has not totally derailed things. i am supporting her no matter what. i do not care if her husband like you're his teeth. i am in. they have already made up their minds. donald trump or jeb bush. they will stick with them no matter what. i will not believe my lying eyes. that is something the american public understands. not classified. it is a little complicated. go ahead. >> i do not think that she swiped left on a benghazi e-mail that was relevant. there was an e-mail about benghazi, she would have responded to it appropriately. they are picking fights. that may have happened. saying something about obama or
something else. it is high school. it is nonsense. >> there are some questions that need to be in third. part of that profit that we're seeing here today, a good thing for the country. thank you so much. kt, do not go anywhere. we will continue watching it. more breaking news coming to us out of washington. we ship everything you atcan imagine.n,
♪ trish: okay. we are watching this rally for you. up 271 points on the dow is now. of little bit. we are keeping a high on shares. they are soaring after reporting early turnaround. the company has also been seeing improvement here today's sales report says the company's prudent efforts are finally starting to gain some traction. lowering microsoft and amazon. all higher today. be sure to tune in to fox business after the bell. we will have all of those reports for you. coming up next, we are heading back to that breaking news out of washington. hillary being grilled by republicans on capitol hill. what really happened in
if legalzoom has your back.s, over the last 10 years we've helped one million business owners get started. visit legalzoom today for the legal help you need to start and run your business. legalzoom. legal help is here. why is philips sonicare the most loved electric toothbrush brand by americans and their dentists? because it leaves your mouth with a level of clean like you've never felt before. get healthier gums in 2 weeks innovation and you. philips sonicare and. >> okay. it is here. the day that a lot of people have been waiting for. that testimony that hillary clinton has to give. ed henry is joining us with the very latest. secretary clinton. she has been very composed
around all of this. you saw hurt on the campaign trail. is this any surprise to you or did you expect that? >> i suspected that she would be pretty prepared. she took several days off of the campaign trail. when she does not fully prepare or loses her cool, it blows up in her face. what we are seeing more than anything is hillary clinton determined to not blow a lead. she has had a good week. she has a lead right now. the democratic field has narrowed. she had a good debate last week. we all know that. >> that is the only alternative now for her. >> you have asked her about her server. there were times that she was
not so cool, calm and collected. >> right. wife the server with a cloth moment. she did not want another what difference at this point does it make. that is, she was getting emotional at the right moments. the four dead americans. i want to honor their service. that is why i am testifying. at one point she said i have lots more sleep then all of you. she was very dismissive. she blew off at some point. this time, she is determined. her body language is giving away the fact that sometimes that patients of hillary clinton is being tested daytime. certainly when they were pressing her on the fact of why she spent all of this time e-mailing cindy blumenthal about a lot of political, ambassador
stephens did not have her personal e-mail address. he did not e-mail her those security request. she claimed that their cool request never got to her desk. today, elsewhere on capitol hill, not many tv cameras on capitol hill. the director was testifying on another matter. asked whether her server was ever compromised by a foreign government. i am watching this investigation very closely. i have been briefed every day. look. this is playing out right now. that fbi investigation is just as important. >> kt was just making that point. this is a very public spectacle, if you would. one that we all get to see and hear. in the meantime, something very serious. that may bring much more information to light.
ed henry, thank you, sir. i do want to bring kt back in along with stephen gates. one of the big complaints here is how on earth did hillary clinton not know that they needed increased security when there were so many requests to improve security. we heard craig gaudi making the reports. they can chit chat about all of this nonsense. >> based on her own words, she considered that to be the work of the help. not her personal staff. she thought that it was proper for that communication to basically go to the assistant secretary level and below. they would take care of these operational matters. it is incredibly significant that you have this e-mail available to some people, but not the people that needed to get a hold of her.
>> did she have enough of an explanation to satisfy you, kt? another thing to her daughter and another thing to the american public and the family of those killed. >> you should be consistent at least. she was saying two very different things. she knew it was a terrorist attack from the very beginning. why did she use that excuse, to avoid blame for what did you do wrong, hillary. why did this happen. the narrative was we got rid of al qaeda. she wanted to rewrite barack obama. the way you do that is to say that bin laden is dead. therefore, she is back in office. >> we did hear her double down there saying that there was a lot of conflict and information. you tell one person one thing.
you tell another person another. there was conflicting information. you knew. you knew, but you chose not to say anything. there was conflicting information at the time. what if she know. what did she not say? >> she was telling foreign leaders that this was a terrorist attack feared she nonetheless had no problem telling the survivors of the dead that we will go get that video producer who in fact the only person that has been prosecuted in any of this travesty. she helped the narrative that was lying to the american public. after the first attack, is that of susan rice explaining what happened. >> they kind of hung through the drive. okay. here is what happened.
she went on all the shows. monday morning, i went on fox. she defends line for the state department. i went and checked secretary clinton schedule. she was at home in washington. she was available. i think she realized that this was a losing proposition. >> look at this. i want to share with you all and e-mail that has been put out by the benghazi twitter feed which appears to be a readout of hillary clinton's call with the egyptian prime minister. acquiring to her about what the real story was. she allegedly said that we know that the attack in libya had nothing to do with the film.
it was a planned attack, not a protest. she said you're not kidding, there was a bad word in their also, it claimed the responsibility for this. affiliated with al qaeda. this is e-mail communication that she apparently had there with that egypt and, forgive me, a call, and e-mail, a readout of the call that she had with the egyptian prime minister. again, she knew and they deliberately chose another story. >> i think to answer your question about all of this, what were they doing here in the first place. secretary clinton and her opening remarks, we were doing this, chris stevens was there. wanting to secure the weapons. making sure that they did not fall in the hands of bad guys. we wanted to make sure that they
did not get in the hands of bad guys. then what did they do. what did you do with those weapons. you do not throw them in the trash. there was an amount of money laundering. stockpile. passing along. passing along to serious rubbles. passing along to others. were these weapons ultimately the same weapons that had been used on our people. >> as you pointed out to me you did not have the correct aggression at that time. right? if that is in fact what they were up to. >> i cannot know whether they were really running arms to the serious rubbles.
to me, the bigger picture coming out of the whole libya issue is not just benghazi. then godsey is a totally failed mission for which hillary clinton was a major foreign-policy advocate. if you are looking at how she handled the situation and benghazi, she was in favor. trish: i am reading hillary clinton's body language here. she seems to be getting a little bit rattled. let's listen in. >> he went to great links about what she tried to be done. couldwe, what do we need to have there. yes, there was an ongoing discussion. i think that he knew he was
going to be an mind to go to aaa. he wanted to know what the decision would be on the compound. he weighed in on numerous discussions with his colleagues back at the state department. >> secretary, we know that compounds was extended for yet another year. that same month you are benghazi point person sent a memo wanting to extend benghazi through 2012. he sent it to other secretaries who approved it. another high-level official who, by the way, has given us not of secretary kennedys e-mails yet. very high level officials. are you familiar with that memo sent on december 27 entitled future of operations and benghazi libya? are you familiar with that memo? discuss that memo with you at that time and discuss extending
the mission and benghazi in december 2011. >> i am familiar that there was an ongoing discussion. >> the discussion between whom, ma'am? help me with understanding. >> jeff feldman was one of them. obviously, chris stevens was one of them. many of them had expertise to add to them. part of the continuing evaluation of what we wanted to have on a permanent basis. >> were you specifically in the meeting. more meetings and briefings. were you in those meetings about extending and godsey through the end of the year. >> there were certainly meetings in which i was advised about the
process being undertaken as to determine whether ben got the should be extended here at yes, i was aware of the process that was ongoing. i was kept to update. >> the general lady time has expired. we will now recognize the gentleman from washington. mr. schmidt. >> first of all, ambassador stevens had access to you. in fact -- trish: i would like to thank our entire all-star panel here that we have had with us. stephen yates, thank you. kt mcfarland with me throughout the hour. wonderful analysis from all of you. thank you so much. we will continue monitoring these hearings as republican lawmakers grill hillary clinton there on capitol hill over just exactly what happened that day, september 11, 2012 when four americans were killed in libya.
we will continue watching it as this market climbs higher. of 307 points. near highs of the session. liz claman taking it away. . liz: the dow up 312 points, the s&p up better than 33. both seeing best levels in two months. does it prove wall street needs less grilling on the secretary of state and more on the grilling of mcdonald's hamburgers? the fast food giant thrilling investors, and we can show you the stock. mcdonald's, ticker symbol mcd is jumping 7 nearly 8%, a major