Allen B. West

Clinton gave “direct instructions” re: Benghazi. My heart is sinking.

Getty Images

I went to the lady-parts doctor today. (No, this one wasn’t written by Col. West) While waiting for my appointment, I picked up the most recent copy of People Magazine. The cover story was Hillary Clinton with a headline “We need to break that highest, hardest glass ceiling.”

I leafed through about two pages before the physician’s assistant called me in. While I replaced the magazine in the rack, she said breathlessly, “I think she’s going to be interviewed by Diane Sawyer tomorrow!” It took me a minute to figure out what she was referring to, and then I realized it was Hillary.

My heart sank.

Advertisement - story continues below

This woman already had heroine worship. In her mind, she had already cast her vote for a Clinton presidency. Nothing was going to change her excited anticipation to vote for the first woman president.

Not even a story like this one.

As our fellow Liberty Alliance partner, Minuteman News reported, Clinton says she gave “very direct instructions” to security experts during the Benghazi attack in an effort to secure the U.S. mission. You can read the full story here.

Host Diane Sawyer asked Clinton if there was anything she could have “personally” done to protect the Americans in Benghazi.

“What I did was give very direct instructions” to “the people who have the expertise and experience in security,” Clinton said. “That is personal.”

What does that mean? It’s “personal.”

Yes, it was very personal for the four Americans who died. It was very personal for Ty Woods and Glen Doherty who willingly rushed into danger, trusting that help was on the way. It will always be very personal for the families they left behind in the wake of their tragic deaths.

But what difference, at this point, does it make?

Because it’s personal.

Clinton declined to say whether she is willing to testify on Benghazi before the new House select committee investigating the attack. “That’s going to be up to the people running the hearing,” she said. “We’ll see what they decide to do, how they conduct themselves.”

Oh, to see if they “get too personal?” Then maybe she won’t want to? How about if she’s subpoenaed?

Here’s the thing, a great majority of black people were thrilled to vote for the first black president. But black people represent only about 13-14 percent of the population. Women represent just over 50 percent.

There will be an avalanche of media coverage of Hillary Clinton in every single woman’s magazine and every soft news program about her hair, her outfits, her role as grandmother and long-suffering wife, her historical importance, her fashion evolution, her ability to succeed in a man’s world…and on and on.

But as tough as nails as she’s supposed to be, hard questions won’t be asked, because that would be sexist. It’s personal.

It’s a terrible, dangerous double-standard. I’m not surprised Clinton gave “direct instructions” – I’m just sad she was the one giving them, and I pray she will not be the one giving them as Commander-in-Chief in January of 2017.

Look which FEDERAL LAW Dems broke last night

Look which FEDERAL LAW Dems broke last night

BUSTED: Hillary's gun control plot UNCOVERED at DNC

BUSTED: Hillary's gun control plot UNCOVERED at DNC