Hillary Clinton aide at State kept track of her public Benghazi statements for her

Brett T. | 12:30 AM on December 01, 2015

@sarahcwestwood @drawandstrike wow that's a shock said no one ever.

— Chris (@concretevol) November 30, 2015

Monday’s dump of State Department emails again has reporters digging through a pile of highly redacted documents and occasionally finding a gold nugget, such as an easily confused Hillary Clinton’s apparent need for help with every little task, such as finding the right channel for “Homeland.”

Shocking no one, the Washington Examiner’s Sarah Westwood writes that many of the newly released Clinton emails contradict her Benghazi testimony. Westwood writes that Jake Sullivan, a top Clinton aide, was instrumental in keeping track of Clinton’s statements on the Benghazi terror attacks and sending her Word documents with all of her public statements compiled.

This is the kind of thing a person who tells the truth doesn't need.https://t.co/NOAwQyEM2H #Benghazi pic.twitter.com/PNn2an3Ak2

— Arthur Kimes (@ComradeArthur) December 1, 2015

But she doesn’t tell the truth.

.@HillaryClinton & aides seemingly very focused on how her early Benghazi response would be perceived down the line pic.twitter.com/kRprbJQH8s

— Cameron Joseph (@cam_joseph) November 30, 2015

@ComradeArthur Weirdest part of her email situation is early talking points were clearly written by lawyers. But they still weren't accurate

— Parse O'Matic (@funwithparsing) December 1, 2015

@ComradeArthur It was like she didn't even trust her lawyers enough to tell them the situation so they could craft accurate talking points.

— Parse O'Matic (@funwithparsing) December 1, 2015

https://twitter.com/JohnVantran1/status/671546324496621568

After putting so much work into keeping the lies consistent, Sullivan was disappointed with criticism offered up by strategist Mark Penn, who panned Clinton’s famous “What difference, at this point, does it make!” rant. “I don’t think the emotion in the hearing works to your advantage — looks more like they rattled you on something no one outside the crazy right blamed you for anyway,” Penn advised.

“Give. Me. A. Break,” contended Sullivan. “You did not look rattled. You looked real. There’s a difference. A big one.” He continued, “My problem with Mark’s analysis is that it repeats the same flawed assumption that underpinned his advice in 2008; namely, that being yourself is risky.”

Clinton’s response: “BINGO!!”

Of course, being herself now means being more spontaneous and showing her “humor and heart.” Someone should remind her.