admittedly recovering from a concussion and other ailments, she is poised. she is steady. she has signaled both with her put-downs, you can read that in my book, or i don t accept your narrative or that s your story but those aren t the facts, sir, or just with her facial expressions, brian. she has shown attempts at humor or laughing off their efforts to get her to look at tab 17 or else just an expression of weariness, patience, and dare i say, at times, contempt. that seems to be sort of the demeanor of the former secretary of state, facing this panel which so far at least has not covered itself with glory, although they ve got some good ammunition if you will, asking her why there wasn t more security, why chris stevens
i should add to that, i think mr. smith gave o soliloquy. i think it was eloquent. but it was representative of the behavior of democrats on this panel since may of 2014. not one finger, not one question for a witness. they say they want get at the truth but the truth of the matter is they spent most of their time today attacking members of this committee and this process. i regret that. i think that s a violation of their duty to the country and most importantly their duty to families. i want to go back to a couple things we talked about the day before, madam secretary. ambassador stevens didn t have your e-mail. i m sorry, what did you ask me? ambassador stevens did not have your personal male address, we ve established that? yes, that s right. did he have your cell phone number? no, but he had the 24-hour of the state operations in the state department that can reach me 24/7. yes, ma am.
i d like to add to that. mr. smith give a solely question. it was represent and representative of the behaviors of the democrats on the panel since 2014. not one finger, not one question for a witness. they want to get to the truth but the truth they spent most or their time today attacking members of this committee ask this process, and i regret that. i think that s a violation of most importantly, their duty to the families. i m going to go back to automatic consecutive things i talked to you about before, madam secretary. ambassador stevens didn t have you e-mail. is that correct? i m sorry. what did you ambassador stevens did not address. we established that juggle that s right. did he have your cell phone number. nod, but he had the 24 hour number of the state operations in the to state department that-reach me 24- did he have your fax number? he had the fax number of the
wasn t listened to, but that was all pursued by previous hearings. there have been seven previous hearings and they have, with a number of witnesses, including deputy chief, made it clear all requests were either denied or ignored and she s made the point none of them got to her level than was an institutional question, which i think that they could do a better job of pursuing. i don t know what your takeaway is but it seems to me there are a lot of lessons that should be learned and she has discussed what reforms have taken place. but there could be a lot more said about why the mission was not better protected. i will say, maybe this is coming, andrea, a lot of us were surprised that the there hasn t been more of a drilling down on how ferocious the attack was on the compound how many elements it contained. forensic investigation, after the fact that revealed the