Two Benghazi Parents Sue Hillary Clinton for Wrongful Death, Defamation

by Pete Williams

The parents of two Americans killed in the 2012 terrorist attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, filed a wrongful death lawsuit in federal court Monday against Hillary Clinton.

In the suit, Patricia Smith and Charles Woods, the parents of Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods, claim that Clinton's use of a private e-mail server contributed to the attacks. They also accuse her of defaming them in public statements.

Smith was an information management officer and Woods was a security officer, both stationed in Benghazi.

"The Benghazi attack was directly and proximately caused, at a minimum by defendant Clinton's 'extreme carelessness' in handling confidential and classified information," such as the location of State Department employees in Libya, the lawsuit said.

While no such connection has ever been established, their lawsuit called it "highly probable" that Clinton sent and received information about the activities of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Such information, the lawsuit claimed, "easily found its way to foreign powers" and was then obtained by Islamic terrorists.

James Comey, in announcing the findings of the FBI's investigation of her private e-mail server last month, said it was "possible that hostile actors gained access" to it. But he said the FBI did not find direct evidence that it was successfully hacked.

The two parents also said when Secretary Clinton met with them after their children were killed, she said that a controversial YouTube video was the motivation for the attacks. But they said that in later interviews she denied making such a statement and implied that the recollection of the parents was incorrect.

In a speech to the Republican convention in Cleveland, Smith said, "I blame Hillary Clinton personally for the death of my son."

The parents were represented by Washington, D.C., lawyer Larry Klayman, a frequent critic of the Clintons.

About Larry Klayman @ FreedomWatchUSA.org

About time .

Just a frivilous attempt to try and degrade Sec. Clinton.

How about having 4,500 parents of American soldiers killed in Iraq due to the LIES told by GW Bush about weapons of mass destruction that never existed?

Crapweasels Bush and Cheney are both war criminals and should be in prison.

Originally Posted by Guest

Just a frivilous attempt to try and degrade Sec. Clinton.

Not frivolous at all read

http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/1...mplaint%20.pdf


She degraded herself.

Originally Posted by Guest

Just a frivilous attempt to try and degrade Sec. Clinton.

How about having 4,500 parents of American soldiers killed in Iraq due to the LIES told by GW Bush about weapons of mass destruction that never existed?

Crapweasels Bush and Cheney are both war criminals and should be in prison.

Explain how HELLary can be "degraded" any more?

Dude, it's 2016. Snap out of it. We're talking about scumbag lady Hellary.

Originally Posted by Guest

Explain how HELLary can be "degraded" any more?

Dude, it's 2016. Snap out of it. We're talking about scumbag lady Hellary.

Nazi prison guards are still being convicted of war crimes 71 years after the end of WWII. War criminals GW Bush and Cheney still can stand trial in the World Court. Hopeully, some day they will.

I believe that two more parents have since joined the lawsuit .

Originally Posted by Guest

Just a frivilous attempt to try and degrade Sec. Clinton.

How about having 4,500 parents of American soldiers killed in Iraq due to the LIES told by GW Bush about weapons of mass destruction that never existed?

Crapweasels Bush and Cheney are both war criminals and should be in prison.

Why don`t you organize a Movement to do so if you are so convinced and energized . You are retired and have the time and you certainly have the intelligence and the funds .

Originally Posted by Guest

Just a frivilous attempt to try and degrade Sec. Clinton.

How about having 4,500 parents of American soldiers killed in Iraq due to the LIES told by GW Bush about weapons of mass destruction that never existed?

Crapweasels Bush and Cheney are both war criminals and should be in prison.

Geez, blame bush, now that frivolous. Bush got his Intel form fed gov liberal heads, yes most all heads of fed. Gov. Are lead by liberal democrats. So by your thinking IMO bush was set up by liberal democrats which had access of the same Intel and was majority voted for war. Then, like all liberals find fault in others, so they can't be held responsible. I imagine you blame bush for the first ice age or the killing of the dinosaurs!

Two Benghazi Parents Sue Hillary Clinton for Wrongful Death, Defamation - NBC News

That's going to be a hard case to win especially if she is President of the United States which looks more and more likely unless Wikileaks has something more substantial. And they probably would have tried to use it before this if it were very serious.

Originally Posted by Guest

That's going to be a hard case to win especially if she is President of the United States

First did you read the Complaint, or are you familiar with Federal Law?
not a hard case at all, not easy but triable issues of fact are alleged.

The plaintiff's lawyer is no light weight.

which looks more and more likely unless Wikileaks has something more substantial. And they probably would have tried to use it before this if it were very serious.

they have them but 30,000 need to be organized, that takes time.

She got her server hacked that's been established.

Originally Posted by Guest

About time .

The repub are following trumps lead and becoming sue happy. LOL

Originally Posted by Guest

First did you read the Complaint, or are you familiar with Federal Law?
not a hard case at all, not easy but triable issues of fact are alleged.

The plaintiff's lawyer is no light weight.




they have them but 30,000 need to be organized, that takes time.

She got her server hacked that's been established.

Bet your house she will go to trial, when you lose I'm sure your trump cronies will take you in. But don't bet on that. LOL

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/op...eaks.html?_r=0

A good read.
"In a world awash in new information — and misinformation — context, motivation and trust are crucial when weighing the importance of leaks and their accuracy."

It will boil down to intention.

Originally Posted by Guest

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/op...eaks.html?_r=0

A good read.
"In a world awash in new information — and misinformation — context, motivation and trust are crucial when weighing the importance of leaks and their accuracy."

It will boil down to intention.

Intent is not required for some crimes, such as mishandling of classified information. And her ignorance of the law is pretty hard to convince, being she is a lawyer and being as she was instructed by the State Dept prior to her taking on the duties of SecState. And I am sure she was exposed to classified information as First lady and as senator. So, any excuse of ignorance is hard to prove. She was also told by the White House NOT to use her private server. She did so regardless and that shows the intent to violate. She also shows intent when she instructed her staff to remove classification markings and transmit them to her on the Internet, a felony. Any first year law student could convict her in court. She is protected right now. She won't see a court room until after the election.