john: i have to say, the obsession with cindy blumenthal, for people like us who have known her and her relationship with him, have talked about that for a long time. it's an interesting relationship. he's an interesting dark figure in her life. fascinating stuff. you might even put in a book about residential elections. to the millions of americans for supposed to care about this on the matter of benghazi, whether her e-mail system exposed classified information to the world, those people don't care about cindy blumenthal et al.. we have a couple tidbits about things she said to the egyptian prime minister about the source of the attack, but these are small things impaired to what they have claimed. mark: the hearings will continue into the evening. as of now, on the substance, on the back-and-forth of the facts and questions, trying to trip her up, the democrats and clinton folks are happy. the republican critics are disappointed because they have not brought to the fore the kind of new information this committee said they would have based on access to e-mails. john: trey gowdy spent

>> cindy blumenthal is a classic figure who is now -- sydney blumenthal is a classic figure. he is hillary's annoying friend. she would pass on some of his intelligence higher up as that benghazi thing was showing. secret email servers while top state department officials like investor stevens did not. -- ambassador stevens did not.>> they are trying to's -- to turn sydney blumenthal into a figure whispering strategy into hillary's here. >> she withstood the 11 hours of bad debt -- of badgering and i can't remember another man or woman being subjected to that over that amount of time and doing as well as hillary clinton did. they chose several people on the republican side and they hammered away at her as though they were in a courtroom and they were going to create reasonable doubt in the minds of one juror. different. in tone and in style. republicans really felt on their face. one more time, republican clinton. this is another hurdle that she has gotten over on her way to likely capturing the democratic nomination. >> moderator: who was senate -- who was hillary clinton's

i think every time they bring up cindy blumenthal, they dig deeper into the hole that kevin mccarthytarted 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.

newly released e-mails show that clinton confidante cindy blumenthal e-mailed the secretary of stateof a cia source which she forwarded. trey gowdy said this debunks claims she never sent the confidential data. blumenthal regularly advised clinton on u.s. involvement in libya. >>> moment ago the noble peace prizeed. the award goes to the tunisia national dialogue quarter. they praised the group for building a peaceful government after the revolution in 2011. secretary of state john kerry and miracle were considered the favorite the for this year's prize. >> heavy rain is possible for some folks today. lots of people don't need to hear that. while other folks are enjoying some warmer temperatures. >> maria molina is in the weather center with what you need to know for the weekend. >> we are tracking temperatures that will be above average. very unusual for this time of year. it is a pretty good deal. we have heavy rain southwest of the city of austin across portions of kansas and missouri. a fast moving area of low pressure across the portion of the great lakes. northeast through out

about help me from the ambassador when she could get other kinds of information about libya from cindy blumenthal? that was an interesting line of inquiry. when it got down into the weeds, it quickly became one where you look at it and thought, what does this have to do with the central question. charlie: she made sure everybody understood that ambassador stevens was a good friend of hers. and secondly, that after his death she was fully behind all kinds of recommendations, make sure this kind of thing did not happen again. >> as you pointed out, basically saying the security piece is handled by professionals. it's not really the secretary of state's job to make sure the security was up to snuff. that's a little bit of buck passing. on the other hand, that is the answer she has given before, so there's nothing new coming out of this. charlie: before we turn to biden, when you look at the question of the e-mails, this committee was organized to look into benghazi and then it discovered the e-mails and they had been done on a private server. is anything come out of that story? is there any potentia

some like cindy blumenthal, a deposition, different rules and may be prevent from unilaterally makingsure, but if they're going to continue to do this, they released selective e-mails they wanted published but not others, released e-mails about the witness but not the witness' testimony about the e-mails. >> when secretary clinton raised the prospect the committee might not exist by the time she's due to testify to them on october 2 2nd, will the committee end some time soon? >> it's a possibility the democrats will end the participation. we have a debate at the outset whether we should participate at all. i took the position we shouldn't, this should be in effect what it has become, solely about trying to attack secretary clinton. now, there were good reasons to be in the room and frankly if we hadn't been in the room, we wouldn't be in the position to be releasing this transcript to be setting the record straight. so it was a tough call, but at the same time, our continued participation gives this committee a patina of respectability it doesn't deserve. and at a certain point we may

i think there is a lot of history there that david brock and cindy blumenthal certainly believed to behe case. used to be raines the executive editor, man from the self, hasn't been there since you have been there. then there is the other side of this. monica crowley talking on fox news about "the new york times." is, how damaging could this be for her possible presidential run? i think the reason you saw this on "the new york times" is not because they want to hurt hillary clinton's chances but they want to help her. they want to get the negative stuff out early so that they can claim it has all been covered and it is old news. secondly, they can say, if there are dirty dealings going on at the clinton foundation, it was all going on before she joined. i can say, it was all going on before she was on board and she is there to help. brian: what is it like to listen to that? amy: i have forgotten about that theory. very interesting. this is an extreme form of media bias. i think one of the gifts of covering the clintons is that everyone has an opinion and it is exciting as a reporter to

what's the role of cindy blumenthal. what role did the fact that this is going on 56 days before a presidential election. these are reasonable questions. questions that the american people deserve to have answers to and are highly relevant if we want to hold the obama administration, the secretary of state and a future presidential candidate to the highest values that you would want to have in our government. >> i want to ask you about another side of the hearing. obviously, we talk about watergate a lot. and parallels or differences. one of the differences, i thought, i remember well on the senate watergate committee some of the republicans actually asked tough questions of -- about richard nixon. and in fact, as you point out in your book, it was a senate republican staffer who elicited the information about the nixon taping system. here is the kind of thing the democrats were asking hillary clinton during this hearing. >> do we want badger you over and over again until we get the gotcha moment he was talking about? >>

drop of the hat the committee chose to prioritize your e-mails and cheryl mills' e-mails and cindy blumenthal's e-mails to you and they chose to prioritize those e-mails over the others. the state department is trying to get those e-mails but it is a the priority of the committee. the other point i want to make, and i won't take the full ten minutes here. a lot of accusations have been made back and forth about things that were said that were or were not true. i think the one thing that was said in this hearing that is clearly the farthest from the truth is that this is not a prosecution. if you listen to the other side, this is unquestionably exactly that, a prosecution. i mean, i ask viewers to just go back and listen to chairman gowdy's questioning of you before the first break and tell me that that's not a prosecution. and i think, again, i don't know if shame, embarrassment, whatever word you wish to choose, it shouldn't be a prosecution, you know, we have the, you know, former secretary of state here. we should be genuinely trying to inquire about how we can gather more information. now,

drop of the hat the committee chose to prioritize your e-mails and cheryl mills' e-mails and cindy blumenthal's e-mails to you and they chose to prioritize those e-mails over the others. the state department is trying to get those e-mails but it is a the priority of the committee. the other point i want to make, and i won't take the full ten minutes here. a lot of accusations have been made back and forth about things that were said that were or were not true. i think the one thing that was said in this hearing that is clearly the farthest from the truth is that this is not a prosecution. if you listen to the other side, this is unquestionably exactly that, a prosecution. i mean, i ask viewers to just go back and listen to chairman gowdy's questioning of you before the first break and tell me that that's not a prosecution. and i think, again, i don't know if shame, embarrassment, whatever word you wish to choose, it shouldn't be a prosecution, you know, we have the, you know, former secretary of state here. we should be genuinely trying to inquire about how we can gather more information. now,

one was cindy blumenthal, a top ally of hillary clinton. i think we will see that come up in the hearing. host: rachael bade, outside of the committee hearing this morning on capitol hill, we appreciate your time this morning. guest: thank you so much for having me. host: this gets underway at 10:00 this morning, that is when the questioning will start. and you can see our cameras set up there. we are going to continue to talk about this -- this testimony today. later on in our show, we are going to be extending the last hour showing you the sights and the scenes in the room, as well as outside, and show you what is happening as that committee prepares for hillary clinton's testimony. that is at 10:00 a.m. it begins. the hearing is to consist of four rounds of questions lasting each of itsrom seven republicans and five democrats. bade, heard from rachael she could be in the chair for eight, ten hours. there are several ways you can watch. first of all, it is going to be on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. that is where you can find it on

sunday, representative from pale claimed on national television that secretary clinton relied on cindy blumenthaler intelligence on libya. earlier this week, the washington post fact checker -- here's the bottom line. the select committee has spent 17 months and $4.7 million of taxpayer money, we have held for hearings and conducted 54 interviews and depositions. yes, we have received some new e-mails from secretary clinton, ambassador stephen and others. yes, we have conducted some new interviews. these documents and interviews do not show any activity. in fact, it is just the opposite. we are the new from a previous investigations. they do not change the basic implosions. this time and it is time now. the taxpayer-funded expedition. we need to come together and shift from politics to policy. that is what the american people want. shifting from politics to policy. our promises to the families. they'll have access to do three things. do not make this a political football. two, find the fax. three, do everything in your power to make sure that this does not happen again. we need to start focusing

i would have this -- cindy blumenthal is somebody you're not a fan of. he was influencing policy with your secretary of state that ultimately pushed you into a conflict with libya which is now in utter chaos. how do you feel about this statement, mr. president? this was sinned any blumenthal sent to hillary clinton. here's six or seven times here in which she's flat-out lied through the investigation. the last point about this would be, is hillary clinton the reason why this is going on? she's not come clean about what she had on that server and do you feel as though that she was disloyal to you in doing so? >> he also, steve croft, asked him about donald trump. he said he will not be president of the united states. that was his prediction. we'll ask the donald about that in about a half an hour, actually 50 minutes from now. >> he's going to answer it. i'm sure a lot more. you don't want to miss that. >> he's still leading in all the polls. >> by i big margin. >>> wisconsin congressman paul ryan is taking some time to consider throwing his hat into the

drop of the hat the committee chose to prioritize your e-mails and cheryl mills' e-mails and cindy blumenthal's e-mails to you and they chose to prioritize those e-mails over the others. the state department is trying to get those e-mails but it is a the priority of the committee. the other point i want to make, and i won't take the full ten minutes here. a lot of accusations have been made back and forth about things that were said that were or were not true. i think the one thing that was said in this hearing that is clearly the farthest from the truth is that this is not a prosecution. if you listen to the other side, this is unquestionably exactly that, a prosecution. i mean, i ask viewers to just go back and listen to chairman gowdy's questioning of you before the first break and tell me that that's not a prosecution. and i think, again, i don't know if shame, embarrassment, whatever word you wish to choose, it shouldn't be a prosecution, you know, we have the, you know, former secretary of state here. we should be genuinely trying to inquire about how we can gather more information. now,