Hillary Clinton vs. the House Select Committee to Drive Down Her Poll Numbers

DEM_2016_Clinton_Emails_Congress.JPEG-000ab_c0-236-3732-2411_s561x327At 10 a.m. today, Hillary Clinton will appear before the House Select Committee to Drive Down Her Poll Numbers.

In that hearing, committee chairman Trey Gowdy and other Republicans have promised to produce new material from their investigation, the eighth major investigation into the attacks at our Benghazi consulate more than three years ago. We’ll see. “New material” can have a lot of definitions, but given the microscopic attention already paid to this tragedy, it would have to be evidence that significantly changes the narrative.

Those previous investigations — many of them Republican-led — have been forced to conclude that the Obama administration did everything that it could militarily to save our people, and that initial reports that the Benghazi attacks were inspired by an anti-Islamic video were the honest analysis of our intelligence people, not a politically motivated cover story.

They also concluded that more could have been done beforehand to improve security at the facility, and that better intelligence might have allowed us to prevent the attacks in the first place. And those recommendations and shortcomings have been acted upon.

Nonetheless, the obsession with the Benghazi attack is amazing.  In 1983-84 alone, three attacks on our embassies in Lebanon and Kuwait killed 93 people, permanently altering the course of U.S. policy in the Middle East, and a single investigation was deemed sufficient.

During the recent Bush administration, attacks were launched against U.S. diplomatic facilities or personnel in India, Nepal (twice), Pakistan (3 times), Uzbekistan, Peru, Indonesia, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Greece, Yemen (twice), Afghanistan and Turkey, resulting in at least 50 deaths, including 10 Americans. (That’s not counting the U.S. diplomatic personnel killed in Iraq.) Congressional interest was minimal.

So ask yourself: If Clinton were not the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination, would today’s hearing even be occurring? There is only one honest answer to it.

Reader Comments 0

800 comments
Kamchak
Kamchak

@Penses 

 I couldn't agree more..we do see a lot of that here, on this liberal blog.

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

National Review says, "What?"


LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

Penses
Penses

@Paul42 

"It's pretty standard. We see hit here all the time - people who shun source material and rely on someone else's interpretation."

LOL. I couldn't agree more..we do see a lot of that here, on this liberal blog.


Paul42
Paul42

@Visual_Cortex

Caption time!

"We're paying this guy HOW much?"

"This is a founder of the Freedom Caucus?"

Penses
Penses

@GaBlue

LOL. See VC - there's another of those "progressive" neologisms used as attack words (in lieu of a logical argument) - "splain". I ought to compile a lexicon of "progisms". ;-)

Paul42
Paul42

oh geez...

Brooks:  'why did you talk to Ambassador Kress and not to Chris Stevens?

Clinton:  'Kress was the ambassador..."

This is painful in a macabre sort of way.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

 you should know that I am not "afraid" of the practice of homosexuality

It's when they're good enough at it not to have to practice that it gets really scary.

Numbers_R_Us
Numbers_R_Us

I see really only one key thing missing from a Republican Intelligence Committee.  They should just call them Republican Committees and be done with it.

consumedconsumer
consumedconsumer

If it was made a consulate, would the CIA have still been able to run the arms through it?



YouLibs
YouLibs

I appreciate the opportunity given to Ms. Clinton to demonstrate her competency and grace under pressure. 

Kamchak
Kamchak


@Penses 

"dittoheads" come in all shapes, sizes and political stripes.

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

Self -described El Rushbo dittoheads say, "What?"

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

LOL ROFL LOL ROFL LOL ROFL

Penses
Penses

@Kamchak

"Self -described El Rushbo dittoheads say, "What?""

You mean ASK "What?" don't you?

BWAHAHAHA

gotalife
gotalife

How many innocent Americans did gowdy send to prison.


He is horrible.

gotalife
gotalife

This is a perfect example of why pols can't use transparency. They play politics when you do.

Jackie_36
Jackie_36

Rep. Sanchez(D-CA) is read a literal "riot act" to the so-called conservatives and new secessionists on the committee.

DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

@Jackie_36 Well, since the dems are there to provide cover for Clinton, did you expect something different?

Paul42
Paul42

@Jackie_36

"Hey, Chairman, you asked the same thing a year ago and it was covered in these previous investigations..."

Yeah, that was good.  Subtle and good.

KUTGF
KUTGF

If I understand, at some point, Bloomy sent HC an email which got forwarded to Stevens to discuss?  Wonder if that forwarded email included HC's email address. 

KUTGF
KUTGF

Gowdy just got smacked down by Sanchez!

Numbers_R_Us
Numbers_R_Us

On more important matters, my MCD shares had a nice bounce today.

ByteMe
ByteMe

And "unsolicited" comes back for a rehash.


I really want to get back to un.... fettttttttttterrred.

gotalife
gotalife

Prosecution back to gowdy.

gotalife
gotalife

gowdy does not know how State works. rookies.

Numbers_R_Us
Numbers_R_Us

Why don't you Republicans go dig up a bunch of time stamps from emails and phone calls and demonstrate to us all how Hillary would respond within thirty seconds to any email from Blumenthal but she let calls from Stevens go to voice mail.  Better yet, maybe that is Trey's true smoking gun.  Is that it.  Come on now.  Don't keep us in suspense here.  I mean, Trey is the GOP brain trust, right.  So surely he is going to show us all how he got that title.  Right.  

honested
honested

@Numbers_R_Us 

The campaign cash on the line for this must be yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge!

Numbers_R_Us
Numbers_R_Us

@DownInAlbany @Numbers_R_Us I would hope it would matter to those of you that have placed so much confidence in Trey.  As for me, I know better.  Trey simply does not have anything more than a swelled head and lump of coal for a heart.  A true Dixiecrat.

gotalife
gotalife

She has the school the rookie.

Penses
Penses

@kitty72 

"I once asked a self-proclaimed dittohead if he was allowed to think for himself. He looked at me blankly. I took that for a no. Sadly he was one of my bosses. :) I still worked there for years until I left to take another job elsewhere. Family firm. That was how he got away with it I think."

LOL. In case you didn't have your coke-bottle glasses at hand when reading THIS blog the past couple of weeks, months or years (however long you've been visiting the site), "dittoheads" come in all shapes, sizes and political stripes.

honested
honested

@Penses @kitty72 

So refusing to be sucked in by the vast wrong-wing noise machine makes one some sort of 'dittohead'?

Wouldn't that really make one a 'truthhead'?

Penses
Penses

@honested

LOL. Thanks for unwittingly admitting to being yourself a "dittohead". ;-)

kitty72
kitty72

@Penses @kitty72 


He was a Rush Limbaugh fan. Of course that point went over your pointed little head.


No one else would proudly call himself that. smh

Penses
Penses

@kitty72

LOL - "...your pointed little head."? Is THAT your argument? In case you didn't notice, Sparky, I made no reference to self-proclaimed "dittoheads", but only "dittoheads" (as a general term).

Reading comprehension escapes you, doesn't it?