Mr. Speaker! We Need To Get Back To Benghazi

[KingOrfeo]

No, they really couldn't continue to pretend this isn't a story and cling to the fiction that they are journalists.

But, it isn't a story. It would have not a shred of news value any more if the Pubs were not still flogging it, to their own embarrassment and theirs alone.

 

[cjh]

But, it isn't a story. It would have not a shred of news value any more if the Pubs were not still flogging it.

Doesn't matter whether it's a story if it keeps the Republican faithful engaged.

 

[Que]

But, it isn't a story. It would have not a shred of news value any more if the Pubs were not still flogging it, to their own embarrassment and theirs alone.

Understood. A story isn't a story unless it either shines the light of truth and righteousness for Obama to bask in, delineates the sharp contrast between the vast intellect of the left and the abject stupidity of the right or if it shows the darkness that beats within the evil hearts of the Koch Brothers.

Since this is so highly embarrassing to the Republicans, it is probably good timing, yes?

Going to make hanging on to the Senate THAT much easier and may very well lead to the Democrats recapturing each and every one of those seats lost in 2010.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Understood. A story isn't a story unless it either shines the light of truth and righteousness for Obama to bask in, delineates the sharp contrast between the vast intellect of the left and the abject stupidity of the right or if it shows the darkness that beats within the evil hearts of the Koch Brothers.

Since this is so highly embarrassing to the Republicans, it is probably good timing, yes?

Going to make hanging on to the Senate THAT much easier and may very well lead to the Democrats recapturing each and every one of those seats lost in 2010.

Well, certainly these hearings are not going to win the Pubs any votes they did not already have locked up.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Understood. A story isn't a story unless it either shines the light of truth and righteousness for Obama to bask in, delineates the sharp contrast between the vast intellect of the left and the abject stupidity of the right or if it shows the darkness that beats within the heart of the Koch Brothers.

Since this is so highly embarrassing to the Republicans, it is probably good timing, yes?

Going to make hanging on to the Senate THAT much easier and may very well lead to the Democrats recapturing each and every one of those seats lost in 2010.

Not at all. A story isn't a story unless there is something new to be gleaned from it and it is correct, and honestly presented. It's not about left or right, it's about correct, informative instead of incorrect and bullshit.

I don't know how embarrassing it is for Republicans but it is stupid.

I do think Democrats will hold Congress, I might reassess once we're past the primaries. But nobody is predicting Democrats picking seats up. You should go and revisit 2010. Dems and Libs united behind the fact that it wasn't a matter of if, it was a matter of how bad and we seem to be mostly in the same ship again this year. I think people are being slightly more alarmist than is necessary but still. Nobody thinks this will go well.

That's one of the key differences between Dems and Republicans. in 2008 up until the votes were counted the Republicans were insisting that McCain would win and the only reason the polls said otherwise was people wanted to appear politically correct but in the privacy of the voting booth they'd do the White Thing.

In 2012 they insisted Romney was going to pull it and to this day they insist that Obama only won because he lied to American people about terrorism and if he'd told the truth, that he was caught with his pants down (which is an exagerration) that America would have chosen a real man to be our leader.

You don't hear us pretending this is about to be sunshine and rainbows.

 

[Que]

Not at all. A story isn't a story unless there is something new to be gleaned from it and it is correct, and honestly presented. It's not about left or right, it's about correct, informative instead of incorrect and bullshit.

I don't know how embarrassing it is for Republicans but it is stupid.

I do think Democrats will hold Congress, I might reassess once we're past the primaries. But nobody is predicting Democrats picking seats up. You should go and revisit 2010. Dems and Libs united behind the fact that it wasn't a matter of if, it was a matter of how bad and we seem to be mostly in the same ship again this year. I think people are being slightly more alarmist than is necessary but still. Nobody thinks this will go well.

That's one of the key differences between Dems and Republicans. in 2008 up until the votes were counted the Republicans were insisting that McCain would win and the only reason the polls said otherwise was people wanted to appear politically correct but in the privacy of the voting booth they'd do the White Thing.

In 2012 they insisted Romney was going to pull it and to this day they insist that Obama only won because he lied to American people about terrorism and if he'd told the truth, that he was caught with his pants down (which is an exagerration) that America would have chosen a real man to be our leader.

You don't hear us pretending this is about to be sunshine and rainbows.

Ha! Good one!

That is of course why Jay Carney is on the planet to help facilitate that.

I dunno, Rob seems to think Republicans are DESPERATE for a winning message this season, and trying to distract from the wonderfully successful Obamacare that not a single Democrat is bragging about in their campaign literature.

Mary Landrieu has what, 65% negatives? The few that are "undecided" as to whether to keep her or which Republican to replace her, something like 15% of them think the ACA is wonderful.

 

[KingOrfeo]

CNN's Jake Tapper to Trey Gowdy:

Well, CNN’s Jake Tapper hit Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy, the chairman for the select committee for another Benghazi “investigation,” with the question many liberals have been asking conservatives.

“Republicans in general did not seem to have this appetite to find out what went wrong when incorrect intelligence was used to push the war in Iraq,” Tapper asked. “Do you see why some people might say, ‘Why is this more important than that war which resulted in the deaths of more than 4,500 American soldiers and countless innocent Iraqis?”

Exactly!

Shockingly, Gowdy didn’t answer the question.

This is the kind of nonsense that makes it impossible for me to take Republicans seriously. We have a previous administration that admitted to war crimes, ignored warnings prior to 9/11 and started a war based on lies – yet Republicans essentially gave it all the proverbial shrug of the shoulders.

Yet here we are, nearly two years after the fact, and Republicans are still holding hearings about Benghazi.

This is the scenario I think we should go by. Once we see George W. Bush and Dick Cheney put on trial for war crimes, willfully misleading the American people into war and for the deaths of over 4,400 American soldiers in Iraq - then we’ll talk about what talking points were used immediately following Benghazi.

 

[Que]

Well, certainly these hearings are not going to win the Pubs any votes they did not already have locked up.

Great! So you can breathe easy about any of the made up bullshit that might come out in the hearing...not only is there nothing to see here, it is absolutely nothing to worry about.

In fact you are probably secretly glad they are embarrassing themselves so, am I right?

 

[Que]

This is the scenario I think we should go by. Once we see George W. Bush and Dick Cheney put on trial for war crimes, willfully misleading the American people into war and for the deaths of over 4,400 American soldiers in Iraq - then we’ll talk about what talking points were used immediately following Benghazi.

Well, why don't you write your congressman and have tem tell the House to get right on that.

What was that Obama said? "Elections have consequences."

Wait...I thought Sean just told me you guys let that go long ago? I am confused...

 

[KingOrfeo]

Great! So you can breathe easy about any of the made up bullshit that might come out in the hearing...not only is there nothing to see here, it is absolutely nothing to worry about.

I ain't worried and I'm sure nobody in the Admin is worried.

In fact you are probably secretly glad they are embarrassing themselves so, am I right?

I might be if it were not all so damned annoying, as well as diverting the House's time and attention from countless things more important and urgent.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Ha! Good one!

That is of course why Jay Carney is on the planet to help facilitate that.

I dunno, Rob seems to think Republicans are DESPERATE for a winning message this season, and trying to distract from the wonderfully successful Obamacare that not a single Democrat is bragging about in their campaign literature.

Mary Landrieu has what, 65% negatives? The few that are "undecided" as to whether to keep her or which Republican to replace her, something like 15% of them think the ACA is wonderful.

Jah Carney is there so you don't waste Obama's time.

Not a single democrat is bragging about, just so I know are commercials for the sake of this conversation literature? I would normally say no but I'm curious your opinion.

Great! So you can breathe easy about any of the made up bullshit that might come out in the hearing...not only is there nothing to see here, it is absolutely nothing to worry about.

In fact you are probably secretly glad they are embarrassing themselves so, am I right?

I'm glad they are embarrassing themselves, that doesn't mean I'm happy we're wasting time on BS instead of working on important things.

Wait...I thought Sean just told me you guys let that go long ago? I am confused...

We did. Context is important however. In this case the context is that you think nothing of this disaster that we let go but expect us to freak out over this situation that even as you present it is minor and none of us believe it's at all what you claim.

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

If it threatens Democrats, they let go right away.

And if it threatens Republicans, they let go right away.

 

[Que]

The Benghazi panel is stacked with people with good amount of trial experience.

I find it interesting that the Dems find that intimidating. They seem to think the word "Trial" makes it MORE political. In theory justice is blind and both sides are supposed to be only in pursuit of the truth.

What? They would prefer people that will pontificate, rather than present and review exhibits, interview and cross-examine witnesses? If they truly believe there is nothing here, a methodical 'trial' format should bear that out.

Pelosi wants the right to veto witnesses...for what purpose? If someone has no relevant information, why would they be called. If they are called, why would you not want them to tell what they know?

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

The Benghazi panel is stacked with people with good amount of trial experience.

Congress is stacked with people who have trial experience. Your perceptions are worthless.

 

[Que]

Congress is stacked with people who have trial experience. Your perceptions are worthless.

Congress is stacked with people that have law degrees. That is not nearly the same thing as trial experience.

Experience from the criminal prosecutorial side is even more invaluable in this sort of panel. They have experience organizing exhibits and testimony in a way that makes sense to lay juries...I can see why that scares you.

The whole point of this select committee is that the administration has run the other panels hither and yon with each department pointing to other departments as having relevant information. Since each of the departments fell under a different defined purview it enabled the obfuscation to continue.

Your evaluation of my perceptions isn't really required, but nice to have some feedback.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

How about we spent the tens of millions in Congressional panels to deal with crumbling infrastructure, investing in small business, jobs programs, worker retraining ... anything resembling what the country needs.

Maybe if the investigation continues for four years you'll find out that the President got a blowjob.

 

[Adre]

We all know this is politics, it was at the beginning just as it is now. It's the only business of Washington. We will learn nothing new, no one will be punished. It's a waste of time but Congress has little else to do anyway. On the other hand, it gives a few folks on a porn board something to yack about.

 

[Que]

Be sure and let California Democrat Henry Waxman how you feel about such waste.

 

[Adre]

Be sure and let California Democrat Henry Waxman how you feel about such waste.

Why would I have any interest in him?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Que]

Why would I have any interest in him?

I wasn't addressing you specifically...BND was pretending that millions of dollars that he assumes will be necessary to get the Obama Administration to comply with subpenas was actual money.

(Remember when even a Billion Dollars was real money?)

Anyway since he is concerned about the costs of hearings perhaps he might want to let Henry know how he feels about Rep Waxman's proposal yesterday.

She wants to frustrate the committee on behalf of the President.

Well, of course.

I think my post didn't come out quite like I intended. I was trying to avoid interjecting sarcastic snark in posing some real, valid, rhetorical questions.

What I mean is if she wants to convey that she is being anything but an obstructionist, the rules she is asking for (and knows she won't get) are too obvious as to her true motive.

No one that is calling for "impartial" hearings would need the things she is demanding.

 

[RjThoughts]

Another day and no one from the apologizers can answer my questions. Because of this, I guess I've hit the nail on the head: It's ALL bullshit!

 

[Que]

So.... your questions (we call those distractions) are valid, interesting and relevant, but The Congress's questions (which you would call a distraction) in the capacity of oversight are optional, invalid and irrelevant?

What little I remember of your questions they seemed to be the same rhetorical questions that all of the leftie sites have been pushing this week in an attempt to re-frame the hearings.

As far as I know I have answered every single leftie blog's protestations in a reply to someone or another in this thread.

Sorry if you felt left out when I didn't repeat my answers to your repeated question.

 

[RjThoughts]

So.... your questions (we call those distractions) are valid, interesting and relevant, but The Congress's questions (which you would call a distraction) in the capacity of oversight are optional, invalid and irrelevant?

What little I remember of your questions they seemed to be the same rhetorical questions that all of the leftie sites have been pushing this week in an attempt to re-frame the hearings.

As far as I know I have answered every single leftie blog's protestations in a reply to someone or another in this thread.

Sorry if you felt left out when I didn't repeat my answers to your repeated question.

Yes!
The supposed lies came AFTER the deaths, and why is Congress STILL having a hard-on about it. It's a total waste of time and money when there are more important things to be done.

Why is it soooooo important to find if what was done was a mass conspiracy? It's time to just give it up!