The unraveling of the Benghazi Committee

Kevin McCarthy: Next Speaker of the House?

Nailed for its purpose of bringing down Hillary Clinton, the best qualified candidate in the 2016 race, the Benghazi Committee continues to unravel. Most thoughtful members of the electorate believe this disgraceful and slanderous Committee should be under investigation for wasting millions of dollars of taxpayer money on their fool's mission of trying to destroy HRC.

Steve Benen has the scoop:

At last count, two congressional Republicans and a notable GOP staffer have admitted that their party’s Benghazi Committee is a partisan political exercise intended to undermine Hillary Clinton. The pressure’s starting to get to the panel’s chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who said yesterday that Republicans not on the committee need to “shut up.”

But as Clinton herself prepares to testify this week, the political conditions surrounding the controversial panel appear to be going from bad to worse. The Huffington Post reported yesterday:

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), the chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, alleged in an Oct. 7 letter that Clinton used her private email account to release the name of a CIA source on Libya. An email sent by adviser Sidney Blumenthal that she then forwarded to a member of her staff reportedly contained the name of that source, which would have suggested that Clinton used her private email server to disseminate classified information.

But on Sunday, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the committee’s ranking member, revealed that the CIA investigated the email and found that the information was not classified.

Cummings’ letter explained, “The CIA [on Saturday] informed both the Republican and Democratic staffs of the Select Committee that they do not consider the information you highlighted in your letter to be classified. Specifically, the CIA confirmed that the State Department consulted with the CIA on this production, the CIA reviewed these documents, and the CIA made no redactions to protect classified information.”

Cummings asked that Gowdy apologize for making a bogus anti-Clinton claim, though the former Secretary of State probably shouldn’t hold her breath.

Read More:

The loose-lipped Kevin McCarthy and yet another Clinton non-scandal

Rep. Kevin McCarthy

Even as the Democratic Party takes seriously the possible candidacy of loose-lipped, gaffe prone Joe Biden, the Republican Party is picking up the pieces after the loose-lipped Kevin McCarthy tells us what most of us already knew: the Benghazi Hearings were yet another attempt to bring down Hillary Clinton.

Over at the NY Times, economist Paul Krugman gets the word out:

So Representative Kevin McCarthy, who was supposed to succeed John Boehner as speaker of the House, won’t be pursuing the job after all. He would have faced a rough ride both winning the post and handling it under the best of circumstances, thanks to the doomsday caucus — the fairly large bloc of Republicans demanding that the party cut off funds to Planned Parenthood, or kill Obamacare, or anyway damage something liberals like, by shutting down the government and forcing it into default.

Still, he finished off his chances by admitting — boasting, actually — that the endless House hearings on Benghazi had nothing to do with national security, that they were all about inflicting political damage on Hillary Clinton.

But we all knew that, didn’t we?

Read More:

After yesterday's appearance on the Hill, poll shows Sec. Clinton more popular than ever

Official portrait.

The Washington Post's Dana Millbank summarizes exquisitely Hillary Clinton's final appearance on the Hill as she lets her critics have it while winding up her tenure at the State Department. Millbank also reports the results of a new Washington Post-ABC poll showing the Secretary of State is more popular than ever.

Millbank writes:

 They blamed her mismanagement for the death of Americans in Benghazi, Libya. They accused her of a cover-up. Some even suggested that she faked an illness to avoid testifying about the attack.

On Wednesday, Hillary Rodham Clinton finally had her chance to respond to critics, and the outgoing secretary of state served up a potent brew of righteous outrage. 

She began her appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with restraint, and even remorse. She choked up as she described receiving flag-draped caskets at Andrews Air Force Base and hugging relatives of those killed.

But her anger boiled over when rookie Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) demanded to know why she and her aides didn’t immediately call those evacuated from Benghazi to find out whether a protest had preceded the attack.

Clinton replied that she didn’t want to interfere with the FBI’s investigation — which is almost certainly what Republicans would have accused her of doing. 

“That’s a good excuse,” Johnson said, scornfully. 

“Well, no, it’s a fact,” Clinton retorted, growing irritated. Waving her index finger, she pointed out that much of what happened in Libya on Sept. 11 remains unknown. 

“No, no, no, no,” Johnson rejoined. “We were misled that there were supposedly protests and then something sprang out of that, an assault . . . and the American people could have known that within days.”

Clinton raised her voice. “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,” she shouted at the lawmaker. Waving her arms and then pounding the witness table with her fist, she continued: “Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Johnson stopped interrupting as Clinton continued. “It is, from my perspective, less important today looking backward as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice,” she said. 

Johnson didn’t attempt a rebuttal. “Okay, thank you, Madam Secretary.”

Read more:

Secretary Clinton sets the record straight on Benghazi (video)

One can no longer be surprised by the extremes Hillary Clinton's foes will go to in their attempts to disparage her outstanding service as secretary of state.

Nor should we be surprised at how ably and emphatically the secretary responds to her critics (watch video below).



Kate Norcera at Politico reports:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took responsibility for the attacks on U.S. diplomatic outposts in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday morning.

(PHOTOS: 10 quotes about Hillary Clinton and Benghazi)

She visibly choked up as she spoke of the four dead Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, who died in the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack.

“For me, this is not just a matter of policy… it’s personal,” she said. “I stood next to President Obama as the Marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at Andrews. I put my arms around the mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters.”

In her opening statement, Clinton also reiterated that she took responsibility for the attack.
“As I have said many times since September 11, I take responsibility. Nobody is more committed to getting this right. I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger, and more secure,” Clinton said.

(PHOTOS: 10 slams on Obama and Benghazi)

“Taking responsibility meant moving quickly in those first uncertain hours and days to respond to the immediate crisis and further protect our people and posts in high-threat areas across the region and the world. It meant launching an independent investigation to determine exactly what happened in Benghazi and to recommend steps for improvement. And it meant intensifying our efforts to combat terrorism and support emerging democracies in North Africa and beyond.”

Clinton said that immediately after the attack she “stayed in close contact” with officials both here and in Libya.
Clinton answered sometimes pointed questions from senators on the timing of the attack, new threats in Northern Africa, and funding for security in embassies around the world.


Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho) questioned Clinton’s role in coming up with talking points used by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice and why administration officials initially characterized the assault as spontaneous rather than deliberate.

Clinton said she was not involved in the selection of Rice to speak on the Sunday talk shows. She added that it was clear to her, as she said the day after the attacks, that “heavily armed militants assaulted our compound.” But with several simultaneous protests happening around the world, it was difficult to understand the exactly why the attack occurred.

“I personally was not focused on talking points, I was focused on keeping our people safe,” she said.

Read more: