Now this looks to be a positive development.
The Benghazi coverup is going to be investigated by a House select committee, with full powers of subpoena and the ability to hire its own special prosecutor.
This will essentially bypass Eric Holder and the corrupt Obama Department of Justice:
The move comes after the revelation of an email from a top Obama national security official, Ben Rhodes, instructing Susan Rice to focus on an anti-Muslim internet video to explain the attacks.
“The new emails this week were the straw that broke the camel’s back,” says the aide. “The Speaker was furious to learn that the administration withheld relevant documents from a congressional subpoena. He’s sick and tired of this evasion and obstruction from the administration, and wants a solution to finally force accountability, get to the truth, and provide justice.”
Now, since this is Boehner, I expected him to put some toothless establishment RINO in charge who would go through the motions. But I was pleasantly surprised to see that none other than Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, a staunch conservative and Tea Party favorite is going to head the committee. Gowdy spent six years as a very successful Federal prosecutor, so he has the knowledge, the smarts and the aggressive temperament to make this the Obama Administration's worst nightmare. And he's also close to Chairman Darrel Issa of the House Oversight Committee, which Gowdy used to serve on.
And speaking of which, Issa just subpoenaed Secretary of State John Kerry to testify before Congress about the department's response to information requests about the attack. Note that Issa didn't just issue an invitation,which is less formal.
"The State Department's response to the congressional investigation of the Benghazi attack has shown a disturbing disregard for the Department's legal obligations to Congress," Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., wrote in a letter to Kerry.
He added: "Compliance with a subpoena for documents is not a game. Because your Department is failing to meet its legal obligations, I am issuing a new subpoena to compel you to appear before the Committee to answer questions about your agency's response to the congressional investigation of the Benghazi attack."
I'm cautiously optimistic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Awesome! I'll bring the popcorn!
I never miss a chance to watch the republicans overplay their hand, especially on a scandal that literally no one but drooling dittoheads care about.
I'm still waiting for a republican to calmly explain to me where the 'scandal' actually is without sputtering or resorting to silly conspiracy theories.
So, you don't see any problems with deliberately lying to the entire country for partisan political expediency, lying to congress and obstructing justice?
Or four Americans left without adequate security in an unsafe location and then deliberately left to die with no attempt to save their lives?
OK, You're absolutely right. No one is going to be able to explain it to you.
Why would they waste the time?
ROFLMAO
anon issuing a challenge to: "without sputtering or resorting to silly conspiracy theories" is sort of like losing your virginity in a porn movie.
Rob: Or four Americans left without adequate security in an unsafe location and then deliberately left to die with no attempt to save their lives?
No one disagrees that security was inadequate. For whatever reason, the ambassador was also taking inordinate risks on behalf of the Libyan people. However, once the die was cast, there was little the Americans could do. Despite belief by some Americans, they do not have a magic army.
Zachriel is quite correct here. Once the so called die was cast, there was nothing we could have done. Even as for the deployment of military forces in the region or nearby, we are going to need the permission of the countries or regions where these forces are stationed at to deploy them. Since they are unlikely to want to get involved in something like this, approval may not be readily forthcoming. Also, any approval would need to go through whatever channels these governments have and we would be looking at a day or more to obtain the necessary approval. Even if approval is somehow instantaneous which is unlikely, there's nothing that could have been done at that point. Since approval by the nations hosting these military assets is not likely to be forthcoming instantaneously, there's simply nothing that could have been done at that point.
As such, I'm not really sure what the investigators are investigating or what they hope to accomplish. For better or worse most Americans understanding that serving in a war zone carries with it certain risks have moved on from Benghazi and could care little about this right now. Furthermore as the first African-American president in US history combined with a nation that feels extremely guilty over its past POTUS still has a vast amount of goodwill among the American people.
If Republicans push this to hard, they risk having the American people close ranks around this POYUS and his team. While there is some discontent over his performance as POYUS, the American people still genuinely love the man in the position for the most part. Again, I'm not saying don't investigate this. Simply Republicans and anyone else choosing to investigate this needs to be aware of the dynamics of this situation.
As for the belief in a "magic" army and military, this is unfortunately true. The media has been extremely unhelpful in this regard. They've often overstated American strengths and understated the strengths of adversaries and potential adversaries. This has been done for a variety of reasons. The primary reason is by overstating American strengths and understating the strengths of adversaries it becomes much easier for these media forces to demonize the nation.
Zachriel and Poster,
May I point out that this attack took place over nine hours?
I could have boarded an airliner at JFK and been in Benghazi in about 6 hours, tops.
And if I had been in Sicily where our Commander's In-extremis Force (CIF) (a unit specifically designed for exactly these kinds of situations) was sitting and waiting for orders, I could have been in Benghazi in about two to to and a half hours tops.
And Zachriel,if you really believe that Ambassador Stevens was 'taking risks on behalf of th Libyan people' please keep on believing.
You may both believe whatever you fancy.
Rob: May I point out that this attack took place over nine hours?
It was actually two separate attacks separated by nine hours.
Rob: And if I had been in Sicily where our Commander's In-extremis Force (CIF) (a unit specifically designed for exactly these kinds of situations) was sitting and waiting for orders, I could have been in Benghazi in about two to to and a half hours tops.
The logistics are far more complicated than that, nor did they have much information about events on the ground. The reason why the American military is so effective, when it is effective, is because of intelligence and planning. The U.S. did not have planes waiting to takeoff, and troops ready for immediate deployment. Sending in troops without intelligence could have just led to more losses.
What they did do was divert an unarmed drone for surveillance, a security team flew from Tripoli to Benghazi to evacuate Americans and two Marine security teams were repositioned from Spain to Libya. By then it was over.
Rob: And Zachriel,if you really believe that Ambassador Stevens was 'taking risks on behalf of th Libyan people' please keep on believing.
By all accounts, Stevens was dedicated his mission to help the Libyan people during the transition. There are reports that they were attempting to negotiate the retrieval of weaponry left over from the revolution.
Zachriel,
1.I believe you're mistaken. The entire incident took place over 9 hours.
2.The Commander's In-extremis Force (CIF), a unit specifically designed for exactly these kinds of situations is what was already deployed at our base in Sigonella, Sicily, less than a two-hour plane ride away.They specialize in operations where intel is far more limited than it was in Benghazi, with a unarmed drone (why unarmed, we might ask?) in place, phone contact, real time feeds to the State Department from cameras located at the consulate (BTW the video tapes have been classified by the WH, who refuses to release them - or allow survivors to be interviewed or questioned).
There was also an ex-Navy Seal with a laser sight in the CIA annex with a clear line of vision to the consulate phoning in coordinates.
That's a lot more intel than a cop normally has when he responds to a radio call.
Remember, there was no indication in advance of how long the attacks were going to go on. It wasn't a basketball game. They obviously left them to die.
Did it perhaps also occur to you that even if our forces had been sent too late to save our ambassador and the others, they might have been in time to capture the perpetrators?
3. You have it half right. Stevens was there because he was familiar with Libya and to negotiate the sale of the weaponry(with Saudi and Qatari money)that the Libyan jihadis got their hands on after Obama stupidly intervened to take out Khaddaffi.
If he'd been successful, Obama wanted to send those arms to Syria to the al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood jihadis there.
After O's BS about how we were at war with al-Qaeda and how they were 'on the run', the American people finding out that he was arming them would not have done wonders for his re-election prospects.
But again, you're welcome to believe whatever you want to.
Fast and Furious, Middle East style.
Here's something else you might find relevant.
Brig. General Robert Lovell, who was running the military intelligence operation involved in monitoring the Sept. 11, 2012, assault in the Libyan city on the Mediterranean coast "agreed adamantly with the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee, whose report concluded that the military did all it could do on that tragic night. 'That's a fact,' Lovell said."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/09/john-mica-benghazi_n_5294767.html
Sorry Zachriel,
I don't find the statements of General Lovell, who is a serving soldier under orders from the Obama Administration and who is quite possibly implicated in this fiasco to be relevant.
Especially given the other facts I provided you with.And There are other military personnel from the CIF who have said just the reverse, but had to do it anonymously for the same reason.
And here's another thing to ponder. It this is all so above board, why the coverup?
Why the lie about the video for days when the administration knew with 24 hours that this was a planned, al-Qaeda attack? Why make the Benghazi survivors sign non-disclosure agreements to keep them from talking to Congress and why make the videos from the drone and the security cameras at both the embassy and the compound 'classified', as well as the phone recordings of the calls between the WH and both the consulate and the CIA annex? Why hide this e-mail when congress requested it, which is illegal?
We obviously disagree on this matter, but I take it that you want to get to the truth an dsee these questions answered,along with he ones I raised previously. Given the duplicitous and frankly lawless and obstructive nature of this administration, I'm sure you'll agree that a select committe and possibly a special prosecutor is needed to get the answers I'm sure we both want.
Post a Comment