i'd like to thank the House GOP for wasting two years and at least $7 million in taxpayer money to basically determine that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong and that we've already learned the important lessons about how to protect our overseas diplomats. good job, guys!
First of all, the article basically points out that the report DOES support attacks on Clinton:
The document cites an August 2011 memo in which Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s then-deputy chief of staff, said she has had “leadership/ownership/stewardship of this country’s Libya policy from start to finish.”
Clinton “has been a critical voice on Libya in administration deliberations, at NATO, and in contact group meetings—as well as the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya,” Sullivan bragged. “She was instrumental in securing the authorization, building the coalition, and tightening the noose around [Muammar] Gadhafi and his regime.”
whether or not Hillary was in control of the operations -- i'm pretty sure there are more important lessons to be learned than "did Hillary lead the Libya campaign from start to finish?" considering how many diplomats were lost during the GWB years WITHOUT a Congressional hearing, why did this particular loss of life demand SEVEN?
republicans are always claiming that Social Security, welfare, and other social programs are a waste of taxpayer money. but for some reason creating a redundant committee to re-investigate a "scandal" that had already been settled SEVEN TIMES is not a waste when the target is anyone named Clinton. just as holding 50+ votes to repeal Obamacare is also apparently not a waste of taxpayer money, even though everyone agrees they are all wasting their time holding the vote to begin with.
Remember back when the attack actually happened, and you guys were all complaining that the GOP was making a stink about nothing just to smear Obama? Now you claim that the whole point of the Benghazi scandal was to smear Hillary. Make up your mind what imaginary agendas you are going to attribute to your targets.
so what have we learned, mr. I-know-everything-and-anything-about-all-things? was it that we learned the CIA mis-handled the talking points about the attack, in addition to the evidence? was it that security concerns were woefully under-funded and understaffed by the republican-controlled House? was it that that particular location was a terrible place to put a diplomatic outpost? all of these things were learned by the other SEVEN COMMITTEES that heard the evidence. most thinking people agree that, after one committee to investigate the attack and the House Intelligence Committee review of the data, there was literally nothing else to learn about Benghazi.
so why did we need Trey Gowdy to start another committee, specifically to lecture Hillary about her email server? at what point during the last TWO YEARS did anything new come out about the specific attack that wasn't already covered by the other SEVEN COMMITTEES? keeping in mind that all SEVEN of those committees could find nothing criminal in anyone's actions inside the US government whatsoever? the whole "scandal" was just part of some elaborate republican fundraising ploy (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/nrcc-takes-down-benghazi-fundraising) designed to make money off the death of innocent people. but then, making money off the death of innocent people seems to be one of the few things republicans actually stand for these days....
"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman