« | »

AP Says House Benghazi Hearings Are All Politics

From the Associated Press:

GOP Benghazi probe stokes political controversy

By DONNA CASSATA | May 8, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans insist the Obama administration is covering up information about last year’s deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, rejecting administration assurances to the contrary and stoking a controversy with implications for the 2016 presidential race.

Damn those Republicans are evil. Is there nothing they won’t do for political advantage? Clearly, there is nothing to their accusations, or the AP would have never led of their report on today’s hearings this way.

Republicans on five House committees are pressing ahead with their own investigations despite an exhaustive independent review that blistered the State Department…

A report made by either current of former State Department employees or hirelings. A report that did not even interview the deputy at the State Department’s own counter-terrorist unit. (And it is always the deputies who run such organizations in the government.)

A report that did not recommend anyone be punished. And, of course, no one was. And never mind that an Inspector General is now investigating the report.

[Despite] more than 25,000 pages of documents sent to Congress and hours of testimony from former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton…

And never mind that the documents and the testimony from Panetta and Dempsey contradicted Hillary’s testimony and the White House’s own claims.

Three State Department witnesses, including the former deputy chief in Libya, are scheduled to testify Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee at a session certain to attract attention after recent disclosures from the panel’s Republicans.

Notice how the AP studiously avoids calling these three ‘whistleblowers.’ Or mentioning that they are going to give new and credible testimony that completely contradicts the Obama administration’s previous claims at every point in the Benghazi scandal.

The hearing is the latest in a long-running and bitter dispute between the administration and congressional Republicans who have challenged the White House’s actions before and after the Benghazi attack…

You see? That’s all it is. A "long-running and bitter dispute."

Here is how the Administration Associated Press wraps up their objective report on today’s upcoming hearings:

Conservatives who are vital to the GOP in turning out the vote in midterm elections have pressured the party to act forcefully in investigating the Benghazi assault. In the House, more than 130 rank-and-file Republicans have signed onto a resolution calling for Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to create a special select committee to look into the attacks, seeing the latest GOP investigation as less than satisfactory.

In other words, the House Republicans are only holding these hearings because of lunatic fringe right-wingers. There is no new information. The truth has been long known. Hillary has testified.

This is what passes for journalism in Obama’s America.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, May 8th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “AP Says House Benghazi Hearings Are All Politics”

  1. dregstudios says:

    The true shame in the Far Right’s obsession with this tragedy is the effect on the families of the victims. This entire process is being instrumented as a ruse to attempt to shame Hillary Clinton and our President. Our Republican Congressmen spend their days trying to Bamboozle Obama instead of doing what they are paid for by representing their constituents… Their hands are sticking to this tar baby as the public is becoming increasing impatient with the nonsense and waste of taxpayer money.

    • River0 says:

      “…Shame in the Far Right’s obsession…”? There’s never been a time in our history that a murdered American ambassador and three of our best soldiers – all in cold blood – would fail to cause outrage.

      Even the sad-sack Jimmy Carter was more engaged than the Alien in the White House or Hillbilly Clinton when our people were taken hostage in Tehran in ’79. Nobody died during the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and still, all Americans were outraged. Carter even launched a disastrous rescue mission, and milked the grief and sympathy for all it was worth. It took Republican Ronald Reagan to free our people – without firing a shot – because the Ayatollah Khomeini knew all hell would break loose on him when Reagan got into the White House.

      Not so with today’s Demonicrat/crypto-Marxist /America-haters. Truth: It’s all your projection. The hatred is in you. It’s yourself that you despise. Our enemies rejoice at Demonicrat inaction, cowardice, and mendacity. They understand the ‘progressives’ very well, and call them “useful idiots”.

      Our embassies and ambassadors are sovereign, extensions of the U.S. itself, and it’s an act of war even to hold them hostage.

      The present Administration, its Puppet Press and the Regime Media are craven and depraved beyond words now.

      The XYZ affair in 1797 caused outrage against France that led to the ‘Quasi War’ with that country. The reason? French ambassadors in Paris demanded a bribe from our ambassadors.

      Our nation is now sick from the disease of Liberalism, which is always fatal.

    • SinCity says:

      Well said River. The original post stated that the families should be considered, and then nothing about the why. Much less, if you want to take the families’ of the victims into consideration, I would suspect that they would demand justice from those who not only did the deed, but also those that were so blindingly incompetent, e.g., Hillary, that it could be said that they were complacent in it.

      You can alway tell when a libtard troll posts, because of the inconsistent theories and scatterbrained straw men arguments, “…the public is being increasingly impatient…”. Add the weak defense of O’Babbles, “…trying to bamboozle Obama…”. I normally don’t feed the trolls, but I liked River’s thoughtful response.

      Now, this fellow is either a “hit and run” poster, or they’ll come back with their supposed conservative/libertarian credentials (I voted for Bush once) all the while trying to distract from the actual point of the debate or they’ll come back with their pea-shooter half cocked in the effort to gain cred with their little buddies on DU, or whatever slimy hole that they climbed out of. I swear, liberalism is a mental disease.

    • River0 says:

      I’m much obliged, SinCity. Well said.

  2. Chrispbass says:




  3. GetBackJack says:

    Women and Minorities affected the most

« Front Page | To Top
« | »