If I was a progressive blogger I would be humiliated to be on this list of Carney defenders over Benghazi:
[Jay Carney] had The New Republic’s Brian Beutler dismissing Benghazi as “nonsense.” He had Slate’s David Weigel, along with The Washington Post’s Plum Line blog, debunking any claim that the new email was a “smoking gun.” Media Matters for America labeled Benghazi a “hoax.” Salon wrote that the GOP had a “demented Benghazi disease.” Daily Kos featured the headline: “Here’s Why the GOP Is Fired Up About Benghazi—and Here’s Why They’re Wrong.” The Huffington Post offered “Three Reasons Why Reviving Benghazi Is Stupid—for the GOP.”
It’s been a familiar pattern since President Obama took office in 2009: When critics attack, the White House can count on a posse of progressive writers to ride to its rescue.
(Via Gateway Pundit) I really hate saying this, but: this Politico article is, horribly, an indication that we’re apparently on the right track with this Benghazi investigation.
The U.S. Capitol Police are investigating threatening emails against Rep. Trey Gowdy, the South Carolina Republican recently tapped to lead a special panel probing the Benghazi terrorist attacks.
The investigation comes after POLITICO reporters and journalists at other outlets received two emails on Tuesday warning that Gowdy would be harmed because of his role in investigating the 2012 attacks.
Elections have consequences: “House Republicans have decided the select committee to investigate the Benghazi terror attack will include seven Republicans and five Democrats, according to two senior House GOP leadership aides.” This is in stark contrast to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s eyebrow-raising demand that Democrats be given equal membership on said committee: it’s an open question whether Pelosi will appoint anybody at all at this point. Given her generally poor decision-making since 2009, I’m going to guess that she’ll boycott the entire thing out of pique until it becomes clear that playing even a bad hand on this still beats playing no hand at all.
The Streisand Effect, of course, refers to the practice “whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet.” In this particular case, the information that the Democrats are trying to hide – desperately trying to hide – is that presumed 2016 Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton was not actually a good Secretary of State. She was, in fact, a disaster, to the point where people died. Continue reading #benghazi and the Streisand Effect.
Seriously. You do not get this kind of meltdown over nothingburgers. I guess that the Left has decided that it’s not real wasn’t working and so it was time to retreat to everybody does it. The below says it all, really:
Bob Beckel’s *defense* of the Obama administration’s cover up of the Benghazi scandal is apparently that they’re no better than Nixon.
Yeah, Tommy Vietor is the guy that shrugged off his poor grasp of the details of how the administration got an ambassador and three other Americans killed with a breezy Dude, this was, like, two years ago. Yeah, dude, and you should have refreshed your memory. You know why the Right won’t stop taking this issue seriously, one and a half years later? It’s because we’re still waiting for the Obama administration to start taking it seriously. By all available evidence, that might be a while.
Basically, I am going to labor under the delusion that the NYT’s (false) report that the Benghazi attack was not due to al Qaeda-related terrorism is actually a clever bit of misdirection done by the shadow Hillary Clinton campaign to exonerate her record AND that the Washington Post’s rebuttal was the answering gambit by the shadow Joe Biden campaign to target Clinton AND that Robert Gates’ new memoir slamming both was actually put up by a shadowy Third Way cabal in the Democratic party to start a war between the two factions and allow for a dark horse candidate to sweep in. Continue reading I have decided to subscribe to a false media narrative*.
Can’t say that I blame him: the executive branch has thoroughly fornicated the canine on this one.
Darrell Issa is scheduled to travel to Libya next week as part of his investigation into the attack last year on the Benghazi consulate, according to documents obtained by POLITICO.
The California Republican, who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, did not invite Democratic counterparts on the trip, which has been in the works for over a week and begins on Sunday with stops in Italy and Egypt.
Having seen the Democrats that got assigned Oversight… can’t say that I blame Issa for that, either. The only way any of them would discover a clue to what happened in Benghazi would be if one of the Democrats tried to obscure an incriminating footprint, over-balanced, and fell through a false wall and right into al-Qaeda’s hidden lair. That’s not quite likely enough to be a reliable strategy, though.
Staffers at State Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. held their own private ceremony Wednesday to commemorate the first anniversary of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya after finding out the agency would not be organizing a formal, official memorial service.
The Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attack left four people dead, including the American Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and Sean Smith, an information management officer in the department’s foreign service.
A State Department staffer who worked with Stevens in Libya and asked not to be named told TPM there were about 20 to 25 staffers at the memorial. The informal gathering was put together after staffers inquired and learned the department would not be holding an official event to mark the anniversary.