Colin Powell used a private email server, so the precedent had already been sent. Why didn't republicans investigate him?
Why isn't the $128 million dollar cut that House Republicans passed to cut embassy security being investigated?
The fact is I disagree with much of what democrats believe, however, I will never ever vote for a party who abhors the democratic process and that is what right wing republicans represent in this county.
Why isn't the $128 million dollar cut that House Republicans passed to cut embassy security being investigated?
The fact is I disagree with much of what democrats believe, however, I will never ever vote for a party who abhors the democratic process and that is what right wing republicans represent in this county.
14
It sounds like you may be a classic reasonable moderate. Maybe a moderate Republican like those of the pre-movement-conservatism days. Like a number of my relatives, who now feel politically homeless.
Strange days indeed.
Strange days indeed.
3
The real tragedy in Benghazi was the decision of the ambassador to stay in the mission building that was lacking in any real security and was guarded by a local militia. The British had survived an assassination attempt in June and two British security officers had been injured in an attack with a block or two of their consular office that was far better fortified that the American compound. The British then withdrew their consulate. In June the Tuniisian consulate was also attacked. Indeed, security officers saw a man in a police uniform taking pictures of the compound the afternoon of the attack and Sean Smith commented on the danger at the compound that night..
Ambassador Stevens was a fine ambassador who was well liked in Libya. He understood there were real risk in Benghazi but believed that he needed to shoe the American presence there.. On the night of the attack his bravery led to his death.
Our current national response to any tragedy is to second guess and see how the event could have been avoided. Hearings and revisionist theories abound and folks like Mr Gowdy go on a protracted "investigation". Ambassador Stevens deserves a better legacy.
Ambassador Stevens was a fine ambassador who was well liked in Libya. He understood there were real risk in Benghazi but believed that he needed to shoe the American presence there.. On the night of the attack his bravery led to his death.
Our current national response to any tragedy is to second guess and see how the event could have been avoided. Hearings and revisionist theories abound and folks like Mr Gowdy go on a protracted "investigation". Ambassador Stevens deserves a better legacy.
9
Wow the Clinton defenders are thick. She has lied and told half truths / split hairs from the get. She first said she had a private server as not to carry two devices. Multiple email accounts can be accessed on one device. She there was no classified info. on the server. When caught in that lie she change to no info. was classified at the time. Of course it was not classified. The state dept. did not have the emails to classify. They were hidden on Clinton's server. She turned the emails over to state years later after leaving office. The country does not need Nixon in a pantsuit. Biden / Warren.
3
Unsupported conclusory statements. Ad hominem attacks. False "facts."
The standard arrows in the quiver of today's right winger. Thank you, FOXNews.
The standard arrows in the quiver of today's right winger. Thank you, FOXNews.
13
For all of our (the governed) frustration over this committee's endless and politically motivated hearings, one would think that HRC's inability to respond to questions and criticisms of her actions without stonewalling, contemptuousness and paranoia - thus the never-ending nature of these investigations - would be an equally voiced frustration. Looking over these comments, apparently not. President (during his terms) and presidential contender Clinton are as responsible for these outrageous, never-ending hearings as are their political opponents due to the tactics they use in response. As an independent voter who is disgusted with both parties, I can't decide if an outsider would be effective or eaten alive by a battle-hardened Congress (President Obama hasn't had much success) or if an insider, willing and able to fight in the Congressional gutter, would have a better chance at governing effectively. I have, though, decided that Hillary Clinton is too hostile, combative and secretive to govern effectively - she would be spending all of her time stonewalling the infinite "committees" created to investigate her every secretive action.
2
4.5 MILLION DOLLARS? No wonder they have no money for infrastructure repair or any other little thing the people in this country really need, like affordable college tuition, jobs creation, feeding and housing the very many poor (right here at home, btw, not in the Middle East or Africa), educating our young people instead of incarcerating them - for profit, taking care of returning veterans with profound medical needs, and so on. No, much better to fart around ruining the political aspirations of one Democratic candidate over such trifles!
12
Death by a thousand cuts. It's the strategy of the Republican party who have nothing better to do than try to repeal the ACA 60 times or so and get Clinton (him or her) always. It's all they've got aside from fear and hate and relentlessness.
16
The FBI, the Department of Justice, the Intelligence Community Inspector General and the State Department have all launched investigations of HRC's use of her private email server separate from the Congressional Committee investigating Benghazi. The only way these multiple agencies would be compelled to conduct their own investigations of HRC's server under a Democratic administration is for the consequences of the violations to be so grave that they simply cannot do otherwise.
With the collective efforts of the various federal agencies investing the matter, along with the Benghazi Committee, the truth will ultimately be revealed.
With the collective efforts of the various federal agencies investing the matter, along with the Benghazi Committee, the truth will ultimately be revealed.
2
As is typical, many of the commentators have completely missed the point. The State Department was responsible for the security of the Benghazi compound. Ms. Clinton was in charge of the State Department at the time. Presumably, her e-mails will reveal what she knew and when at what actions she took or failed to take. This seems highly relevant to the investigation.
As an aside, I have had the opportunity to hear directly the account of two of the shooters who were involved in the 13 hour long siege during which they repelled four different assaults, saving many lives, and were repeatedly denied military and other assistance. Anyone who still believes the official account, that this was a street demonstration gone out of control, is a nitwit. I fervently hope that these valiant men will have the opportunity to provide the committee with their version, which is markedly different than that provided by the administration and reported in the media.
As an aside, I have had the opportunity to hear directly the account of two of the shooters who were involved in the 13 hour long siege during which they repelled four different assaults, saving many lives, and were repeatedly denied military and other assistance. Anyone who still believes the official account, that this was a street demonstration gone out of control, is a nitwit. I fervently hope that these valiant men will have the opportunity to provide the committee with their version, which is markedly different than that provided by the administration and reported in the media.
1
No one cares about this, because everyone of any intelligence knows it is a GOP witch hunt aimed at Hillary Clinton because she is a woman.
9
This has become a farce. Not only do the republicans waste taxpayers money on witch hunts like this, the accomplish less than nothing, because the do nothing productive and obstruct the progress of the democrats and the President.
8
Why is this FAKE SCANDAL even news.
Please Boycott (refuse to cover, other than a couple of column inches at the bottom of the page) this Right Wing Fantasy NYT.
Please Boycott (refuse to cover, other than a couple of column inches at the bottom of the page) this Right Wing Fantasy NYT.
10
On one end, this is a witch hunt by the GOP. The incident, in Benghazi, though tragic, resulted in four deaths. The Us just bombed a hospital last week, that killed scores of people. Throw in friendly fire incidents, and accidental deaths of our own soldiers, the blood train is long; going back to 9/11/2011. Close to 12,000 of our own troops were killed, and thousands of Iraqis and Afghans killed, over 14 years. Not to mentioned thousands in other Arab nations in teh region. Finally,thousands of Americans have been killed by gun violence.
But, even President Obama agrees, Ms. Clinton has poorly handled the e-mail situation. Ms. Clinton has hedged about the incident. She has skirted the issue. She broke the law, she had classified information, on a non-classified computer. Anyone who has worked in the defense industry knows the penalties for doing what she did. And information she had access to, and here clearance level is far above what any private citizen can ever achieve.
I reiterate, what Congress is doing is a witch hunt. But, that is not the point. What is the point is the lack of forthcoming and truthfulness of ms. Clinton. This is Ms. Clinton's "Monica Lewinsky Moment".
But, even President Obama agrees, Ms. Clinton has poorly handled the e-mail situation. Ms. Clinton has hedged about the incident. She has skirted the issue. She broke the law, she had classified information, on a non-classified computer. Anyone who has worked in the defense industry knows the penalties for doing what she did. And information she had access to, and here clearance level is far above what any private citizen can ever achieve.
I reiterate, what Congress is doing is a witch hunt. But, that is not the point. What is the point is the lack of forthcoming and truthfulness of ms. Clinton. This is Ms. Clinton's "Monica Lewinsky Moment".
1
Today the RNC has started to run anti-Hillary ads based on this fake Benghazi investigation. That tells you all you need to know about this taxpayer funded partisan witch hunt.
19
...and then the pundits wring their hands and wonder why the American body politic is not voting.
It is understood that Conservatives and Progressives have to fight each other once elected. What is not understood is why the right side of the aisle refuses to ever concede on any point, and excels at blocking the forward movement of government. And now, even the Republicans are at loggerheads about their own party, whether they are Teapartyers or just ultra-conservative, which further holds up the governmental process.
Those who vote expect effort from their elected officials, with some action to prove they were worth voting for. When Congress becomes so encumbered in minutia, especially when the minutia has nothing to do with governing the U.S., and everything to do with sullying the reputation of a Democratic hopeful for the presidency, it makes the electorate lose faith in their elected officials.
When unemployment, low wages, no health insurance even under Obamacare, the budget deadline drawing near, re-working of gun control laws, deciding how to work with Iran and stopping ISIS are all so much more pressing than Hilary's e-mails, the electorate can only throw up its collective hands, shake its head and turn away...thinking, "We have nowhere to turn for help and good governance."
Unfortunately, no one can curtail the bombast issuing from Congress, except by--voting in the next election.
It is understood that Conservatives and Progressives have to fight each other once elected. What is not understood is why the right side of the aisle refuses to ever concede on any point, and excels at blocking the forward movement of government. And now, even the Republicans are at loggerheads about their own party, whether they are Teapartyers or just ultra-conservative, which further holds up the governmental process.
Those who vote expect effort from their elected officials, with some action to prove they were worth voting for. When Congress becomes so encumbered in minutia, especially when the minutia has nothing to do with governing the U.S., and everything to do with sullying the reputation of a Democratic hopeful for the presidency, it makes the electorate lose faith in their elected officials.
When unemployment, low wages, no health insurance even under Obamacare, the budget deadline drawing near, re-working of gun control laws, deciding how to work with Iran and stopping ISIS are all so much more pressing than Hilary's e-mails, the electorate can only throw up its collective hands, shake its head and turn away...thinking, "We have nowhere to turn for help and good governance."
Unfortunately, no one can curtail the bombast issuing from Congress, except by--voting in the next election.
6
What came first, the chicken or the egg? So I would ask, who voted those ultra-partisan clowns into Congress in the first place? Their sorry behavior does not provide an excuse for public indifference.
1
Randall – –
There are structural issues here, not just voter information/motivation issues.
Gerrymandering by Republican – controlled state houses and the Citizens United decision have both contributed greatly to the stacking of Congress with a significant number of low-quality Republican political hacks who are nearly invulnerable.
There are structural issues here, not just voter information/motivation issues.
Gerrymandering by Republican – controlled state houses and the Citizens United decision have both contributed greatly to the stacking of Congress with a significant number of low-quality Republican political hacks who are nearly invulnerable.
11
Well, Randall, the same demographic of motivated souls who tend to always vote, which is not even 50% of the voting age population.
The Constitution says we elect people we trust to make our decisions for us (paraphrasing). I imagine the original voters may have become as disgruntled with their representatives as we are with ours.
You will note, I did say that the only way to change the situation in Congress is to get out and vote. Contacting representatives and senators directly is also a good idea.
The Constitution says we elect people we trust to make our decisions for us (paraphrasing). I imagine the original voters may have become as disgruntled with their representatives as we are with ours.
You will note, I did say that the only way to change the situation in Congress is to get out and vote. Contacting representatives and senators directly is also a good idea.
2
If the debacle in Benghazi wasn't enough for Clinton supporters, they can feel vindicated by Obama's latest Pentagon Plan. Recall that Benghazi was the 1st act in a surreal play by Harold Pinter for a ratline of arms from Libya to Turkey and into the open arms of "moderate rebels" in Syria, so they could overthrow Assad. That didn't work, but it did finally get the attention of Russia, who is bombing the Terrorists we were supposed to bomb but didn't -aka ISIS.
Since Putin and the Ruskies support Assad, and we want him out, the New Pentagon Plan version 4.0.8 is to - get this - drop by helicopter over 50 tons of ammo into the middle of nowhere and "hope" that the moderate rebels - aka Terrorists - find it.
Now, if I was a neo-con strategic planner at the Pentagon, this hair-brained scheme is exactly what I would have come up with - and would actually think it would succeed. Because, "If at first you don't succeed, try and try again." The Pentagon tried to train some 5000 or so "carefully vetted" terrorists/freedom fighters, but once sent into battle, they were killed or captured by the other freedom fighters that we trained - or joined up to become part of the winning side - ISIS. So now, they figure if there are weapons and ammo waiting for them in the desert, they will run to the "undisclosed location", get the stuff, and use it against Assad - like we intended them to do from the gitgo.
The Hillary Brand® is laughing all the way to her next paid speaking engagement.
Since Putin and the Ruskies support Assad, and we want him out, the New Pentagon Plan version 4.0.8 is to - get this - drop by helicopter over 50 tons of ammo into the middle of nowhere and "hope" that the moderate rebels - aka Terrorists - find it.
Now, if I was a neo-con strategic planner at the Pentagon, this hair-brained scheme is exactly what I would have come up with - and would actually think it would succeed. Because, "If at first you don't succeed, try and try again." The Pentagon tried to train some 5000 or so "carefully vetted" terrorists/freedom fighters, but once sent into battle, they were killed or captured by the other freedom fighters that we trained - or joined up to become part of the winning side - ISIS. So now, they figure if there are weapons and ammo waiting for them in the desert, they will run to the "undisclosed location", get the stuff, and use it against Assad - like we intended them to do from the gitgo.
The Hillary Brand® is laughing all the way to her next paid speaking engagement.
2
This is absurd. Where do you get that we haven't been bombing ISIS?
2
The Iraqi Army is an example of how the GOP does things the right way, not the bumbling Hillary and Barack way. When ISIS attacked Mosul and Takrit with a few hundred fighters, Bush's American trained and equipped/financed Iraqi troops to the tune of $200+ billion bravely battled until they achieved a heroic victory as if the Marines on Iwo Jima. Not.
3
"The Hillary Brand® is laughing all the way to her next paid speaking engagement"
Aww, are you jealous because no one wants to hear you speak?
Aww, are you jealous because no one wants to hear you speak?
3
Does this really surprise anyone? Maybe the GOP can form a separate committee to investigate the nefarious and untoward actions of the House Benghazi Committee? The House GOP continues to look ridiculous - in fact, they keep one-upping themselves.
11
When will the press do us the favor of not weighing, for instance, Trey Gowdy's defense of this investigation equally against every indication that it is disingenuous, including the fact that the house-speaker-heir-apparent himself virtually admitted it was conceived as a partisan hit job to help lower candidate Clinton's poll numbers (thus achieving the nifty goal of damaging her candidacy before the primaries even begin)? Can we get a little help here?
10
It is ironic that the Republicans are pushing the email server issue so strongly when they have a lot to hide themselves. Maybe it s time that we really examined what happened with Michael Connell and gwbush.com. All Roves folks were using their own special email server hosted by Connell and when the Valerie Plame episode stated heating up, they mysteriously "lost" a few million messages (and all of the IT folks out there are probably now shaking their heads as to how difficult this was to do).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Connell
Then there was his involvement in stealing the 2004 election.
http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/the-mysterious-death-of-bushs
Oh and then he died in a very mysterious plane crash the day before he was to testify about it (after being told about a death threat surrounding tinkering with his plane allegedly coming from Rove).
This sounds like a novel but it fact it happened and there was certainly no Benghazi committee looking into it..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Connell
Then there was his involvement in stealing the 2004 election.
http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/the-mysterious-death-of-bushs
Oh and then he died in a very mysterious plane crash the day before he was to testify about it (after being told about a death threat surrounding tinkering with his plane allegedly coming from Rove).
This sounds like a novel but it fact it happened and there was certainly no Benghazi committee looking into it..
10
The republicans have driven this into the ground for so long, that most people are simply tired of hearing about it--which is a shame, but it is possible to turn something *sacred into banality by constanly grinding the ax. No doubt there are also lots of people who, if you ask them about "Ben Ghazi" would say, "Wasn't he that actor?"
*sacred = here, the loss of lives; another example would be how Americans have began to wear the flag as an piece of clothing and contributed to its banality by the ubiquitous wearing of flag lapel pins--phony, "cheap" patriotism.
*sacred = here, the loss of lives; another example would be how Americans have began to wear the flag as an piece of clothing and contributed to its banality by the ubiquitous wearing of flag lapel pins--phony, "cheap" patriotism.
7
Isn't it a form of corruption to use government monies to repeatedly try to politically assassinate a presidential candidate and fail at it no less?
19
It is, of course, and it is media corruption to continue following a partisan issue.
8
I would like to see a panel to examine the House members donations from the usual big business donors.
Perhaps the investigation ought to go back all the way to the Bush/Cheney era, although it ought to examine further all that was done to make that ruckus about the silly "Intern?"
Perhaps the investigation ought to go back all the way to the Bush/Cheney era, although it ought to examine further all that was done to make that ruckus about the silly "Intern?"
7
and the "silly" perjury?
1
I certainly regard it as silly, including the 'perjury' which was a private affair, not high treason. At least 3 of the Republicans on the committee had conducted extramarital affairs of their own, including Newt and a young Congressional aide, later 3rd wife, who was having an affair at the same time he was persecuting Clinton. The hypocrisy of Republicans is always interesting.
More directly ignoring the millions of emails "lost" from the Bush administration and their use of non-governmental servers seems not to bother Republicans.
More directly ignoring the millions of emails "lost" from the Bush administration and their use of non-governmental servers seems not to bother Republicans.
9
GmooG --
Yes, perjury is how they can entrap you when nothing substantive is found despite an open-ended publicly funded fishing expedition . Justice in action!
Maybe this committee can come up with completely unfair and irrelevant personal questions to ask Hillary Clinton to entrap her into perjury, just as that Family Values team of God – fearing, marriage – cheating Republicans on the Whitewater committee entrapped Bill Clinton after they, to their glee, learned about a completely irrelevant private sexual matter. And we can all watch it and feel great about watching our noble government in action.
Yes, perjury is how they can entrap you when nothing substantive is found despite an open-ended publicly funded fishing expedition . Justice in action!
Maybe this committee can come up with completely unfair and irrelevant personal questions to ask Hillary Clinton to entrap her into perjury, just as that Family Values team of God – fearing, marriage – cheating Republicans on the Whitewater committee entrapped Bill Clinton after they, to their glee, learned about a completely irrelevant private sexual matter. And we can all watch it and feel great about watching our noble government in action.
2
I think it's long past time to start prosecuting, impeaching and removing key Republican senators and congressmen. They have flouted their oaths of office, brought our government to a virtual standstill, and placed our entire nation in jeopardy for purely political ends.
19
Not possible legally, but it's fun to dream ....
1
The Benghazi Committee has been so discredited by Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy's comments that it should be disbanded. Republicans are illegally using federal funds and congressional investigative powers for political purposes.
21
Here's the thing: Condi used personal email, and so did Powell. Why are they not being scrutinized as well. In addition, whatever happened to the 40 million emails that G. W. Bush "lost" on Iraq???
Seriously, the Republicans have lost credibility on all of this. There's no other reason they would continue to dig their heals in except for cognitive dissonance... which is a mental disturbance.
Perhaps we need to demand that these people take a mental competency test to see if they are even psychologically fit to be representatives in the House... let alone the voice for the American people!
Seriously, the Republicans have lost credibility on all of this. There's no other reason they would continue to dig their heals in except for cognitive dissonance... which is a mental disturbance.
Perhaps we need to demand that these people take a mental competency test to see if they are even psychologically fit to be representatives in the House... let alone the voice for the American people!
18
About two weeks after Benghazi, I was having a chat with someone who basically said: "The CIA was running an operation out of the embassy. The CIA is not supposed to do that. The Obama administration couldn't reveal that the CIA was the reason the embassy was targeted, because it was an ongoing CIA operation, and because it would make the U.S. look bad. Thus all the emails about what it was okay to tell the American public." What they were "hiding" was a covert CIA operation.
That was like two weeks after the event. I still assume it was the real story, and it explains pretty much everything, including why every time there's an investigation, Congress gets the same debriefing and finds no wrongdoing. Furthermore, I assume every single person in Congress knows the real story by now.
The interesting question is whether this level of naked political pandering will eventually backfire and reveal that the Republicans can't govern. Period.
That was like two weeks after the event. I still assume it was the real story, and it explains pretty much everything, including why every time there's an investigation, Congress gets the same debriefing and finds no wrongdoing. Furthermore, I assume every single person in Congress knows the real story by now.
The interesting question is whether this level of naked political pandering will eventually backfire and reveal that the Republicans can't govern. Period.
9
You were "having a chat with someone" who told you all of this? How is that supposed to be credible in any way?
2
Is this ever going to stop? Benghazi was a tragedy, all agree, and the Congress has been investigating endlessly and now there are several witnesses to an ongoing committee method of destroying a reputation. Hilary Clinton was well-respected as a Senator and then served as Secr. of State, yes. When will the discussion in the US turn toward constructive activities, and not endless cycles of the same negative witchhunt.
11
It will stop after November, 2016. Guaranteed.
3
I think we can all safely assume what the number one legislative priority for the GOP will be when Hillary Clinton is elected President. No matter what foreign threats, wars or economic crisis may be looming over the nation, the most important thing to GOP "leaders" will be to ensure that President Clinton is a one term President. The only antidote will be to return them to minority status in both houses of congress so they can do less harm in order to make their plan succeed.
18
They have thus far spent $.4.5 m on this investigation, how much on the others? Just think about how much extra security that would have funded for our embassies.
17
This has been a political witch hunt from its very beginning, just like the Whitewater investigation. In the future, investigations like this that turn up nothing should come out of the budgets of the members of the committee.
14
I worked with classified data for decades. Any of several acts that Ms. Clinton has admitted to already would have landed me or my co-workers in jail. No cleverness is required to know when you've created a classified document. There should always be a clear chain of custody of any classified material. If you have control of it, you have complete responsibility for its security. You cannot share it with anyone, no matter their security clearance who does not have a need to know. If Ms. Clinton is not indicted, it will be a purely political act; her violations are obvious to anyone who has handled such material.
2
None of the documents were classified at the time.
She committed no crime. Sorry, Con.
She committed no crime. Sorry, Con.
10
OK, so you worked with classified data for decades.
And yet you haven't actually accused Hillary Clinton of doing a single specific misdeed, other than unnamed "acts that Ms. Clinton has admitted to already".
This would be obvious to people who have handled such material.
And yet you haven't actually accused Hillary Clinton of doing a single specific misdeed, other than unnamed "acts that Ms. Clinton has admitted to already".
This would be obvious to people who have handled such material.
7
"her violations are obvious to anyone who has handled such material."
Yet, you don't name a single one of them.
LOL @ "I worked with classified data for decades".
Sure you did, buddy.
Yet, you don't name a single one of them.
LOL @ "I worked with classified data for decades".
Sure you did, buddy.
3
All of a sudden the private sector can't be counted on as the best securers of e-mails? The GOP prefers to let the socialist government do that job? Next they'll start telling us that government bonds are a more secure investment than letting Lehman Brothers handle our retirement money.
20
If our government is "socialist," as you so label it, then so is every government in the world. Having said that, I ask you, what is wrong with some degree of socialism? Even Adam Smith realized that no humane society can function purely and only as a capitalist one.
1
I should point out that the Republican Congress has not, to date, launched an inquiry or established a committee to investigate Mrs. Clinton's role in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. We can all be grateful for little things.
26
True, but that is only because there is a Republican consensus that Obama was behind that.
15
President Obama should have gone nuclear after hearing about the meeting to obstruct and denying what the American people voted for "A President to get things done".
After President Obama stabilized the economy he should have set up a select committee to investigate bush, cheney, rice and anyone else who gave false intelligence to them to go to war in iraq. If false evidence was found "of course it would have" all those involved should be prosecuted for war crimes. That would have cut the military industrial complex funds in half, as well as send half the contractors and generals to jail along with bush and cheney
After President Obama stabilized the economy he should have set up a select committee to investigate bush, cheney, rice and anyone else who gave false intelligence to them to go to war in iraq. If false evidence was found "of course it would have" all those involved should be prosecuted for war crimes. That would have cut the military industrial complex funds in half, as well as send half the contractors and generals to jail along with bush and cheney
19
He should have done it, yes. However, he was still in his naive state, thinking he could make a fresh start with Republican'ts and "work with" them.
1
If the NY Times was a branch of government, what would they promote? This question is asked and answered, since it functions as the propaganda arm of the far left, i.e., the current regime. It is unlikely Mrs. Clinton will be indicted by the Justice Department because it has become politicized beyond recognition. In fact, Mrs. Clinton is likely beyond the reach of the (law). Sadly, people no longer care, have lost all faith in corrupt government. Actually, centralized governments worldwide are rapidly becoming irrelevant, a relic of the past, in the daily lives of thinking people..
3
"It is unlikely Mrs. Clinton will be indicted by the Justice Department because it has become politicized beyond recognition."
I would hope so, since she's committed no crime.
I would hope so, since she's committed no crime.
10
She is worse than a criminal in GOP eyes — she is a Democratic presidential nomination contender.
6
Wurse than that, her is a librul.
1
Can someone please explain how and why these obstructionist clowns are allowed to get away with squandering millions of dollars on an open-ended, politically-motivated witch hunt? Do we the people have NO immediate recourse?
P.S.: I am a Sanders supporter.
P.S.: I am a Sanders supporter.
23
This investigation is an expensive undertaking.
This would not happen if Hillary was not running for POTUS.
However, because she is running, don't fans of Hillary want to know the truth? To properly know she is honest and forthright, so you can vote for her knowing she has been properly vetted?
Anyone who becomes POTUS needs to jump through these rings, it's part of the process. Americans need to believe in their leader's intelligence, their ability to access a situation, and the ability to tell the truth.
This would not happen if Hillary was not running for POTUS.
However, because she is running, don't fans of Hillary want to know the truth? To properly know she is honest and forthright, so you can vote for her knowing she has been properly vetted?
Anyone who becomes POTUS needs to jump through these rings, it's part of the process. Americans need to believe in their leader's intelligence, their ability to access a situation, and the ability to tell the truth.
Anyone who thinks their elected representatives, Senators, or President are completely "honest and forthright" are either so naive as to be a danger to our electoral system or suffering from delusions of some sort.
7
It's a shame that our tax dollars are spent in such a sham. I guess the 7 or 8 other investigations didn't demonstrate that Hillary should be crucified for what happened. Yet Republicans chastise Obama for overspending.
As a taxpayer I demand to put an end to this fiasco. Stop spending my hard earned money on your fantasies.
As a taxpayer I demand to put an end to this fiasco. Stop spending my hard earned money on your fantasies.
18
Well this wouldn't be about "driving Hillary Clinton's poll numbers down" would it?
What a sham and waste of taxpayers money. Meanwhile these Republicans don't seem to be worried about the looming debt limit. I guess they aren't worried (again) about shutting down the Federal Government, or another credit downgrade for the US Treasury..
What a sham and waste of taxpayers money. Meanwhile these Republicans don't seem to be worried about the looming debt limit. I guess they aren't worried (again) about shutting down the Federal Government, or another credit downgrade for the US Treasury..
17
No need to guess on either front. The House Majority Leader went on national television and unprompted, began bragging about how effective the "Emailgate" committee has been as a completely partisan, oppo smear tool. Likewise, many Republican house representatives have been on national television recently saying they "look forward" to a government shutdown.
9
Give it up Gowdy, you've been going down hill ever since appearing on "Forensic Files"
13
Between party infighting, corporate bribe-collecting, repeals of the ACA, denials of global warming, attacks on Planned Parenthood, and threats of another government shutdown, it's amazing these Multi-Task Republicans can find time for yet another Hillary Clinton "investigation"...
Such Focus!
Such Focus!
18
My goodness, even the "Salem Witch Trials" didn't take this long!
18
Sure....because the Salem Witch Trials didn't have huge executive branches of the government obfuscating, denying, destroying and stonewalling all attempts to get information over the past 3 years.
1
Now that a whistle blower has come forward and a lawsuit appears imminent the GOP surely realizes that they are about to be subjected to the same as Mrs. Clinton has been subjected. Their emails and correspondence from GOP hardliners and members calling for the leadership to take down Mrs. Clinton with yet another 'investigation' and the emails and correspondence that will all be subpoenaed for the lawsuit will put the spotlight on the real purpose the GOP created yet another 'investigation' and how that 'investigation' was conducted. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. The GOP staffers who if ordered to destroy these types of emails would be well served to come forward instead of following orders and becoming the scape goat for some GOP congressman who wants the evidence destroyed.
13
Between McCarthy's admission and the whistleblower's, there is enough evidence for an indictment against Republicans for using government funds for political purposes. Ironically, the Democrats have shown remarkable restraint when they have a better case to support criminal charges.
21
It seemed clear, months ago, that the committee chairman wanted to delay the proceedings until close to the Presidential elections. Then all the 'information' and accompanying innuendos will come flooding out to exact maximum damage on Clinton's campaign.
13
That's exactly what he wants. Gowdy also wanted the hearings with Clinton to be closed, so he could selectively leak what info was gathered.
She, wisely, told him to shove it.
She, wisely, told him to shove it.
6
Cut away the smoke and mirrors and give the partisanship a rest for a minute, then it becomes obvious there is one important thing here which should be paramount to all of us.
As SoS, - that's the boss - Ms Clinton ran her business on an unsafe, non-secure private server. The only plausible reason for someone in her position to do that is to avoid complying with the Freedom of Information Act and the Federal Records act, both designed to let Americans see what their officials are doing in our names.
By keeping her records from us she made them more available to hackers from unfriendly countries. Was she actually hacked? Did important records get into the wrong hands? I don't know but she gave our enemies their best chance at them. Then she spent the last 6 months stonewalling and lying about it, changing her story 4, 5, 6 ?? times as each new lie became untenable...
Now she wants to be President. Just think about that for a minute. Someone that untrustworthy as Secretary of State now wants to become the most powerful person on earth. Just for a minute. Leave the other luggage alone. Hillary as President....
As the Bard, Larry the Cable Guy, might say, "No matter what your politics may be, that there is just not funny."
As SoS, - that's the boss - Ms Clinton ran her business on an unsafe, non-secure private server. The only plausible reason for someone in her position to do that is to avoid complying with the Freedom of Information Act and the Federal Records act, both designed to let Americans see what their officials are doing in our names.
By keeping her records from us she made them more available to hackers from unfriendly countries. Was she actually hacked? Did important records get into the wrong hands? I don't know but she gave our enemies their best chance at them. Then she spent the last 6 months stonewalling and lying about it, changing her story 4, 5, 6 ?? times as each new lie became untenable...
Now she wants to be President. Just think about that for a minute. Someone that untrustworthy as Secretary of State now wants to become the most powerful person on earth. Just for a minute. Leave the other luggage alone. Hillary as President....
As the Bard, Larry the Cable Guy, might say, "No matter what your politics may be, that there is just not funny."
3
When is the media going to stop treating the GOP as a serious entity? As the recent events in the House show and as their governing record (both in Congress and the White House) shows the party is nothing more than incompetent hacks.
16
When Democrats stop calling it a Grand Old Party.
Do your part.
Do your part.
3
If there were ever a hearing regarding the trillions of dollars wasted and hundreds of thousands of lives (i.e., a few more than 4) frivolously lost or maimed during the two recent wars of opportunity, I would take Congress seriously. Sadly, I have no illusions that any such hearings will ever tale place----now or in the future.
16
It is crystal clear that the Benghazi committee is pursuing a 100% politically motivated witch hunt, and that the "investigation" is intended to damage her in the presidential campaign. Rep. Eugene (oops, I mean Kevin) McCarthy admitted this was the case. He should know - he's the #2 Republican in the House. This is the kind of thing that shows conclusively that to Republicans, the ends justify any means, and it's precisely why they are worse than prostitutes blinded to right and wrong in their lust for power. But no one believes in their pathetic charades.
16
I absolutely agree that politics was a significant motivating factor, if not at the inception, certainly as the Republican chaired Benghazi hearings evolved.
However, the political opponents who decry that motivation are hypocritical. I spent considerable time working in DC in the area of government relations, with both parties. Whoever was in power often used committee hearings for political purposes, to grandstand and demagogue. It cuts both ways, always has and always will. If the Democrats regain the House, they will get even with the Republicans. Then the Republicans will get even with the Democrats. Then the Democrats ... Anyone thinking either party can claim the higher ground is either naive or not being honest with themselves.
And, even if a committee is politically motivated, sometimes it does uncover the truth. That goes back to at least Watergate. But, just because there may have been a political motive does not make the truth any less truthful. This time the truth happens to involve emails. Regardless of intentions, Republicans scored big. Sooner or later the Democrats will get their chance, and the games will continue, always.
However, the political opponents who decry that motivation are hypocritical. I spent considerable time working in DC in the area of government relations, with both parties. Whoever was in power often used committee hearings for political purposes, to grandstand and demagogue. It cuts both ways, always has and always will. If the Democrats regain the House, they will get even with the Republicans. Then the Republicans will get even with the Democrats. Then the Democrats ... Anyone thinking either party can claim the higher ground is either naive or not being honest with themselves.
And, even if a committee is politically motivated, sometimes it does uncover the truth. That goes back to at least Watergate. But, just because there may have been a political motive does not make the truth any less truthful. This time the truth happens to involve emails. Regardless of intentions, Republicans scored big. Sooner or later the Democrats will get their chance, and the games will continue, always.
3
Rove deleted over 23 million emails from the White House server under Bush, crickets. Bush ignored warnings of a terrorist attack and 3,00 died on 9/11, crickets. Bush lied and nearly 5,000 troops died in Iraq and several hundred thousand wounded,crickets. Bush et al allowed the Wall Street Banks to crash the economy costing trillions of dollars, crickets.
Then we have Benghazi. 8 House and Senate committee hearings later the administration and Clinton were cleared of any fault. Next a new Select Committee because the GOP didn't like the findings of the 8 committees. The House and the Senate defunded requests for money from the State Dept. for added security for embassies in crisis areas. Instead of crickets we have all out war against her, with no interest in what actually happened. This is a witch hunt, and if the Republicans think the American people are so stupid as to believe the lies of the GOP they are even dumber than I thought they were. McCarthy told the truth and the Major Intelligence officer told the truth, and Gowdy wants us to believe his lies? Nope, not a chance!
Then we have Benghazi. 8 House and Senate committee hearings later the administration and Clinton were cleared of any fault. Next a new Select Committee because the GOP didn't like the findings of the 8 committees. The House and the Senate defunded requests for money from the State Dept. for added security for embassies in crisis areas. Instead of crickets we have all out war against her, with no interest in what actually happened. This is a witch hunt, and if the Republicans think the American people are so stupid as to believe the lies of the GOP they are even dumber than I thought they were. McCarthy told the truth and the Major Intelligence officer told the truth, and Gowdy wants us to believe his lies? Nope, not a chance!
21
Romney bought his servers back from the State of Massachusetts then wiped them clean. The Boston Globe and other news outlets covered it. Romney, Powell, Rice and Rove all used private emails for government businesss. This issue is a witch hunt. Republicans are not putting their emails up for scrutiny. Who among the Republican leadership, mostly men in their upper 60s, has scrupulously kept their government and work emails separate? When can we start filing subpoenas and discovery motions?
4
Independence looks at all this partisan posturing as just covering their "guy/gal". No matter what party - if there is no activity to draw fire - there would be no fire. This is about elite politics where lying and incompetence run rampant. It is all about selling their influence. Its a big wink wink game - and those who play it are the stupid ones. We are ruining our democracy and replacing it with demagoguery. Such intellectual nitwits - all of them. At least - there is a fight going on just to stop the lying....our politics has corrupted our very basic institutions - it is a game of lying for funding. what a bunch of sheeple.
After paying my taxes before the extension deadline, I realized all of the money I sent to the IRS will be consumed by the political foley of the Benghazi partisans. These are the same "leaders" that scream about government wasteful spending. Their definition of wasteful is completely disingenuous. Sadly that is an desired attribute of most congress persons.
11
This is both a serious breach by Mrs. Clinton of the public trust--effectively privatizing, in good old neoliberal fashion, the people's business by removing her emails from the public eye--AND an obvious attempt to harm her presidential candidacy. It's clear now that they plan to drag their "inquiry" through the entirety of the forthcoming campaign. Bernie Sanders for President.
4
Condi Rice and Colin Powell did the same thing. It's not illegal.
Get over it, Con.
Get over it, Con.
5
Well, if those two exemplary public servants did it, by all means--every pol should be able to hide their doings while on the public teat from public scrutiny.
No, not really.
No, not really.
1
Instead of Joe McCarthy picking on Americans we have Trey Gowdy and pals picking on Hillary. There is no Morrow around now.
I wasn't going to vote fo her, I prefer Sanders, but given only this choice I now will.
I wasn't going to vote fo her, I prefer Sanders, but given only this choice I now will.
10
How many died, from U.S. and Iraq, from the Iraq invasion? Did any of these clowns hold hearings abut that?
17
You are referring, I assume, to the Democratic "clowns" who controlled Congress for the first two years after Bush left office?
1
You raise a good point, GMooG of LA. The Democratic Congress of 2009-2010 indeed did not hold hyper-partisan, deliberately politicized hearings about the rampant malfeasance of the Republican administration of 2001-2008 in blundering America into the needless Iraq war. Heck. Even a fair and balanced set of Congressional hearings on that mess would have been just fine. At least we got the 9/11 Commission Report, which says pretty clearly -- even though it tried very hard not to say it -- that George W. Bush and Condi Rice blew it by ignoring warnings from the prior Democratic administration (primarily Richard Clarke) about osama bin laden. Some more hearings on all of that would be terrific.
1
It's clear that the Benghazi hearings are not primarily about finding out how four Americans perished but rather about how best to attach the blame to Hillary Clinton.
That said, while the Benghazi hearings are largely worthless and a huge waste of taxpayer money, let's not forget that both parties are prone to engage in this type of publicly-funded political theater. By some counts, over 300 hearings or investigations - the vast majority ineffective and worthless - under the Democratic Congress in the Bush years.
None of this means that Rep Gowdy is doing good work however. He and his fellow Republicans on the committee are now engaged in nothing less than stealing from US taxpayers. Yet, we should not loose sight of the fact that at best, Secretary Clinton showed an astonishing lack of judgement with respect to her use of a private server.
Whether this failing should disqualify her from consideration as a Presidential candidate is a matter for each Democratic primary voter to decide. It is debatable as to whether this relevant item regarding Mrs Clinton would have surfaced absent something like the Benghazi committee investigation however.
That said, while the Benghazi hearings are largely worthless and a huge waste of taxpayer money, let's not forget that both parties are prone to engage in this type of publicly-funded political theater. By some counts, over 300 hearings or investigations - the vast majority ineffective and worthless - under the Democratic Congress in the Bush years.
None of this means that Rep Gowdy is doing good work however. He and his fellow Republicans on the committee are now engaged in nothing less than stealing from US taxpayers. Yet, we should not loose sight of the fact that at best, Secretary Clinton showed an astonishing lack of judgement with respect to her use of a private server.
Whether this failing should disqualify her from consideration as a Presidential candidate is a matter for each Democratic primary voter to decide. It is debatable as to whether this relevant item regarding Mrs Clinton would have surfaced absent something like the Benghazi committee investigation however.
2
"The process of setting up an electronic system to manage more than 50,000 pages of documents that the committee has assembled is still not complete, meaning that staff members sometimes have to search through boxes to find critical pieces of paper — an almost comical task, staff members said."
The obvious question is why didn't Clinton turn over the actual e-mails in the digital form from which they were originated? Think how wasteful and time consuming it would be to just print out 50000 pages. The equally obvious answer is that Hillary is not cooperating and desperately trying to hide her actions from the American people. How anyone could even consider this deceitful women as president of the United States is beyond me.
The obvious question is why didn't Clinton turn over the actual e-mails in the digital form from which they were originated? Think how wasteful and time consuming it would be to just print out 50000 pages. The equally obvious answer is that Hillary is not cooperating and desperately trying to hide her actions from the American people. How anyone could even consider this deceitful women as president of the United States is beyond me.
5
Your reference to Clinton as "this woman" says a lot about how a certain segment of the electorate is disposed toward a female leader.
7
Wait until the democratic primary ends. The results will say more about how a majority is predisposed away from a dangerous female returning to office.
Anybody wondering who told her it was okay to have a private server in her basement? President Obama said he wasn't aware of this so it leaves me wondering who said it was okay? In my opinion, this action by Clinton serves to emphasize her behavior over most of her public career wherein she pushes the envelope on what is ethical and/or legal in most areas of her political performance.
4
Clinton was sloppy, unprofessional and disdainful of basic hi-tech bookkeeping that ANY Fortune 500 employee does on regular basis.
Benghazi bothers some because of poor judgement ( re protection for our Ambassador who was ambushed and killed) which seemingly was based "bad info" on Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside non-govt power broker seeking favors in Libya.
There is no need for further committees as this is fact. Whether or not this is an important fact in supporting, or not, Ms. Cinton is the voter's choice.
Benghazi bothers some because of poor judgement ( re protection for our Ambassador who was ambushed and killed) which seemingly was based "bad info" on Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside non-govt power broker seeking favors in Libya.
There is no need for further committees as this is fact. Whether or not this is an important fact in supporting, or not, Ms. Cinton is the voter's choice.
3
"Benghazi bothers some because of poor judgement ( re protection for our Ambassador who was ambushed and killed) which seemingly was based "bad info" on Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside non-govt power broker seeking favors in Libya."
Not according to any of the 8 Benghazi committees.
Stop lying.
Not according to any of the 8 Benghazi committees.
Stop lying.
1
This committee is a pathetic - and pathetically transparent - attempt to smear a political opponent. If the House would just put this much effort into crafting legislation that will actually answer any of the myriad of ills that need to be addressed, perhaps the American electorate would hold them in more esteem. At least more than the absolute contempt with which they are now regarded. Faint hope, however.
13
$45 Million on a committee to investigate Hillary's e-mails? There should be a committee to investigate this committee.
9
It's sad that only these continuous witch hunts will be their legacy.
12
Don't lose any sleep over it. They don't care. As George W. Bush once famously said, "who cares about history when we'll all be dead then."
These people are not playing a long game.
These people are not playing a long game.
1
The dearth of proper scandals has left the GOP scrambling to cobble together shreds of slightly uncomfortable details in a desperate attempt to attack the person who is most likely going to be our next President. With Obama they had to wait until he was inaugurated to assault him. Why wait until she has been inaugurated when you can attack her now? They've learned from Fox News that you can put a red apple next to a watermelon and say it's the red menace at work and repeat it often enough until it sounds like a real thing.
15
Anyone with a moral thought in their head should immediately compare the lie to invade Iraq and the Benghazi tragedy. If the lie to war comes out on top, your should thank the heavens you know the difference between 4 and 500,000 and maybe more affected by the lie to go to war. But if you choose Benghazi, each of us must question our moral standing in America. This character trait is the moral fiber of your existence, by choosing a not at fault crime over an at fault crime you have no moral ground to stand on in America.
11
Hillary is way wrong. Everyone who has worked for the government knows it. It was negligence, appalling and incredible, on a strategic scale. That nice source of information that the Russians, Israelis, and Chinese (one imagines) depended on, enjoyed, and cherished, has now dried up since she left. They must have been laughing their guts out.
This is part of a wider pattern of incompetence displayed by the Obama administration on foreign policy. Libya, no matter which way you cut it, has been a disaster. She gleefully joked about the death of Qaddafi and advised the president to make the worst foreign policy mistake since GW, which, to his credit, he hesitated to do. They destabilized a region and flooded it with weapons from Qaddafi's stockpiles (imagine that!); a humanitarian disaster ensued. Tens of thousands are dead or wounded. How about making that fact the subject of an inquiry? OPM, that is part and parcel of the same sickening lack of focus (even awareness), it has been and will be the greatest counter-intelligence failure in US history. It may very well cost the lives of US personnel. Belly laughs in Beijing. Hillary in 2016? Forget it. We need competent leadership in the United States and the question on everyone's mind is from whence it will come.
This is part of a wider pattern of incompetence displayed by the Obama administration on foreign policy. Libya, no matter which way you cut it, has been a disaster. She gleefully joked about the death of Qaddafi and advised the president to make the worst foreign policy mistake since GW, which, to his credit, he hesitated to do. They destabilized a region and flooded it with weapons from Qaddafi's stockpiles (imagine that!); a humanitarian disaster ensued. Tens of thousands are dead or wounded. How about making that fact the subject of an inquiry? OPM, that is part and parcel of the same sickening lack of focus (even awareness), it has been and will be the greatest counter-intelligence failure in US history. It may very well cost the lives of US personnel. Belly laughs in Beijing. Hillary in 2016? Forget it. We need competent leadership in the United States and the question on everyone's mind is from whence it will come.
9
Well, it probably won't be coming from a businessman who keeps going bankrupt, an ex-surgeon who doesn't seem to have read the Constitution, a businesswoman with an extremely-sketchy resume, another Bush who thinks his brother "kept us safe," a loonbox Senator who's got absolutely nothing done to help his constituents, a governor who ran his state into the ground (the other gov who did this already quit) a governor who's likely to end up under indictment (the other gov who's actually been indicted already quit), a...
3
How humiliating it must be for any intelligent person to get grilled by this bunch of dunces! How I despise having to pay for it!
(My apologies to the committee members not in on this smear campaign, and my sympathy for having to sit next to the perpetrators.)
(My apologies to the committee members not in on this smear campaign, and my sympathy for having to sit next to the perpetrators.)
19
Perhaps we should privatize Congress. Every one of these deadbeat Republicans would be fired for incompetence and not even trying to do their jobs as employees of a for profit corporation.
15
Gee you think, yes four americans were killed and yet the only thing this committee want to talk about is bringing Hillary numbers, down, Mr. Gowdy should be shame of himself.... wasting money, time and energy... when they should be working on way to help people: jobs, social benefits, and medical,,,
11
Sadly this all could have been avoided but where there is smoke there is fire. This is just the tip of the iceberg for the political elite. The cronyism is under attack in both parties.
1
Actually, sometimes when there is smoke there is just smoke. And people who have a reason to blow it.
2
Forest vs. Trees: This is what this committee is lacking focus on.
1
Interesting. I see nothing but men, and what's their main objective? To prevent a woman from becoming the first would-be female President. Not unlike their main objective over the past 7 years, to prevent a black man from successfully serving as the President of the United States, our first black President. And I bet every Republican on this committee calls himself a Christian and a patriot. Our system is broken and corrupt to the core. What are we, the people, going to do about it?
14
GOP committees investigating Benghazi (again and again and again) and, now, the private email server.
If only the GOP would spend a fraction of its time on governance, compromise, negotiation and not on vindictive attacks, its polling numbers might rise above a dismal 10% favorability rating. Just pathetic. And we are paying their salaries for these partisan, political attacks.
5
If only the GOP would spend a fraction of its time on governance, compromise, negotiation and not on vindictive attacks, its polling numbers might rise above a dismal 10% favorability rating. Just pathetic. And we are paying their salaries for these partisan, political attacks.
5
9
If only you could quit calling them by their branding statement. But no, that would take effort. Bless your heart.
A Benghazi tragedy turned into a partisan game and planned to only accomplish one goal. Which is to paint Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as untrustworthy, reducing her high favorable ratings down so any republican will have a chance in the general election. Then with the majority of people who pay attention to politics hear house leaders and a whistleblower state the purpose of the committee was created to bring down former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while the NYT write another narrative and by pass the committee's purpose to focus on emails raises question to the legitimacy of the New York Times itself. And weather partisan journalism is the norm and truth has no place in the American History.
3
Investigating HRC's unauthorized email server is completely justified under the Benghazi investigation. The investigation committee required information from the State Department was not available. That led to the State Department's discovery that HRC used an unauthorized private email server for the entire time she was SoS. This resulted in additional discoveries; 1). That the State Department had no official record of the Secretary's official communication as required by law, 2) That the unauthorized server was used to store, send & receive emails containing highly classified material including Top Secret information, and 3). That foreign adversaries knew of HRC's personal email and were using sophisticated cyber attacks attacking to capture it the information it contained, 4). That the system containing the classified information was given to persons with no clearance at all.
As a result the FBI, DoJ and Intelligence Agency IG and State Department are conducting their own separate investigations on these matters and for good reason. These are serious matters involving national security, mishandling of classified material and potentially perjury.
Even President Obama said HRC's private email server was a mistake so there is no question that wrongdoing was done. The investigation needs to continue so that the full truth is known.
As a result the FBI, DoJ and Intelligence Agency IG and State Department are conducting their own separate investigations on these matters and for good reason. These are serious matters involving national security, mishandling of classified material and potentially perjury.
Even President Obama said HRC's private email server was a mistake so there is no question that wrongdoing was done. The investigation needs to continue so that the full truth is known.
3
"Even President Obama said HRC's private email server was a mistake so there is no question that wrongdoing was done"
Nothing illegal was done. You goobers just can't accept that.
Nothing illegal was done. You goobers just can't accept that.
1
Who cares about the USA, good governance, national security and domestic security...certainly not the Republicans or the news media that can only focus on Republican political vendettas and nothing else. We have a lot of serious issues and national security concerns that call for grown ups to be in charge. The GOP is the party of no ideas and petty grievances. The care not for the good of the country. I am sick of silly politics and hateful ideological rhetoric. Go away GOP...go away
8
Can we sue Republicans for abuse of process so they can repay the tax payer?
The waste of time and working people's money is despicable. I know Congress doesn't work for a living. I believe they are in recess for the fall equinox. But, I work for my money and the feds get a chunky slice. If this is what I pay for, I want my money back.
The waste of time and working people's money is despicable. I know Congress doesn't work for a living. I believe they are in recess for the fall equinox. But, I work for my money and the feds get a chunky slice. If this is what I pay for, I want my money back.
7
The name Hillary Clinton will go down in history as synonymous with 'decimation by acquaintance'.
In reading many of these comments, I come away with puzzlement at the degree of deeply emotional personal animus those who are politically at odds with Hillary or Obama seem to experience I just can't bring myself to dredge up that kind of hatred, even for those I disagree with utterly and who's motives I suspect (see, e.g., Ted Cruz). Where does this hatred come from? It is terribly unhealthy for our society.
5
Simply another witchhunt committee similar to the whole Whitewater thing. The GOP is the biggest bunch of hypocrites on Earth. They complain about taxes and the deficit and then waste millions on a political vendetta. Use your super PACs for this junk! Any even if I might a agree with some GOP ideas, the fact they cannot campaign based on those ideas, but instead rely on witchhunts and voter suppression shows just what losers this sad political party consists of today.
8
Aside from attempting to remove Hillary from the race, to set her up in disgrace, why is this still an active issue? Seeing the e-mail Hillary put out as being a security threat - was it? Did any threats result from her using the same computer for both personal and State mailings? These inquiries themselves are a disgrace and an embarrassment to our country.
9
The party that doesn't like big government uses the system to do "make work" must be nice to get paid to do nothing useful. This is not to say Hilary Clinton is blameless, rather these committees by either party always end up with nothing that the public cares about. Just a bunch of guys (for the most part) taking up space, yammering for the press about basically nothing and tuning out the rest of the country. Get a grip guys and do an honest day's work.
5
Hmm. The Republicans open a spurious probe into the Clintons, keep grappling around for years until they find something completely unrelated to the original mission, the purpose being character assassination.
Where have I heard this story before?
Where have I heard this story before?
13
Instead of the Hillary witch hunt, the Republican controlled Congress should be investing why they didn't properly fund for security at the Benghazi embassy. They need to take the "speck" out of their own eye and actually get some work done for the country.
11
It wasn't, technically, an embassy. A lot about the US' involvement there has never been fully disclosed.
If anything, the Benghazi attack was an indictment of the "small footprint" strategy of the Obama Administration.
If anything, the Benghazi attack was an indictment of the "small footprint" strategy of the Obama Administration.
More like an indictment of the restriction of funding by the Republican Congress to adequately secure state department personnel abroad.
1
“Secretary Clinton’s unusual email arrangement with herself has only made it more difficult for the committee to ensure the public record with respect to Libya and Benghazi is complete”
Hold on, so Secretary Clinton's "unusual email arrangement" makes her emails MORE difficult to access and read? Isn't that the exact opposite of what they've been claiming?
Hold on, so Secretary Clinton's "unusual email arrangement" makes her emails MORE difficult to access and read? Isn't that the exact opposite of what they've been claiming?
9
As tiresome and boring as this email tirade is getting, it is actually a good thing for Hillary. It just shows that the GOP can't find anything else that disqualifies her, so they keep biting the same old tire over and over again.
Let them gnaw on it. By this time next year, the actual election will be coming up and the voters will be so tired of this non-issue, they will be glad to finally put it behind them.
Let them gnaw on it. By this time next year, the actual election will be coming up and the voters will be so tired of this non-issue, they will be glad to finally put it behind them.
13
Say what you will about a GOP "witch hunt", but if it weren't for the persistence of these investigators, State would still be claiming that it had handed over everything despite the fact that it didn't even have access to Hillary Clinton's emails. The investigators are still uncovering material she claimed didn't exist.
As for the comparison to former Secretaries of State's emails, they didn't delete all their emails during an active investigation.
The FBI is involved for a reason. It has nothing to do with partisanship.
As for the comparison to former Secretaries of State's emails, they didn't delete all their emails during an active investigation.
The FBI is involved for a reason. It has nothing to do with partisanship.
9
State likely still would be claiming that it was a blasphemous movie about the Prophet that caused the "unforeseen" violence in Benghazi, instead of a planned attack that we were unprepared to defend ourselves against.
That the FBI is involved at all, as AACNY states, is reason enough to see fire where there is ample smoke.
That the FBI is involved at all, as AACNY states, is reason enough to see fire where there is ample smoke.
1
Yawn. No we know that HRC gets spam just like all of us.
Yippee!
Yippee!
2
Nor did Hillary. But at least you've moved away from your usual "Obama is to blame for everything under the sun" trope.
The FBI is not investigating Hillary Clinton. And think about the millions of emails deleted by the Bush administration and their use of the RNC server.
This is supposedly the Benghazi Committee, not an email investigation. And Wine Wednesdays at taxpayer expense are not an investigation - nor are ridiculous gun buyer clubs.
The FBI is not investigating Hillary Clinton. And think about the millions of emails deleted by the Bush administration and their use of the RNC server.
This is supposedly the Benghazi Committee, not an email investigation. And Wine Wednesdays at taxpayer expense are not an investigation - nor are ridiculous gun buyer clubs.
2
Two fake Clinton "scandals" in one article, validated by being placed above the fold in the New York Times as if they were real and worthy of our attention. What a sorry sight.
7
Wrongful deaths on a Secretary of State's watch
Mishandling of (at least) scores highly classified government documents in a deliberate and systematic way, to keep them from public scrutiny
Doesn't sound like "fake" scandals to me.
Let me guess. The only real scandal of the past couple of years - one that isn't getting enough attention - is whether or not a few lanes of traffic were closed during a bridge repair in New Jersey, with / without the governor's explicit approval. Yeah. Right.
Mishandling of (at least) scores highly classified government documents in a deliberate and systematic way, to keep them from public scrutiny
Doesn't sound like "fake" scandals to me.
Let me guess. The only real scandal of the past couple of years - one that isn't getting enough attention - is whether or not a few lanes of traffic were closed during a bridge repair in New Jersey, with / without the governor's explicit approval. Yeah. Right.
3
Why weren’t Condi Rice’s private e-mails released during those exhaustive investigations of the thirteen consulates and embassies attacked that resulted in 60 deaths during GWB’s administration? Oh that’s because there hasn’t been an investigation not even one. How many into Benghazi eight? Oh still would like to know what happened to those 22 million emails that were deleted from the RNC server that Bush and company were using.
1
Obama say Hillary made a mistake with her email server in the basement, she didn't make a mistake she did it on purpose so she would have complete control
over her communications. She obviously learned something from then President Nixon's congressional hearings.
over her communications. She obviously learned something from then President Nixon's congressional hearings.
6
It's time to end this because Hillary has withheld evidence long enough to get away with it again! It always works. The State Department was a big help, too. Besides, it looks like they're about to find something really incriminating. Yep, time to end this.
4
To whom does it look like that? Please back up your statement. Do you have inside information?
3
Yes, she "withheld" evidence that she orders pizza online, just like all of us.
Can the Republic survive this?
Can the Republic survive this?
2
"We're going to go wherever the facts take us." What is the definition of "facts," as it is used in this context? It is perfectly obvious republican committee members are trying to concoct a political narrative to destroy Hillary Clinton's presidential bid. The American people deserve more than fraudulent behavior from their elected representatives.
6
Ummm... No. The facts are leading everyone to a negative conclusion, regarding Mrs. Clinton's actions. You dislike (immensely) that it is a Republican-led Congress that is uncovering it. There is no concoction.
What is shocking is that the more outrageous the alleged wrong-doing, the more evidence emerges (by Obama-era FBI investigation, at this point) that hammers home nail after nail into her political coffin.
The lingering question is this: How many nails must she hammer into her own political coffin before liberals finally decide to look to someone else for leadership?
What is shocking is that the more outrageous the alleged wrong-doing, the more evidence emerges (by Obama-era FBI investigation, at this point) that hammers home nail after nail into her political coffin.
The lingering question is this: How many nails must she hammer into her own political coffin before liberals finally decide to look to someone else for leadership?
7
Ed:
All these responses show is that it's far easier to indict all republicans than to indict one Clinton.
All these responses show is that it's far easier to indict all republicans than to indict one Clinton.
2
Why didn't your friends the Republicans make a select committee to investigate the Iraq war which was founded on a LIE. Instead of focusing on the emails that has very little to do with Benghazi. These email tells us who and what favors she had to return to political backers not weather she ordered no one to help the 4 Americans killed in Benghazi. If I were Hillary I would sue John Boehner and the Republican party for "Bill of Attainder" and wasting taxpayers money for political gains which is against the law as well.
2
This Commitee is a De Facto "Bill of Attainder" and should be judged so by
the courts. Hillary Clintion should be able to sue both Boehner and those on the committee for damages.
An act of Attainder is a determination of crime without benefit of jury done by a legislative body with one individual as the object of said act.
The Benghazi Commitee fits description of a legislative body enganged in iacts of Attainder perfectly.
the courts. Hillary Clintion should be able to sue both Boehner and those on the committee for damages.
An act of Attainder is a determination of crime without benefit of jury done by a legislative body with one individual as the object of said act.
The Benghazi Commitee fits description of a legislative body enganged in iacts of Attainder perfectly.
6
Given the Republicans' success at derailing her husband's reelection via the trumped-up impeachment hearings over Bill's affairs, Hillary Clinton's prospects for the Presidency are looking better with each passing day.
6
Yeah. You've figured it out! Bill Clinton's hopes at a third term were stymied by the 1998-era GOP.
1
Bill Clinton was impeached because he committed perjury under oath, a criminal offense. He was also disbarred in Arkansas becouse of this crime. There was also seriously probable cause that he obstructed justice.
His impeachment had nothing to do with an affair other than he lied under oath about it. It is amazing that Clinton defenders still bring up this ruse that he was impeached because of an affair when the truth is so clear and evident to everyone. Pathetic.
His impeachment had nothing to do with an affair other than he lied under oath about it. It is amazing that Clinton defenders still bring up this ruse that he was impeached because of an affair when the truth is so clear and evident to everyone. Pathetic.
2
How long this farce is going to continue?
7
Still waiting for the republicans to launch investigations into the 13 attacks on our overseas diplomatic facilities during the Bush era that resulted in dozens dead, including diplomatic personnel, and dozens wounded. Nary a peep from the party of faux outrage over those incidents.
11
Nancy Pelosi is kicking herself that she squandered an opportunity... err... um... Never mind.
They are, however, preparing s Select Committee on Obama's Use of Dijon Mustard on a Hamburger.
1
Unbelievable that the GOP is dragging this on and on, spending money which could be spent on more deserved needs. This is the party that is claiming that taxpayer money is always being wasted on programs which admittedly have a smidgen of inefficiency or fraud. How about this waste of taxpayer money, while this goes on longer than Watergate and the Warren Commission?! Do what you were elected to do and affect change for everyone, make some compromises, and legislate. Freedom Caucus is free from obligation I guess. That is not the freedom we seek.
4
Only dopey Republicans can put a committee together to smear HC, but have it actually help HC get elected, as the American people learn of its actual intent. The stupidity of the Republicans has no bounds.
8
Watergate was political, too, but nobody objected that the Watergate committee was focused too much on the tapes. Hillary is just looking for an out. In terms of sheer optics it is interesting to watch her twist and turn on this and other issues like the TPP which she was in favor of before she was against it. Who is she? What does she really stand for? These are the questions no candidate can evade.
7
The difference is that Nixon eventually said, "Enough! You've got me." and resigned in disgrace. Neither Clinton will ever be willing to admit any wrong-doing of any kind... ever. ...Especially the cover-up. The genuinely believe that when faced with Nixon's dilemma, they would (and continue to actively) deny, dodge, and avoid any admission of responsibility or culpability.
Democrats love them both, because they are eternal optimists. Whatever they screw up, there is always a "vast, right wing conspiracy" they can blame... even when there isn't.
Democrats love them both, because they are eternal optimists. Whatever they screw up, there is always a "vast, right wing conspiracy" they can blame... even when there isn't.
2
This is Ken Starr all over again, an endless investigation at taxpayer's expense with no focus, no aim, other than the political one of somehow "getting" the target. Even if you intensely dislike the Clintons, you should be stridently against this naked abuse of power as the threat to democracy that it is.
This is exactly the kind of roving "investigation" the Democrats refrained from conducting into the much riper field of responsibility for the debacle in Iraq and the "war crimes" of Bush, Cheney, et al. Democracy is not just about competition for power at the ballot box; it is also, critically, about responsible, far-sighted use of powers gained.
The current GOP and the reactionary base it cultivates most evidently believe in no America but their America, no party but their party, (no voters but white voters), and that the end of achieving and holding on to political power justifies any means.
This is exactly the kind of roving "investigation" the Democrats refrained from conducting into the much riper field of responsibility for the debacle in Iraq and the "war crimes" of Bush, Cheney, et al. Democracy is not just about competition for power at the ballot box; it is also, critically, about responsible, far-sighted use of powers gained.
The current GOP and the reactionary base it cultivates most evidently believe in no America but their America, no party but their party, (no voters but white voters), and that the end of achieving and holding on to political power justifies any means.
16
I remember back in the nineties they did the same thing to her. But the best one was when they tried to accuse her of murder. Someone they worked with had depression and committed suicide, but according to some in the nut party, it was the Clinton's fault.
9
You mean the suicide victim who shot himself twice in the back of the head and still had enough presence of mind to fling the weapon in one direction and his body down an embankment?
At least her document management practices have evolved: instead of boxing up damning evidence and attempting to destroy it in a burning car, somewhere out in the woods, she is now having a mom-and-pop organization house her unsecured, highly classified documents on an unapproved, private server... in their bathroom.
Yup. No scandal there!
At least her document management practices have evolved: instead of boxing up damning evidence and attempting to destroy it in a burning car, somewhere out in the woods, she is now having a mom-and-pop organization house her unsecured, highly classified documents on an unapproved, private server... in their bathroom.
Yup. No scandal there!
Ed – –
Can you remind us of why you and your friends believe that the Clintons ordered a hit on Vince Foster?
Can you remind us of why you and your friends believe that the Clintons ordered a hit on Vince Foster?
1
Running what was effectively a clandestine State Department on an anonymous email server outside the reach of official scrutiny, is the primary reason why Ms. Clinton is a primary target of the investigation, and rightly so.
Until all of the emails on her server including those she classified as "private" are analyzed, no one can know with any certainty, "what she knew and when she knew it" during and after the attack on the Benghazi consulate.
Until all of the emails on her server including those she classified as "private" are analyzed, no one can know with any certainty, "what she knew and when she knew it" during and after the attack on the Benghazi consulate.
5
It*s absolutely true that the GOP-controlled Congress cut funding for worldwide embassy security.
But Hillary Clinton was professionally and morally responsible for the safety of people working under her tenure. If everyone knew that adequate security could not be provided, why did she allow Ambassador Stevens to establish a small, vulnerable outpost in an area that could not be appropriately safeguarded?
He was an idealist who believed he was there to strengthen democracy. She is a venal opportunist whose pals were salivating at the thought of getting their hands on that Libyan El Dorado.
And Hillary is ready to send more of our young people--but no one she might ever be related to--into further military operations against the only people who can realistically contain Sunni fundamentalists.
But Hillary Clinton was professionally and morally responsible for the safety of people working under her tenure. If everyone knew that adequate security could not be provided, why did she allow Ambassador Stevens to establish a small, vulnerable outpost in an area that could not be appropriately safeguarded?
He was an idealist who believed he was there to strengthen democracy. She is a venal opportunist whose pals were salivating at the thought of getting their hands on that Libyan El Dorado.
And Hillary is ready to send more of our young people--but no one she might ever be related to--into further military operations against the only people who can realistically contain Sunni fundamentalists.
2
The republicans have no hesitancy wasting the taxpayers money when they think it can further their agenda. Disgraceful behavior by members of Congress. The Tea Party is juvenile and narcissistic, which often goes together at that age of development.
9
Yes. Obamacare isn't a narcissistic venture that costs the taxpayers fully a third of the government's yearly spending.
This is a joke. It's been a joke and a GOP plaything from the beginning. I'm not crazy about Mrs. Clinton myself -- for a former Secretary of State, she's far from diplomatic -- but I don't think anyone should sit still for this abuse of process, power and person.
7
Yes - and every minute that the GOP spends on its own aims, rather than the true work of supporting the American people - should go unpaid. As in, we do not fund their salaries, benefits or pensions while they are sitting in Washington working for themselves rather than for us. These hearings are off the clock, being that they are to benefit the GOP, therefore none of our tax dollars should be wasted on those who continue in this waste of time. Once they are on the hook for the cost plus not raking in our tax dollars, it will be amazing to see how fast they drop the issue. Now if only the Democrats had held months of hearings on the lies that were used to beat the drum for the fake war in Iraq, the naming of a CIA operative and also why thousands were left to die in New Orleans as Hurricane Katrina approached... those hearing we will willingly pay for.
2
The costs of this committee should be paid by the GOP.
12
The cost of these "investigations" should be borne IN FULL by the Congress-persons who have taken all the time effort and yes--taxpayer monies to conduct a partisan witch hunt. It should be paid back by any means nessacary---take their house; take their car--take their PAC money. This and more is what they would do if they had the power TO do so from any one they don't like--in this case; Hillary Clinton.
1
the plot was set and the answers were given by Petraeus as to how his classified leaks caused the bombings. Congress said they denied extra security twice to Ambassador Stevens and Stevens said it himself on an interview on PBS with Bob Moyer. The was planned by the GOP with help from Media-press-Journalist. Yes the plan had a GOP or back up with Independent Bernie Sanders. Yes we know this was to assure no Democrat would be President. Obama has refused to bomb Iran for Israel and not invaded nations for oil as Cheney/war hawks wanted. Now McCarthy bragged about how well the plan is going for 2 years and Hillary's poll numbers dropping. Bernie was part of the plan and he is finished. But the World sees the US Congress-Senate are corrupt liars and can't be trusted. UN sees the US has corrupt fixed elections. The USA can no longer be trusted at it's word, media-press corrupt and it is easy to hoodwink Americans.
2
Question:What do you call 7 old republican men in suits who love to stare at their own...hmmmmm...belly buttons?
Answer: Benghazi Panel
Is there anything else they could possibly be focused on instead?
Answer: Benghazi Panel
Is there anything else they could possibly be focused on instead?
5
As long as Mrs. Clinton is a candidate the Republicans will try to keep this dysfunctional committee alive. It was obvious from the beginning what this was all about. The latest revelations simply confirm what everybody already knew. This a sham and a scam. Gowdy is a political lightweight hack who is simply treading water and getting nothing substantive done. He is simply a tool. Nothing new related to the attack has been determined. Many prior committees have already been there. There is Only One obvious political motive for this committee to exist and continue. All taxpayers should be upset over this political scam that continues to only serve as an expensive, dysfunctional and dishonest attack against Mrs. Clinton. It is politics at it's worst and has absolutely nothing to do with the good of the country.
3
Are the Republicans trying to avenge their infamy of one of their own, Richard Nixon? Seems like it. Although, in that case, the smoke detector led to a real fire in less than 17 months. And here they are plodding with some evidence of a probable smoke, after all these months! Republicans! Nixon and Benghazi could'nt be more different and incomparable. So give up and get that, will you? I want my money spent on ME. It is not yours to waste.
3
My point is, when are the GOP going to start doing the actual consensus and compromise work that actually runs the country? And not into the ground, I might also add.
6
"Having classified information outside a secure government account is illegal." So where is the indictment? Or is this law for other people?
7
Who's going to prosecute? Obama?
3
Exactly, AACNY! So what is the end game here? Why waste tax payer money on this if you're not going to prosecute ANYONE much less Hillary Clinton. This looks like Whitewater all over again.
Yes--put up or shut up. After ALL THIS TIME--still no actual evidence and NO charges.
What does that tell us about the motivation behind this witch hunt?
What does that tell us about the motivation behind this witch hunt?
1
"Clinton Emails Became the New Focus..."? No, they did not, and never were.
3
This all started because Susan Rice claimed it was violence induced by a video. The first lie begets the second. Soon you lose track of your lies.
6
It, in fact, was sparked by a video, which Times reporters found out by talking to the attackers. Were did you get your "facts"?
1
Longer than Watergate, because Nixon, at base, love him or hate him, had at least some semblance of conscience, guilt, shame, and understanding of right from wrong, that Bill and Hillary conspicuously lack. These two grifters never give up.
5
You have no evidence that Nixon had any conscience or even the smallest awareness of his guilt regarding Watergate. He continued to deny his responsibility, even after his resignation was forced. It took a paid appearance on a series of interviews with David Frost to get even close to him admitting his role, and even then, he backed away from that admission afterwards. He remained an isolated figure, and is mainly forgotten now - but for the few who do remember him, his lack of any morality is what will be remembered.
Or maybe because none of the previous Benghazi investigations found any wrongdoing here? Nor has this witch hunt by Gowdy after all this time. Nixon sent burglars into the opposition's office to steal information. That is a crime.
2
To me, the most appalling thing about this farce is that not a single Republican has stood up and said "Enough!" To be sure, it is also discouraging that no news organization is covering the ongoing nonsense as the demented circus it is--or reminding us of the things we know are just not true.
When Comedy Central consistently out performs not just Fox News, but also ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, and even MSNBC, in conveying real news, and BBC reports are much more accurate and balanced than any of our own reporting, there is a deep problem in this country. A democracy requires an informed electorate.
When Comedy Central consistently out performs not just Fox News, but also ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, and even MSNBC, in conveying real news, and BBC reports are much more accurate and balanced than any of our own reporting, there is a deep problem in this country. A democracy requires an informed electorate.
15
requires an interested ;electorate as well
americans have given up
they finally realize their vote is an impotent gesture
money controls what happens in america
things like super pacs and citizens united are ample proof of that
so have your quaint illusions about being a democratic republic
while you eloi frolic in th sunshine , in the underground chambers of th morlocks th likes of th koch boys and shelley adelson are deciding what will happen next
americans have given up
they finally realize their vote is an impotent gesture
money controls what happens in america
things like super pacs and citizens united are ample proof of that
so have your quaint illusions about being a democratic republic
while you eloi frolic in th sunshine , in the underground chambers of th morlocks th likes of th koch boys and shelley adelson are deciding what will happen next
Someone commented that voters don't care about this. Well, the ones voting for Bernie Sanders seem to.
4
And how do you know this? My own preference for Sanders has everything to do with his policies for the future, and nothing to do with Clinton's e-mails.
I'll vote for Bernie in the primary because he's more liberal than Hillary, not because of this email garbage.
And if she's the candidate, I will vote for her - as I imagine most Bernie fans will.
And if she's the candidate, I will vote for her - as I imagine most Bernie fans will.
1
Surprise? Welcome to politics.
Who really is at fault for the Benghazi disaster? I did a search on: funds requested of congress to protect Benghazi. The republicans are guilty for the lives lost and here is proof:
Barbara Boxer’s claim that GOP budgets hampered Benghazi security
By Glenn Kessler May 16, 2013
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/...
Obama To Congress: Provide More Funds For Security At U.S. Embassies
Jennifer Bendery
[email protected]
Posted: 05/16/2013 2:24 pm EDT Updated: 05/16/2013 4:24 pm EDT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/obama-emb...
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'
The Huffington Post | By Sarah Bufkin
Posted: 10/10/2012 1:32 pm EDT Updated: 10/11/2012 1:55 pm EDT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/jason-cha...
Democratic Congressman Refuses To Let Republicans Ignore GOP Security Budget Cuts In New Benghazi Hearing
by Aviva Shen May 5, 2013 10:00am
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/05/05/19646...
There are several more pages of news article links if you want to do the same search on: funds requested of congress to protect Benghazi
Barbara Boxer’s claim that GOP budgets hampered Benghazi security
By Glenn Kessler May 16, 2013
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/...
Obama To Congress: Provide More Funds For Security At U.S. Embassies
Jennifer Bendery
[email protected]
Posted: 05/16/2013 2:24 pm EDT Updated: 05/16/2013 4:24 pm EDT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/obama-emb...
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'
The Huffington Post | By Sarah Bufkin
Posted: 10/10/2012 1:32 pm EDT Updated: 10/11/2012 1:55 pm EDT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/jason-cha...
Democratic Congressman Refuses To Let Republicans Ignore GOP Security Budget Cuts In New Benghazi Hearing
by Aviva Shen May 5, 2013 10:00am
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/05/05/19646...
There are several more pages of news article links if you want to do the same search on: funds requested of congress to protect Benghazi
16
Mr Gowdy and his flunkies are getting paid by taxpayers to obsess over emails, mining for data in hopes of finding the "dirt" on Ms. Clinton. How impressive is that.
I'm still irked over the cover-up of 9/11 by Dick Cheney. Compared to him, Ms. Clinton is a saint.
I'm still irked over the cover-up of 9/11 by Dick Cheney. Compared to him, Ms. Clinton is a saint.
9
I find it extremely sad that the media and the GOP continues to only focus on the emails of Hillary Clinton but never bothers to mention the four Americans who died as a result of the Benghazi attacked: U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty (former Navy Seals) and Sean Smith. Should not the lives of dead Americans be equally, if not more important, that the personal emails of Mrs. Clinton? Where have our priorities gone?
2
Because repeatedly throwing out the names of the dead for the purpose of a partisan witchhunt crosses the line from beating a dead horse to dancing on it.
If turnabout is indeed fair play, my question is this:
Why didn't the Democratic Congress investigate the war crimes of George W Bush? What actually happened on 9/11? Why weren't NORAD protocalls followed? Where did George W Bush get the false intelligence he handed over Congress to get approval for his illegal invasion of non-threat Iraq, killing or injuring hundreds of thousands, costing taxpayers trillions, and destabilizing the region for decades? Why did George W Bush and Richard Cheney only agree to testify before the committee together, with no recording devices, and not under oath? Why was the only plane in America that was allowed to take off on 9/12 loaded with the Bin Laden family heading back to Saudi Arabia, home of 19 of 20 of the hijackers? Why were the Geneva Conventions ignored to implement a secret torture program? How were the massive unconstitutional programs that spy on American citizens with their secret unaccountable court making secret unaccountable rulings implemented?
These are just for starters...
Why didn't the Democratic Congress investigate the war crimes of George W Bush? What actually happened on 9/11? Why weren't NORAD protocalls followed? Where did George W Bush get the false intelligence he handed over Congress to get approval for his illegal invasion of non-threat Iraq, killing or injuring hundreds of thousands, costing taxpayers trillions, and destabilizing the region for decades? Why did George W Bush and Richard Cheney only agree to testify before the committee together, with no recording devices, and not under oath? Why was the only plane in America that was allowed to take off on 9/12 loaded with the Bin Laden family heading back to Saudi Arabia, home of 19 of 20 of the hijackers? Why were the Geneva Conventions ignored to implement a secret torture program? How were the massive unconstitutional programs that spy on American citizens with their secret unaccountable court making secret unaccountable rulings implemented?
These are just for starters...
7
When is Gowdy going to raid the 4.5 million to pay us back for this this pointless exercise in political destruction?
12
I was going to put a comment in here but my fellow readers have covered all my thoughts quite well...thanks guys~ you all got it right.... Hillary-witch-hunt, waste of tax$s, no committee or god-forbid criminal investigation into why bush/cheney invaded a foreign country under the guise of WMDs, thousands of American and foreign lives lost... sadly, government-as-usual.
9
How about instead of and investigation to find out how Hillary Clinton can be blamed for Benghazi, they run a better candidate with more popular ideas?
8
There is nothing earthshatteringly new about Benghazi or emails. Both are political "Red Herrings". Has the world gone off scent so badly? Do the media have to keep pounding Hillary Clinton with a persistent libelous innuendo's? Do other presidential candidates of either party get this scrutiny about personal, non-critical issues, that are designed to foster a negative opinion, over and over and over. I listen to NPR and for the Friday roundup for at least 6 weeks, even this liberal bastion, can only talk about emails when Clinton's name comes up. I personally would like to have an issue to judge her along with all the other over self-promoting egoistical pinheads that want to be president. She is one of perhaps three total people that might be successful presidents. Careful now! what if we get one of the crazies!
15
Do other presidential candidates of either party get this scrutiny about personal, non-critical issues, that are designed to foster a negative opinion, over and over and over.
=============
No, because none of them is being investigated by the FBI
=============
No, because none of them is being investigated by the FBI
1
the fbi investigation is going to find nothing wrong
1
This circus sounds less like a fishing expedition and more like a party. When they begin looking into who killed Vince Foster, we'll know they're really serious about seeing the "whole elephant".
5
The Neverending Story on Capitol Hill. It's good to see that the congressmen have something to keep them occupied and occupied and...
1
Didn't Kevin McCarthy just 'fess up (unintentionally) that all this endless Benghazi churning was just part of a political vendetta?
So WHY is what this committee still meeting -- and wasting our tax dollars, to boot! -- and why are its actions and allegations still considered 'news'?
Shouldn't anything about this hit-job committee now be prefaced by the context making clear that it is utterly and totally a political attack-job?
So WHY is what this committee still meeting -- and wasting our tax dollars, to boot! -- and why are its actions and allegations still considered 'news'?
Shouldn't anything about this hit-job committee now be prefaced by the context making clear that it is utterly and totally a political attack-job?
9
You are obviously a member of the reality – based community. Your connection to reality has understandably made it difficult for you to understand the importance of the Benghazi committee's work.
1
Would the email scandal have come out to public scrutiny if not for this committee?
4
What's the e-mail scandal?
it's only a wannabe scandal
1
What is the scandal? There was no law about emails with classified information at the time the server was set up. None. It came later. The "scandal" is as invented as the birther bunch, meaning it's fantasy built on wishes to destroy rather than reality.
7
Emails and all other types of communications are vital to the investigation that a committee needs. The fact that Hillary, the DOS and DOJ have done very little to nothing to provide the basic materials or backing they need to conduct a thorough investigation is baffling and is costing taxpayers millions. They've done nothing but stonewall the effort. We know she lies, the DOS lies and the DOJ is politically partisan. Let's get to the truth and expose this wing for who they are. Period.
5
So if I follow this correctly, your argument is that we know she's lying because the investigation hasn't yet shown any evidence that she's lying and there must be evidence that she's lying because she's lying.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Thanks for clearing that up.
4
Comment # 1199 or thereabouts?
HRC will be the next President that will lead to 16 years of Democractic Party control of the White House. Her four + four years will cleanup the SCOTUS and rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. She will leave office with a 99% probability that the President that follows her will likewise be a Democratic because of American demographics and liberalism.
HRC will be the next President that will lead to 16 years of Democractic Party control of the White House. Her four + four years will cleanup the SCOTUS and rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. She will leave office with a 99% probability that the President that follows her will likewise be a Democratic because of American demographics and liberalism.
9
It comes dangerously close to blaming the victim, but something has always puzzled me. If it's true that security in Benghazi was a known issue before the attack, what was the ambassador doing there? Just wondering.
2
I agree with you that Christopher Stevens made a reckless decision to travel to Benghazi at that time, given what was going on in Libya and given the failure of the US Congress to appropriately fund security for state department workers abroad. Tragically, this widely liked public servant paid for it with his life.
1
After seven Benghazi Congressional hearings and investigations surely the eighth will still find everyone dead by ignorance and incompetence. And Libya will still not be a stable civil secular plural egalitarian democracy.
Too bad that nine Americans each died in Charleston and Oregon this year. That will require more than twice as many Congressional hearings for each incidence.
Too bad that nine Americans each died in Charleston and Oregon this year. That will require more than twice as many Congressional hearings for each incidence.
8
We know where the President and HRC was the night Bin Laden was killed. I would like to know where they were when the Benghazi attacks occurred. Why were no troops deployed to assist. The server is important because it is the only way to find out where they were. It would be nice if they told us but that is not happening.
4
We know where they were, and we know where the support troops were. A refusal to look it up isn't the same thing as it not existing.
1
What troops?
Do you have any idea how far away Tripoli is from Benghazi. Or the nearest US base, Aviano. Buy a map. Find out.
Do you have any idea how far away Tripoli is from Benghazi. Or the nearest US base, Aviano. Buy a map. Find out.
1
Where were they? Why, they were leading the terrorist charge into the compound at Benghazi. Everybody knows that.
The GOP has already broken the law by using taxpayer funds to underwrite a politically-motivated "investigation" that was NOT conducted for the good of the public but only for a venal political purpose. Are they doubling down by snooping unnecessarily through Clinton's emails when an exhaustive FBI investigation has already proven she has done nothing wrong? I am waiting for the AG to bring felony charges against the key members of the GOP who hijacked public monies for political grandstanding.
9
The republicans have still another mess of their investigations none of which has found anything but a way to bilk the taxpayers of more money. With the new revelations of Bradley Podliska they would be wise to start investigating themselves. What a crew! From the IRS to Fast and Furious to Benghazi and back again the republicans have proven only one thing - they can't find anything.
8
I think the comment by Socrates is correct. The Republicans are using the "bodies" of the slain Americans for a sustained political attack on Hilary Clinton. I am not Clinton fan but cannot stomach these House republicans. They sully the institution of Congress and are an embarrassment of how the world views the American government. How is it they get away with using the House of Representatives to attack the main Democratic contender for the Presidency. Have they no shame? Will they ever stop lying about their purpose? Will they ever let the Country move on and deal with it's issues rather than their angst over a black President?
12
I believe what this report suggests is that stonewalling works. Democrats know that their media allies will write reports like this in an effort to protect dem politicians. Has the NYT ever criticized Clinton, the WH, and/or the DOJ for not being forthcoming with requests from the committee for information?
People who say that there is nothing wrong with Clinton's Benghazi or e-mail conduct look foolish to me. Can I assume that if a republican SOS did the same, the left would defend the republican? Is there any concern on the left about the $6 billion that is missing from the State Department? Has the person that 'created the movie that caused the Benghazi tragedy' been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Are the Libyan people freer and safer now that the Clinton-led push got rid of Qaddafi? There were lots of reports about the insecurity of State Department communications that were sent to Clinton early on. None of the corrective actions were taken. What has Clinton done that has been good for America?
People who say that there is nothing wrong with Clinton's Benghazi or e-mail conduct look foolish to me. Can I assume that if a republican SOS did the same, the left would defend the republican? Is there any concern on the left about the $6 billion that is missing from the State Department? Has the person that 'created the movie that caused the Benghazi tragedy' been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Are the Libyan people freer and safer now that the Clinton-led push got rid of Qaddafi? There were lots of reports about the insecurity of State Department communications that were sent to Clinton early on. None of the corrective actions were taken. What has Clinton done that has been good for America?
2
The Times, with it's shoddy reporting techniques on the investigation into Ms. Clinton's server, is as much at fault for this fiasco, as the republican party is.
2
The Benghazi hearings are still going on because (now former) Secretary Clinton did nothing but stonewall answering any questions in a timely fashion. Despite there being four unexplained fatalities, the President refers to the incident as a "made up scandal." The deaths, which happened on their watch (Clinton's & Obama's), are not made up. There are four people no longer drawing breath in this life because Mrs. Clinton's State Department repeatedly refused to bolster much-needed security.
The email scandal, which continues to unfold (presently under investigation and subpoena by the Obama-era FBI) involves Mrs. Clinton's actions through the Benghazi crisis. She has been caught in a multitude of lies, regarding the emails. So much so, that even the President is now forced to admit, "she made mistakes." Everyone on both sides of the aisle appreciates that his comments are a polite understatement.
The question is... when will Mrs. Clinton come clean? No reset button. No "vast right wing conspiracy." No "what I meant to say was..." She should simply admit what she did - a full mea culpa or "hold me accountable for my role" would be appreciated and respected - and THEN move on. Not before. Anything less demonstrates that she is unwilling to accept responsibility for her own actions or for those that happened on her watch.
Frankly, I am not holding my breath for any answers or new-found contrition.
Neil Young could change his lyrics to "Four dead in Ben-gha-zi."
The email scandal, which continues to unfold (presently under investigation and subpoena by the Obama-era FBI) involves Mrs. Clinton's actions through the Benghazi crisis. She has been caught in a multitude of lies, regarding the emails. So much so, that even the President is now forced to admit, "she made mistakes." Everyone on both sides of the aisle appreciates that his comments are a polite understatement.
The question is... when will Mrs. Clinton come clean? No reset button. No "vast right wing conspiracy." No "what I meant to say was..." She should simply admit what she did - a full mea culpa or "hold me accountable for my role" would be appreciated and respected - and THEN move on. Not before. Anything less demonstrates that she is unwilling to accept responsibility for her own actions or for those that happened on her watch.
Frankly, I am not holding my breath for any answers or new-found contrition.
Neil Young could change his lyrics to "Four dead in Ben-gha-zi."
7
Re "Despite there being four unexplained fatalities, the President refers to the incident as a "made up scandal." "
What about all the unexplained fatalities of some 13 separate incidental attacks on US embassies/consulates on Bush's watch? Where is the GOP outrage about those? That they should settle on Benghazi and not any of the others sure makes it look like it's "a made up scandal". Just saying.
What about all the unexplained fatalities of some 13 separate incidental attacks on US embassies/consulates on Bush's watch? Where is the GOP outrage about those? That they should settle on Benghazi and not any of the others sure makes it look like it's "a made up scandal". Just saying.
2
But he won't. Benghazi was a case of foreign militants shooting at our people. Kent State was our people shooting at our people.
By now I think it is obvious that the Benghazi Investigation is a witch hunt of magnanimous proportions. Normally, an investigation is launched to either find out what happened, or to uncover suspected wrong doing. It is evident that everybody knows what happened, so no need to go over that. However, in this case it has become an investigation to find wrong doing against a political adversary, exactly what, we don't know. The name of the game is find wrong doing, and if you can't, dig deeper - we don't care how much it costs or how long it takes. In the meantime, after months of questioning and accusations, the public is saying, yes, she must have done something wrong, in any event I don't trust her. And that's all the Republicans want to hear.
2
"Magnanimous" - generous, charitable, forgiving, benevolent, etc.; "of a generous or kind nature" according to Webster.
Trey Gowdy's committee was launched to find out what happened and uncover any wrong-doing. It is fairly evident that Mrs. Clinton's State Dept. failed to protect its own resources (people died as a result) - which speaks to the "find out what happened" notion. It is fairly evident, now, that Mrs. Clinton wasn't following any protocols (even those set in place by President Obama) to ensure the safety or security not only of State Department personnel, but of classified documents, too. That speaks to the issue of identifying wrong-doing. An FBI investigation is only making her position less defendable.
My rhetorical rebuttal question back to you is this: why would anyone want to stop uncovering the truth? Could it be... "politics?" Crying "foul" in politics cuts both ways. If the only reason why the GOP wants this investigation to continue forever is to hurt Mrs. Clinton's presidential bid (which I think would be hard to prove with so much damning evidence continuing to emerge), then the only reason to stop uncovering damning evidence is protect her political future.
Perhaps we should come together to agree that neither is a very becoming reason to follow or abandon the investigation. The debacle might have been over with as long ago as two years ago if Mrs. Clinton had just answered their questions in a straight-forward way, back in late 2012 or 2013.
Trey Gowdy's committee was launched to find out what happened and uncover any wrong-doing. It is fairly evident that Mrs. Clinton's State Dept. failed to protect its own resources (people died as a result) - which speaks to the "find out what happened" notion. It is fairly evident, now, that Mrs. Clinton wasn't following any protocols (even those set in place by President Obama) to ensure the safety or security not only of State Department personnel, but of classified documents, too. That speaks to the issue of identifying wrong-doing. An FBI investigation is only making her position less defendable.
My rhetorical rebuttal question back to you is this: why would anyone want to stop uncovering the truth? Could it be... "politics?" Crying "foul" in politics cuts both ways. If the only reason why the GOP wants this investigation to continue forever is to hurt Mrs. Clinton's presidential bid (which I think would be hard to prove with so much damning evidence continuing to emerge), then the only reason to stop uncovering damning evidence is protect her political future.
Perhaps we should come together to agree that neither is a very becoming reason to follow or abandon the investigation. The debacle might have been over with as long ago as two years ago if Mrs. Clinton had just answered their questions in a straight-forward way, back in late 2012 or 2013.
This is pathetic indeed. The media should stop covering this issue as though it is actual news and start covering it for what it is: an attempt (large successful) to smear Hilary Clinton as unreliable and untrustworthy. It is politically motivated and disgraceful. Stop pretending this is news.
6
Well, I think that they should re-name the group, "The Committee to Assassinate the Character of Hillary Clinton" (CATCH). That, at least, would honestly convey the true focus of the group.
10
This is a witch hunt to bring down the candidacy of the most prominent female
politician with any real chancing of winning the Whitehorse. The recent revelations has revealed the nasty politics played by the Republicans at the expense of the taxpayers money. This would have gone for better things; how about a hearing on climate change that threatens to destroy our future.
politician with any real chancing of winning the Whitehorse. The recent revelations has revealed the nasty politics played by the Republicans at the expense of the taxpayers money. This would have gone for better things; how about a hearing on climate change that threatens to destroy our future.
7
Other commenters have noted that over the past three decades, no or almost invisible attempt has been made to investigate other attacks on US government entities abroad.
Yes--that is true, and I am as baffled as they. Why do the Democrats fail, over and over, to hold our elected leaders of either party accountable for their mistakes leading to the deaths of Americans serving their country?
Why do Democrats fail to block confirmation of conservative Supreme Court justices, if elections matter so much?
Why is it regarded as a viable excuse that *Condi and Colin did it; why couldn't Hillary?*
If Democratic leadership is truly better for this country, domestically and in foreign policy, then why do Democrats keep demonstrating spines like earthworms?
Under Hillary*s tenure as Secretary of State, the world which George W. Bush sundered has now completely disintegrated. That's a resume I should take heart from? If she was carrying out policies she didn't believe in herself, why didn't she have the integrity to say so and resign?
The Republicans can*t investigate the genuine crimes and failures here because those actions and policies are only a continuation of theirs. But that does not mean there*s nothing to investigate, and no one to hold accountable.
Let*s hope that Hillary*s opponents in the run for the nomination have the guts others have so far been without.
Yes--that is true, and I am as baffled as they. Why do the Democrats fail, over and over, to hold our elected leaders of either party accountable for their mistakes leading to the deaths of Americans serving their country?
Why do Democrats fail to block confirmation of conservative Supreme Court justices, if elections matter so much?
Why is it regarded as a viable excuse that *Condi and Colin did it; why couldn't Hillary?*
If Democratic leadership is truly better for this country, domestically and in foreign policy, then why do Democrats keep demonstrating spines like earthworms?
Under Hillary*s tenure as Secretary of State, the world which George W. Bush sundered has now completely disintegrated. That's a resume I should take heart from? If she was carrying out policies she didn't believe in herself, why didn't she have the integrity to say so and resign?
The Republicans can*t investigate the genuine crimes and failures here because those actions and policies are only a continuation of theirs. But that does not mean there*s nothing to investigate, and no one to hold accountable.
Let*s hope that Hillary*s opponents in the run for the nomination have the guts others have so far been without.
1
The purposely hidden emails of the Secretary of State are a perfectly reasonable place to look for the truth of what happened in Benghazi (and for any other unlawful activity).
There should really be a special prosecutor for the inappropriate handling of government information. Then the Benghazi committee could focus more on its original mission. But it's quite possible some of the truth about Benghazi is in the hidden emails of Hillary Clinton and her aides.
There should really be a special prosecutor for the inappropriate handling of government information. Then the Benghazi committee could focus more on its original mission. But it's quite possible some of the truth about Benghazi is in the hidden emails of Hillary Clinton and her aides.
6
Why isn't the House Oversight Committee looking into the e-mail server issue? That would be the appropriate committe.
The Trey Gowdy Committee on Benghazi claims to have turned up new insights not turned up by the many other Congressional Committees that have looked into that matter. What are the new insights? Is he going to share them with the taxpayers?
Is he going to make public the testimony of witnesses or just continue to drip selected tidbits out of context?
The Trey Gowdy Benghazi Committee not only has the appearance of a taxpayer funded political hit job but recent admissions by Rep. McCarthy show the reality.
Whether you like Sec. Clinton or not, this Committee is becoming what all of us should fear: the might of the federal government turned against an individual for political gain.
The Trey Gowdy Committee on Benghazi claims to have turned up new insights not turned up by the many other Congressional Committees that have looked into that matter. What are the new insights? Is he going to share them with the taxpayers?
Is he going to make public the testimony of witnesses or just continue to drip selected tidbits out of context?
The Trey Gowdy Benghazi Committee not only has the appearance of a taxpayer funded political hit job but recent admissions by Rep. McCarthy show the reality.
Whether you like Sec. Clinton or not, this Committee is becoming what all of us should fear: the might of the federal government turned against an individual for political gain.
5
They are wasting the time of the country and its money. Howdy Gowdy needs to be reigned in and the committee disbanded. It's a disgrace. Do some real work.
8
It is unfortunate that any Americans died at Benghazi, but in the scheme of things I think it is safe to say virtually no average American cares one iota about anything to do with Benghazi. Only Clinton-hating Republicans care about Benghazi and they only care about Benghazi because they hope it can be used to lessen Hillary Clinton's utter trouncing of them in the coming presidential election.
10
If what you say is true, what is unfortunate is that no average American cares about the death of a US ambassador and a pre-election obfuscation and coverup by the governing party of the circumstances of the terrorist attack (spontaneous attack brought on by cartoons????)/
1
As much as I respect Bradley Podliska for pulling back the curtain, I fear he had no idea what the future will bring. The GOP attack machine will ruin his life for speaking out. He needs to get smart counsellors around himself right now. It's coming.
8
Are NYT journalists unable to detect the political motives behind the Benghazi and E-mail "scandals"?
NYT learned nothing from Lewinsky and Whitewater?
NYT learned nothing from Lewinsky and Whitewater?
7
Use of the word "shifted" in this article to characterize the Republican's focus is questionable at best - - you have to actually have placed your weight on one foot to say that you shifted your weight to the other. The Republicans haven't put down so much as a shadow of a footprint in any actual investigation of the facts surrounding Benghazi - as did the other six or seven committees that have completed their work. That they have "shifted their focus".....? That's a very generous euphemism for "they have been focused like a laser on Hillary from the start."
7
The only question which the committee should be asking is whether the $4.5 million and 17 months they have spent has resulted in ANY improvement in the security of our Embassy personnel around the world.
If they can't show proof that their work will prevent future tragedies of this kind, then it's long past time they found something constructive to do with the people's money.
If they can't show proof that their work will prevent future tragedies of this kind, then it's long past time they found something constructive to do with the people's money.
11
Republicans have proven they can't govern, but boy can they conduct witch hunts!
I predict that should Hillary Clinton not get the Democratic nomination (and she should!), the Republican Email Inquisition will shutdown immediately so Gowdy (more painful than the gout) can launch a new all-out rowdy Republican never-ending inquisition into the Democratic nominee to raise questions of whether he/she is a secret undocumented immigrant Muslim communist socialist with membership in ISIS and likely a second cousin of Iran's supreme leader.
I predict that should Hillary Clinton not get the Democratic nomination (and she should!), the Republican Email Inquisition will shutdown immediately so Gowdy (more painful than the gout) can launch a new all-out rowdy Republican never-ending inquisition into the Democratic nominee to raise questions of whether he/she is a secret undocumented immigrant Muslim communist socialist with membership in ISIS and likely a second cousin of Iran's supreme leader.
7
How like the Times, especially of late, to facilitate "Hillary bashing" and spreading "Clinton doubt. "Shame on you for leaving the header focusing on "MISTAKE," when it goes on to say: "it had not endangered national security and had been “ginned-up” into a political attack by Republicans eager to keep her from being president."
5
I remember when the Congress was about the business of running the government and not about grabbing headlines designed to damage the opposition. If "lies" have been told by the present administration they were no more egregious than the interminable protests that the GOP is dragging out the witch hunt "for the good of the country" or that a private server is in any way connected with a terrorist attack in Libya. Meanwhile we just lost 500 jobs in upstate NY to France, a country with a functioning Ex-Im bank.
8
She was correct about the "vast right-wing conspiracy," then and now.
9
in the former case DNA evidence showed the accusations were true and any denials were false. Are you saying there is guilt in both cases but it is a vast conspiracy because it doesn't matter?
It matters to me. If there really are secondary backups then the Admin has the ability to expose the truth. If this Admin will not hopefully a future Sanders, Trump, or Carson admin will, I don't agree with Sanders socialism, but I also do not see him as dishonorable.
It matters to me. If there really are secondary backups then the Admin has the ability to expose the truth. If this Admin will not hopefully a future Sanders, Trump, or Carson admin will, I don't agree with Sanders socialism, but I also do not see him as dishonorable.
A another political hack job by the Fox News of the left, the NYT. Face it, if this was a democratic controlled committee it would be front page news and a (republican) Secretary of State would certainly have long ago dropped out of any race for political office. That's a fact, Jack.
4
There are no permanent party controlled congresses. The power to create committees, issue subpoenas, compel testimony and refer charges to prosecutors will eventually shift to the Democratic Party. With the precedent now firmly established by Republican malfeasance and shenanigans, we will likely see some revenge. It is sad that there were no men or women of conviction able to resist the siren call of political witch hunting.
4
Typical ploy. The minority drags their feet, State withholds documents and information under subpoena, then they all complain that the investigation is taking too long. The fact that new information has become available through FOIA actions shows that the committee is on the right track.
7
Since the panel chair revealed the entire purpose of the Benghazi Committee, this is just wasting the taxpayers' money and has the same utility as trying necrophilia. You can't get an orgasm out of a corpse.
4
I am an Independent voter and have probably voted 50/50 Dems vs Reps over the years. I’m pretty sure I qualify as part of the “American people”. I don’t know why, given all the military strength we have in the Mediterranean, we did such a poor job protecting our people (including our Ambassador). Why did these people have to wait 12 hours to get help? Why did these people have to die? That is what I want to know. Maybe someone out there knows. If you do, please let us know. If not, please don’t demean my right to know.
5
If you want to read answers about Benghazi, go over to the Washington Post and it's current and just past articles on this disaster and be sure to read the Comments.
there is nothing there, a other committee for what just to slow Hillary up... all these committee are doing is wasting the tax payers money... we will never get to the truth because GOP is focus of defeating the Clinton's and not finding the truth....
4
Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!
For years the Republican/Tea Party shouted it far and wide, calling it a Hillary lie.
Well, now we all know the truth: It's a concocted political Republican/Tea Party lie!
Just ask former Speaker-to-be and current House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
Another witch hunt reminiscent of disgraced Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy's communist conspiracy in the 1950s.
So this is how the Republican/Tea Party governs. What a joke and disgrace.
For years the Republican/Tea Party shouted it far and wide, calling it a Hillary lie.
Well, now we all know the truth: It's a concocted political Republican/Tea Party lie!
Just ask former Speaker-to-be and current House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
Another witch hunt reminiscent of disgraced Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy's communist conspiracy in the 1950s.
So this is how the Republican/Tea Party governs. What a joke and disgrace.
8
To put it bluntly, Mrs. Clinton's choice to use her own server was stupid and unprofessional. One can only think she did it to avoid having her email's archived daily on a government server that she did not have access to.
Beyond that, is an endless investigation meant only to tarnish her the best way to spend government money and time? I believe the investigation itself has become more corrupt than the act they are investigating. To put it bluntly, they are fishing.
When it comes to corruption we have much bigger problems that should be addressed such as a corruption in campaign finance, banking, healthcare, and insider trading. Of course, an investigation into any one of those areas might besmirch the reputation of many if not most of our representatives.
Beyond that, is an endless investigation meant only to tarnish her the best way to spend government money and time? I believe the investigation itself has become more corrupt than the act they are investigating. To put it bluntly, they are fishing.
When it comes to corruption we have much bigger problems that should be addressed such as a corruption in campaign finance, banking, healthcare, and insider trading. Of course, an investigation into any one of those areas might besmirch the reputation of many if not most of our representatives.
4
You must be extremely naive to think that the only possible reason HRC did that was "to have access". I think it is a lot more plausible that she did it to control what others would have access to since the Government emails belong to the people, not her.
1
I'm not a Clinton supporter (I strongly prefer Bernie Sanders), but it's pretty clear that this committee is Ken Starr's investigation all over again. That wasn't a serious inquiry, that was a search for something, anything, to go after Bill Clinton with and in the end all they found was lying about some extramarital hanky-panky in the White House (which many many presidents have engaged in before, and will continue to engage in in the future).
Hillary Clinton's "vast right-wing conspiracy" is not fictional.
Hillary Clinton's "vast right-wing conspiracy" is not fictional.
11
I find it amusing that the NYT screens out anti Hillary comments. This is a individual who has gone from one lie to another and just laughs it off as a great right wing conspiracy. Everything from being fired from the Watergate commission because of alleged unethical behavior, weaving and dodging sniper fire when she arrived in Kosovo, perpetuating a silly story that the Benghazi assault was a result of a spontaneous demonstration, setting up a private server and then pleading ignorance how a computer works. Of course the cool aid drinking Hillary fans will continue to support her.
7
Yes we will. Looking at what the republicans have on offer, any thinking person would vote for her. if you dig into the pasts of any of the republicans, there's dirt. Many of the people keeping the Monica Lewinski investigation going, , were themselves having extramarital affairs.
I for one just assume these investigations are occurring because somehow, the republicans have a jones for Ms. Clinton, and are scared of her. She, however, has stood the test of time.
I for one just assume these investigations are occurring because somehow, the republicans have a jones for Ms. Clinton, and are scared of her. She, however, has stood the test of time.
2
MF, why are you amused that the Times is censoring citizens who make unflattering comments about Hillary R. Clinton? You should immediately contact Trey Gowdy and apprise him of the high level intelligence that you have single handedly uncovered regarding these nefarious activities by a left wing medium that has always been a major supporter of the undeserving former SOS. You owe the patriots of this great country and the victims of Benghazi no less.
1
Bless Rep. McCarthy for giving credence to my conclusion that Benghazi was a ruse to harm SOS Clinton's run for POTUS. And, since there is no there, there this committee went to e-mails since no other committee had done so before giving them clear access to another witch hunt.
2
"Doing a Benghazi" will become a synonym for conducting a political witchhunt. Not that today's Republicans care. As George W. Bush stated when asked how he thought history would judge him (to paraphrase): "Who cares about that? We'll all be dead then."
6
The witch hunters involved with this public lynching should be held accountable for the expenses of these endless hearings and trials.
Americans tax payers should desist paying taxes, while republicans waste important time and resources.
Americans tax payers should desist paying taxes, while republicans waste important time and resources.
7
In 17 months of hunting for witches at taxpayer expense, these guys haven't even found a straw from a broom.
15
Dear Republicans, some advice. When you're in a hole, stop digging.
10
Odd that everyone in the entire US government missed that the e-mail address of Hillary Clinton's messages were from her personal domain during her entire tenure as Secretary of State. If this was such a bad thing, why didn't anyone point it out then?
8
It was a vast left wing conspiracy.
The American print press is absolutely pathetic. Where is the hard relevant information? It doesn't exist. It is the press that is largely responsible for holding the bogus Benghazi and the phony email non event alive. Where is the wrong doing, where is the earth shattering information, where is the crime? The press's collusion in these witch hunts is inexcusable. Put up or shut up.
5
Democrats share the blame for this farce. When the committee was formed, they knew and complained that it was a n obvious political tactic to smear Hillary and a blatant misuse of public funds. But then they said, but count us in; we want to play a role in the dog and pony show.
So it's a little lame now for all that woo-woo by Democrats over the panel.
So it's a little lame now for all that woo-woo by Democrats over the panel.
These numerous comments show how divided and how misinformed the public is on this issue. The committee is obviously not interested in why the embassy was not well-protected, how the events happened, how to improve security. Trey (Le Nez) Gowdy will continue to misguide the majority on the committee through November, 2016, wasting taxpayer dollars, and not likely changing a single vote in the election. Anyone really interested in this tragic event will ignore what the committee is doing. Anyone who loves to bash Hillary will feed on the rot.
7
Private server Emails? If they are going to spend Millions of Taxpayer dollars investing the Private Server Emails of the Secretary of State, then they should start with: Colin Powell & Condi Rice - who also both used their own private servers when they were SOS.
11
Neither Powell or Rice are running for President. It's a most profound difference. Unlike Clinton, they knew when to retire.
The willful hypocrisy of the GOP is reaching a frightening level. I hope that Mme. Clinton confronts their evil ways head on.
10
During one daylong session, Mr. Blumenthal was asked more than 160 questions about his relationship and communications with the Clinton family, according to a count by Democratic staff members based on an interview transcript. That included more than 50 questions about the Clinton Foundation and more than 45 questions related to David Brock, who runs a group that defends Mrs. Clinton against political attacks.
50 questions about the foundation,so what did that have to do with benghazi? they in fact cancelled all other interviews,except thsoe dealing with her emails.cause they had nothing new on anything else.
i will also point out a fact,starr was the SECOND special procecutor,the first cleared bill in 3 months,he was a republican as well. the right did not accept that and hired starr who went from investigation to investigation.including the fire of the travel team who served at the pleasure of the president,mesing he could fire them for ANY reason.he waisted 40m.
50 questions about the foundation,so what did that have to do with benghazi? they in fact cancelled all other interviews,except thsoe dealing with her emails.cause they had nothing new on anything else.
i will also point out a fact,starr was the SECOND special procecutor,the first cleared bill in 3 months,he was a republican as well. the right did not accept that and hired starr who went from investigation to investigation.including the fire of the travel team who served at the pleasure of the president,mesing he could fire them for ANY reason.he waisted 40m.
7
When your own Party is disintegrating, throw the spotlight ( or mud ) at the most likely winner of the race. Politics as usual in Washington!! No surprise there but it's on my dime. Yet I am helpless to stop this charade. I am seething and furious. So what? Grin and bear it, is the message I am getting.
5
Deja vu it is the whitewater investigation redux. The focus is anew and the playbook the same. The politicians start a journey with a goal and wander all over the world at tax payer cost.
What Can you achieve when you go hunting for a needle in haystack with a nuclear missile. It damages all including the people that triggered the firing of the missile.
What Can you achieve when you go hunting for a needle in haystack with a nuclear missile. It damages all including the people that triggered the firing of the missile.
8
Well, duh. Of course the committee's focus has "evolved" the same way Kenneth Starr's investigation "evolved" after he failed to find any evidence of wrongdoing in the ridiculous Whitewater non-scandal. He ruined people's lives and drove them to bankruptcy with his abusive investigations, hoping to find someone he could "flip" and force to give him incriminating information. But when there's no such information to give it's kinda hard to coerce witnesses into cooperation. Then he found out about Monica Lewinsky, and although he knew that a consensual relationship wasn't grounds for impeachment he hoped that at least it would be enough to blackmail Clinton into resigning. This is what the republican party does when an election doesn't go their way, or when they think it won't. And this is how the Times collaborates with them.
16
Talk about burying the lead... Halfway into the article, we read the real stunner:
"Senior Republican officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing confidential conversations, said that Mr. Boehner had long been suspicious of the administration’s handling of the attacks and that Mrs. Clinton’s emails gave him a way to keep the issue alive and to cause political problems for her campaign."
Wow, talk about an incriminating admission! Why wasn't this the headline and lead paragraph?
"Senior Republican officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing confidential conversations, said that Mr. Boehner had long been suspicious of the administration’s handling of the attacks and that Mrs. Clinton’s emails gave him a way to keep the issue alive and to cause political problems for her campaign."
Wow, talk about an incriminating admission! Why wasn't this the headline and lead paragraph?
14
The hearings have dragged on for one reason...the failure of the State Department and the administration to hand over evidence. The State Department said their were no responsive emails in its possession. Then we discover that's because she had her own server. Sorry it's a big cover up run by the administration, State Department, and Mrs. Clinton.
4
How do you know? If you do, you are the one holding up evidence.
1
Sounds like there needs to be a committee to investigate the committee.
8
I beg to differ with the reporters who wrote the sentence, "The New York Times show the extent to which the focus of the committee’s work has shifted from the circumstances surrounding the Benghazi attack to the politically charged issue of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state." The term politically charged gives to much respect to the investigative committee of the House.
The email server issue is not politically charged. It is a bogus witch hunt by the Hillary haters on the right. For the rest of the country, it is something else. It is a gigantic embarrassment., waste of public funds, and diversion from serious issues which face our nation.
The email server issue is not politically charged. It is a bogus witch hunt by the Hillary haters on the right. For the rest of the country, it is something else. It is a gigantic embarrassment., waste of public funds, and diversion from serious issues which face our nation.
9
Just like Watergate tripped on to the Nixon Tapes in its investigations - Benghazi has tripped on to the Clintonmail server. It was hubris that took Nixon down and its Hubris that will take Hillary down.
4
It was paranoia, not hubris, that tripped up Dick.
1
The investigation was legitimate when it started and still is. The fact that it is now focusing on Hillary Clinton’s e-mails and it was uncovered that she did something wrong with the way she set up her e-mail system that may have compromised national security is a byproduct of trying to get to the truth about what happened that caused our people to be murdered during a terrorist attack and what was told to the public that in hindsight appears to be a lie which may have been told to protect the President just before an election. As we know from the news outlets that actually report the facts and the truth, other than the NYT, it appears that there may be a cover-up at hand because of what was told to the public in the aftermath of the attack that is now known to be a lie. Remember Watergate? It was the cover-up that took down the President for a minor crime he had no knowledge of until after it happened. The reason the e-mails are important is because the people who know the truth aren’t cooperating and or are lying and other documents are needed to corroborate or disprove what they are saying happened and why. Those other documents are now Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, which are very hard to come by because she tried to destroy them and kept a private computer server outside the jurisdiction of the State Department while she was Secretary of State until recently refused to turn over her server. That is what happened and is happening whether you like it or not.
4
Take a breath! You are entitled to believe what you wish, but you may not skew the facts to make your argument. Republicans still have Watergate as their "watershed moment", and look to even the score. Remember, Powell and Rice also had private e-mail servers.
1
What is it about Republican apologists that makes them so prolix?
Is there a single shred of evidence about Benghazi here? A political witch hunt is obvious. Tens of thousands of emails have been turned over already, and there have been many investigations already.
1
The notion that Hillary Clinton did not care about the fate of her friend, Ambassador Chris Stevens is ludicrous. The notion that this committee was created to destroy a potential Democratic president is obvious.
9
How much time and money has the vast right wing conspiracy now spent investigating first President Clinton and now Hillary Clinton?
The Republican's deep seated fear and hatred of the Clintons is astounding.
The Republican's deep seated fear and hatred of the Clintons is astounding.
6
You can't make a commander in chief from someone who so readily disregards established protocol.
4
Craig: no 'established protocol' C. Rice and C. Powell BOTH USED PRIVATE EMAIL SERVERS. Brand this correctly for what it is: a witch hunt.
1
I don't know what they do in Canada, but we've made several right here in the good ol' US.
Desperation makes the evil GOP party look even more ugly than it already is. Clinton will win in a landslide against any small minded bum they put up for president.
7
If the State Department had turned over all of the materials that were requested by the initial committees looking into the incident in Benghazi, this special committee would not have been needed.
If Elijah Cummings would have been more an investigator vice a fly in the ointment and a bar to progress, this effort might have moved faster.
If Mrs. Clinton had cooperated with the committee and if each disclosure from both State and the Clinton campaign did not bring out further information that bears upon her tenure in office and specifically on Libya, then ...
But these "ifs" are in play for a reason. Mrs. Clinton is primarily responsible for this mess.
And, keeping in mind that President Obama says now that improper handling of Government e-mail materials is not a matter of national security when it is perpetrated by a Secretary of State, I might suggest that this committee, the FBI, and maybe even the DNC have further work ahead of them before the Clinton e-mail crisis and the Benghazi investigation can be brought to a close.
If Elijah Cummings would have been more an investigator vice a fly in the ointment and a bar to progress, this effort might have moved faster.
If Mrs. Clinton had cooperated with the committee and if each disclosure from both State and the Clinton campaign did not bring out further information that bears upon her tenure in office and specifically on Libya, then ...
But these "ifs" are in play for a reason. Mrs. Clinton is primarily responsible for this mess.
And, keeping in mind that President Obama says now that improper handling of Government e-mail materials is not a matter of national security when it is perpetrated by a Secretary of State, I might suggest that this committee, the FBI, and maybe even the DNC have further work ahead of them before the Clinton e-mail crisis and the Benghazi investigation can be brought to a close.
4
"Democrats and Republicans who remember the Watergate..." Hillary cut her teeth there, self-righteously. What goes round has not yet come around. The parallels between the Benghazi and the Watergate investigations should be fleshed out.
4
You compare Benghazi with Watergate? Starting an unnecessary invasion of Iraq for no reason killing 5,000 of our military and tens of thousands of others would be a better comparison. Or how about the attacks on The World Trade Centers months after the president received a memo that Al Qaeda would attack buildings through the air? Was there a contingency plan for that? I think you can find much better analogies than Benghazi.
1
The Republicans have been trying to destroy Hillary Clinton for 20 years now -- because it has always been so obvious that she is every thing the Republicans hate -- powerful female, highly intelligent, and committed to doing the most she can with her life.
They have done such a good job, that it is now iffy whether she can be elected or not.
But one thing is clear, none of the Republican candidates has much of a chance of winning.
I wonder if they will be happy if they get Bernie Sanders elected to the Presidency? Sounds to me like it would be their worst nightmare. Beware what you wish for, Republicans!
They have done such a good job, that it is now iffy whether she can be elected or not.
But one thing is clear, none of the Republican candidates has much of a chance of winning.
I wonder if they will be happy if they get Bernie Sanders elected to the Presidency? Sounds to me like it would be their worst nightmare. Beware what you wish for, Republicans!
12
Their primary concern is smearing Clinton, as she is a centrist and would be very difficult for any GOP candidate to beat. They consider Sanders to be easier to beat because of his further-left views, which can be used against him.
1
Shades of Whitewater. Republicans kept that investigation open for most of Bill Clinton's term. They threw everything into it, spent untold millions, and never came up with any wrong-doing.
10
Depends what "is" is.
1
Kudos for the Times for exposing this so called investigation for what it really is, a partisan witch hunt, a more appropriate Committee title would be "Whitewater II". The difference between the prior witch hunt is that last time the purpose was to obfuscate the then current president's economic accomplishments and substitute in the public's mind a president receiving oral sex in the white house so that the candidate from their party could have a fighting chance, at the expense of having no legislation past for later half of the then president's term of office, and millions of dollars. This time the witch hunt is designed to bury the obvious presidential candidate under a mountain of rumors and innuendo's of wrongdoing to the public for the period of a presidential campaign. Expect the partisan politicians to hide behind the shield of "classified information that cannot be disclosed to the public" and "matters of national security which cannot be disclosed". While this public spectacle is on show the business of running government is put aside, displaying these politicians skewed set of priorities. I hope the Times puts out a series labeled "Government Fraud, Waste, and Abuse", with this Committee as a starting point.
7
I've never voted Republican yet I feel the email server is an issue worthy of examination. Moreover, Hillary Clinton has lost my vote over it. To me it's about motive. My analogy is as follows: say you land a high level job at Google or Microsoft or Amazon and you show up on Day One telling the I.T. department that you decline to use their email system, the one used by all of your staff and employees. Instead, you prefer your own home-based email server. The idea of it is strange. So my question is: why the secrecy requested by Mrs. Clinton? To me the entire episode shows a high level of paranoia, one that I do not want to see in a president. My vote will go elsewhere.
3
The committee is investigating Benghazi, not Hillary.
Does anybody want to take a bet that the Benghazi committee will still be in business - and more active than ever - as the 2016 elections approach?
7
Whenever any criticism was leveled at George W. Bush when he was president, regardless of how justified, Republicans charged the critics with being disrespectful to the office and "enabling" the terrorists. Yet this respect for office evaporates when a Democrat is president. Their attacks and investigations on Bill Clinton couldn't prevent him from being elected president twice. Likewise the attacks and investigations into Barack Obama.
If they can't find any wrongdoing here, don't expect attacks and investigtions to end if she is the Democratic nominee or elected president. And it would be the same for any Democratic president.
Republicans claim to want both parties working for the good of the country when theirs is the party in power, but completely unwilling to return the favor when theirs is not.
If they can't find any wrongdoing here, don't expect attacks and investigtions to end if she is the Democratic nominee or elected president. And it would be the same for any Democratic president.
Republicans claim to want both parties working for the good of the country when theirs is the party in power, but completely unwilling to return the favor when theirs is not.
14
What a joke Republicans have become. All these witch hunt will make one thing for sure.
US of A is ready for a woman President, no it is not Carly Fioria the name is Hillary R. Clinton.
US of A is ready for a woman President, no it is not Carly Fioria the name is Hillary R. Clinton.
10
Trey Gowdy is, in words of one syllable, a total liar. It is beyond a travesty that the American taxpayers are picking up the tab for this cynical, politically partisan witch hunt. Enough already! We are sick of it.
7
Consistently using the passive voice to describe active Republican attacks against Secretary Clinton is nothing but an effort to obscure reality. Either declare your position or abandon it - but please stop trying to conceal it.
3
I'm not a fan of Ms. Clinton.
I think her use of the private server was idiotic, as was Bush's Iraq war, which Clinton supported and still supports either because:
a) She was stupid enough to believe Bush's campaign of lies,
b) She was a cynic who supported Bush for her future purposes, or
c) a) and b).
But it has to cheer Putin's Russia, Xi's China and ISIS that the U.S. Congress' main goal is to destroy the government of the U.S. and its commander-in-chief.
In the names of our enemies, I want to thank the G.O.P.
I think her use of the private server was idiotic, as was Bush's Iraq war, which Clinton supported and still supports either because:
a) She was stupid enough to believe Bush's campaign of lies,
b) She was a cynic who supported Bush for her future purposes, or
c) a) and b).
But it has to cheer Putin's Russia, Xi's China and ISIS that the U.S. Congress' main goal is to destroy the government of the U.S. and its commander-in-chief.
In the names of our enemies, I want to thank the G.O.P.
All this fuss over e-mails. If it's a crime, where are the victims? If anyone has been harmed by Clinton's e-mails, who are they? Do any of them have names? If so, what are they? The fact that the identities of any such individuals have not emerged after all this time tells me that there aren't any. Or as we say around here, there aint none. To try and link Clinton's e-mails to Benghazi is nothing more than a search for victims that don't exist. It's an embarrassment! It has become a committee in search of a reason to prolong a fruitless investigation, right up until election day.
5
These investigations will, I believe, backfire! Hillary Clinton will get sympathy. She will get sympathy votes, protest votes. Wait, you will see.
Hillary seems ALOOF. The letters can be rearranged as A FOOL. But the House investigation will, I think, show her vulnerability and she may actually get more votes, not less votes...
Hillary seems ALOOF. The letters can be rearranged as A FOOL. But the House investigation will, I think, show her vulnerability and she may actually get more votes, not less votes...
2
Unfortunately Clinton and the Dems bring a lot of this on themselves. Her use of a private email server was inexcusable. I don't think any of us want to hear lame excuses about her not understanding the technology. She was one of the most powerful members of the administration entrusted with national security. Did she use her own server while she was in the Senate? And why does Obama have to yet again get on 60 Minutes with Steve Croft and say she made a mistake but it wasn't a serious one? He did the same thing on 60 Minutes a few years ago again with Steve Croft and Hillary when he touted as the most traveled Secretary of State ever. Enough of the Democrats protecting the Clintons. I for one would like to see some fresh blood in the Democratic Party and not the same tired old response to the Clintons crooked view of entitlement.
6
Why is the use of a private server inexusable? I disagree.
1
And yet on 60 Minutes Obama characterized the questions raised by the Benghazi committee and others about classified information residing on Hillary's unsecured private email server as "legitimate". The FBI continues to investigate aggressively judging by the additional servers and related equipment it has seized over the last few weeks. Clearly, a comprehensive investigation is warranted in this case.
6
"staff members sometimes have to search through boxes to find critical pieces of paper — an almost comical task, staff members said."
This is why Clinton delivered paper emails instead of the electronic records - to slow them down and create this kind of confusion.
This is why Clinton delivered paper emails instead of the electronic records - to slow them down and create this kind of confusion.
1
LMJr...If your post is satire, you missed your point. The e-mails were redacted by the State Dept., not SOS Clinton.
1
I guess our government cannot afford to purchase a few scanners to convert documents into searchable digital text? As is done in major law firms every day?
My goodness, think about what we could do as a country if we used the funds allocated toward trying to overturn Obamacare and investigating Hillary in actually improving our infrastructure or educational system. Mind blowing waste of our Country's efforts. Then again the Republicans don't want to govern--all their efforts go toward stopping Democrats--and ensuring they are in power. Progress seems to be a dirty word for them.
16
Why don't they call this the "Permanent Sub-Committee on Investigations" and let it exist solely for the purpose of investigating anything and everything about the Obama Presidency. After Nov 2016, it could morph into investigating everything Bernie or Hillary. It could be a lifetime position for Gowdy Doody.
10
As McCarthy said, this was never about Benghazi, just a huge effort to damage Clinton. Republicans are never serious about governing, just using whatever power they have to tarnish other people. They have no ethics, no honor, no honesty but still get those evangelicals to vote for them.
13
I agree, and I think the repubs should reimburse the Treasury the 4 plus million they have used in this farce by using the millions they get from their wealthy donors.
1
Having an extra E-mail server seems a lot like a business having two sets of accounting books. Were I an IRS auditor, I would be very interested in the alternate set. What am I missing?
7
John- You win for the best analogy.
1
I have three sets of e-mail accounts for different reasons. Lots of people have multiple e-mail accounts. It is nothing like bookkeeping.
1
The part where we can prevent other Benghazis by focusing on the strategic facts on the ground instead of politics. When you find damaging evidence in this e-mail controversy, let us know.
2
The Times jumps in on cue to play its usual hack partisan role of summing up the talking points for Clinton fans to use in the coming weeks. But the truth about the blatant attempt to cover up responsibiliity for the Benghazi fiasco with a "video" lies hidden in Hillary's illegally housed and deleted email system. How long it is taking to find the truth is entirely a function of Clinton's elaborate efforts to conceal it.
3
How do you "know the truth"? And why aren't you sharing it?
1
Trey Gowdy is the one who should be impeached.
3
These people have no shame. The intent of this committee is crystal clear to the American public, and it is an embarrassment to governance. 4.5 million dollars could have supplied failing public schools with new computers, books for first graders, help for senior centers, repair a bridge, anything we as tax payers could see and understand. Instead, these lawmakers of questionable intent, squander the public's money while using their positions to attempt a take down of the woman who would be President. This is very sick.
6
The Republicans' only hope now is to somehow craft a question at the upcoming hearing to catch her in a "lie" under oath. It doesn't matter what it's about - who will win the Super Bowl - as long as it's something they can then charge her with. That's the Whitewater game. Hopefully, Hillary, unlike Bill, will be too smart to fall into their trap.
9
Clearly, Republicans in Congress don't get it or don't care what the American public thinks. The Clinton emails and Benghazi are in the past. They're no longer issues. The Tea Party touts and like-minded incompetents who go along with them need to move on and do the country's business.
6
How many seconds after she takes the oath of office as our first woman President, will the GOP call for a, "special prosecutor" to investigate her?
7
I find it telling that as 22 October approaches the earth is shaking and the swell of voices calling for a disbanding of the select committee grow ever louder. It is somewhat suspicious that Major Podliska suddenly felt compelled, after four months, to step forward to speak to the NYT and CNN, and to introduce charges that apparently never formed part of his grievance filings about his firing, which, according to the committee, was "for cause."
But even more irking seems to be the intimation that this whole thing should just evaporate because former secretary Clinton has taken responsibility. It is one thing to half-heartedly mutter the magic formula, it is another to truly take responsibility. She certainly did not resign office because of it.
I do believe that this committee was formed with a political nimbus surrounding it, Congress is a political body, and the facts they were seeking had a political undercurrent by necessity. They somehow stumbled into Mrs. Clinton's email subterfuge. Did this set up have anything to do with Benghazi, only to the extent that there were email communications on it. But to suggest that the committee, duly formed, has no legitimacy is no more true today than it was when it was formed, but the drumbeat of close it down seems clearly related to the calendar.
But even more irking seems to be the intimation that this whole thing should just evaporate because former secretary Clinton has taken responsibility. It is one thing to half-heartedly mutter the magic formula, it is another to truly take responsibility. She certainly did not resign office because of it.
I do believe that this committee was formed with a political nimbus surrounding it, Congress is a political body, and the facts they were seeking had a political undercurrent by necessity. They somehow stumbled into Mrs. Clinton's email subterfuge. Did this set up have anything to do with Benghazi, only to the extent that there were email communications on it. But to suggest that the committee, duly formed, has no legitimacy is no more true today than it was when it was formed, but the drumbeat of close it down seems clearly related to the calendar.
1
Times should be ashamed of itself. Why the Times persists in being part of this political hit job against HRC is the more important story.
2
If the committee wants to look the "entire elephant," the best place to do it is the GOP elephant. Self-examination might do them some good.
5
What some of these comments show, through their bizarre combo of semi-literacy, conspiracy theory, gullibility, and certainty that Clinton must be guilty of SOMETHING, is why this goofy committee can't ever get done.
In essence, the GOP has too many far-right loons who simply won't take, "Nope," for an answer, no matter what.
Grownups would simply go after the Secretary's real record, policies, and politics: this lot won't, or can't.
In essence, the GOP has too many far-right loons who simply won't take, "Nope," for an answer, no matter what.
Grownups would simply go after the Secretary's real record, policies, and politics: this lot won't, or can't.
5
lets begin by saying there was NO law that prohibited her from having a private email server,just like no law that allowed trump to declare bankruptcy 4 times.powell also had a private email server.other people like jeb bush USED private emails to bypass gvt email laws. she sent all her emails to the state dept as required.so there is NOTHING to investigate as far as the emails.this is jsut like the other nonsense of the right.like the IRS. which by LAW is required to investigate non profits to see if they qualify. by law that CONGRESS passed.
they have had 7 house and i think 6 senate investigations and NOTHING was found. they can look at the whole elephant,which is why they cancelled all BUT the emails.but all of this will come out in court anyways.as he is being sued.so he can PROVE to a court it was abou tfinding the 'truth' that they have found 7 times.
they have had 7 house and i think 6 senate investigations and NOTHING was found. they can look at the whole elephant,which is why they cancelled all BUT the emails.but all of this will come out in court anyways.as he is being sued.so he can PROVE to a court it was abou tfinding the 'truth' that they have found 7 times.
4
The Gowdy Doody show...
5
Very simple question. If this investigation is nothing more than a partison witch hunt by evil republicans, then why is the FBI involved?
Easy answer, the FBI in investigating Clinton and her staff because there is probable cause that crimes occurred.
All of the MSNBC, Mother Jones, Huffingtpn Post, Daily Koz and Democrat Party talking points can not change this fact.
Easy answer, the FBI in investigating Clinton and her staff because there is probable cause that crimes occurred.
All of the MSNBC, Mother Jones, Huffingtpn Post, Daily Koz and Democrat Party talking points can not change this fact.
5
What was that comment by Ms. Clinton in the early '90's that got her laughed out of the room about a "vast right-wing conspiracy"? It seems to be the elephant in the room that is currently running our country. Into the ground.
9
Yes. At the time I, a lifelong democrat, thought she sounded a little paranoid. Now I understand that she was right.
1
To any and all who believe all the facts are known about this I have to say you are wrong.
1. Where were our aircraft carriers when this happened? Especially the USS Enterprise which had already been relieved and was free to do whatever was asked of her.
2. Why were several military officials penalized right after the attacks that many say they were ordered to "stand down" but no proof has popped up either way.
I'll stop with those two. Now ask yourself, " Is it just possible that there was communication between the military and the state department?" Does it seem politically motivated or illogical to want to check the communications of the time to find out? One of the first things the committee did was ask to see the communications. It took over a year to pry them lose only to find there were none from or to the secretary! Does that seem odd to you? Well it did to the committee and that is what led to where we are today. They are stonewalling on releasing the true and actual story of what happened. It is not the committee's fault they have not released all the communications and it is not a witch hunt to not give up on getting the whole story. The media should be asking the same questions... Ask yourself, "Why are they not asking?"
1. Where were our aircraft carriers when this happened? Especially the USS Enterprise which had already been relieved and was free to do whatever was asked of her.
2. Why were several military officials penalized right after the attacks that many say they were ordered to "stand down" but no proof has popped up either way.
I'll stop with those two. Now ask yourself, " Is it just possible that there was communication between the military and the state department?" Does it seem politically motivated or illogical to want to check the communications of the time to find out? One of the first things the committee did was ask to see the communications. It took over a year to pry them lose only to find there were none from or to the secretary! Does that seem odd to you? Well it did to the committee and that is what led to where we are today. They are stonewalling on releasing the true and actual story of what happened. It is not the committee's fault they have not released all the communications and it is not a witch hunt to not give up on getting the whole story. The media should be asking the same questions... Ask yourself, "Why are they not asking?"
2
The 1500 emails refereed herein are specifically emails Sidney blumenthal sent to sec. Clinton, which will be released by the committee tomorrow and will purportedly show two things: 1) nearly half of clintons Libyan correspondences were with this informal adviser who had been banned from the state dept by the Obama admin and 2) blumenthal had several financial interests in Libya, which were convenient benefactors of the Clinton crafted Libyan foreign policy. That same policy which inadvertently resulted in the death of four Americans. There are a lot of unresolved questions that this committee is diligently looking into and if it were not for the consistent stonewalling by the state dept and the serial misreporting by the most prominent news outlets, we might actually have these answers already. Until then, your readers will have to turn towards the comments sections to get real updates
4
I would like to hear answers to this as well.
Until that happens, can you please direct us to Blumenthal's financial interests in Libya so we can understand this issue better?
Sort of an aside: What puzzles me and I don't hear any discussion of this as well- is why Congress voted down increasing investment in the Libyan embassy and surrounds to better protect them from attack. Any insight into this, anyone?
Until that happens, can you please direct us to Blumenthal's financial interests in Libya so we can understand this issue better?
Sort of an aside: What puzzles me and I don't hear any discussion of this as well- is why Congress voted down increasing investment in the Libyan embassy and surrounds to better protect them from attack. Any insight into this, anyone?
" blumenthal had several financial interests in Libya, which were convenient benefactors of the Clinton crafted Libyan foreign policy. That same policy which inadvertently resulted in the death of four Americans."
You need to back that up. Clinton "crafted" foreign policy which led to Benghazi? If I say your Mom sells pot to school kids, do you then get angry at your Mom?
You need to back that up. Clinton "crafted" foreign policy which led to Benghazi? If I say your Mom sells pot to school kids, do you then get angry at your Mom?
1
https://benghazi.house.gov/news/press-releases/benghazi-committee-inform...
You can read the full letter, as well, (found at bottom) which delves into more information about Blumenthal's role and motivation. I am sure the emails will back me up just fine. This was released Friday night and is the press release that this article seems most related to.
You can read the full letter, as well, (found at bottom) which delves into more information about Blumenthal's role and motivation. I am sure the emails will back me up just fine. This was released Friday night and is the press release that this article seems most related to.
Republicans using tax dollars for their partisan agenda is not new. Until Franklin Roosevelt died, Congressional Republicans kept on investigating the attack on Pearl Harbor, looking for a way to blame it on FDR. Like today's Republicans, those 1940s Republicans used tax payer's money to help the Republican Party. Does anyone actually believe the $75 million tax-payer dollar investigation of President Clinton's Whitewater was justified?
3
It is of course true that the Republicans are indulging themselves in a witch hunt with our money.
But it is also true that during Hillary*s tenure as Secretary of State, disastrous foreign policy decisions were taken and implemented that, astoundingly, made all the Bush foreign policy decisions exponentially worse.
And why are any of these emails important? The ones turned over by Sidney Blumenthal show the Democratic continuation of Republican opportunism and the lust to make big bucks out of the misery of peoples whose governments we toppled with nothing to fill the vacuum but fundamentalists with a knack for getting their hands on the armaments we brought in.
Those of us who voted for Obama--twice--did not expect to get Bush Light for our trust and optimism.
But to vote for Hillary is to vote with eyes open for continued wars in the Middle East. Not everyone in Congress was fooled by the WMD charade. Hillary was; why doesn't that disqualify her to be the leader we need more desperately than ever?
But it is also true that during Hillary*s tenure as Secretary of State, disastrous foreign policy decisions were taken and implemented that, astoundingly, made all the Bush foreign policy decisions exponentially worse.
And why are any of these emails important? The ones turned over by Sidney Blumenthal show the Democratic continuation of Republican opportunism and the lust to make big bucks out of the misery of peoples whose governments we toppled with nothing to fill the vacuum but fundamentalists with a knack for getting their hands on the armaments we brought in.
Those of us who voted for Obama--twice--did not expect to get Bush Light for our trust and optimism.
But to vote for Hillary is to vote with eyes open for continued wars in the Middle East. Not everyone in Congress was fooled by the WMD charade. Hillary was; why doesn't that disqualify her to be the leader we need more desperately than ever?
5
May I suggest the GOP Congress culminate the Benghazi#8 hearings on Halloween.They can get out their witch hats and wardrobes, and they can be served with ethics violations for the misuse of tax payer funds on a political vendetta.
This Congress has not been a treat for the American people to endure. The Freedom Caucus can put away their American flag lapel pins and just wear T-shirts with the motto..My Way at any Cost.
This Congress has not been a treat for the American people to endure. The Freedom Caucus can put away their American flag lapel pins and just wear T-shirts with the motto..My Way at any Cost.
9
The motives of a congressional committee are political. News at 11!
Hillary Clinton's problem is not that the Benghazi Select Committee is coming for her. The Dem Congress had several committees who went after Bush and his team. Rather, Clinton's problem is that the GOP and the Democrat press have hard evidence she committed hundreds of misdemeanor crimes illegally keeping classified information in her hacked home server and dozens of felony crimes illegally providing this information to people who were not cleared to have it.
Hillary Clinton's problem is not that the Benghazi Select Committee is coming for her. The Dem Congress had several committees who went after Bush and his team. Rather, Clinton's problem is that the GOP and the Democrat press have hard evidence she committed hundreds of misdemeanor crimes illegally keeping classified information in her hacked home server and dozens of felony crimes illegally providing this information to people who were not cleared to have it.
2
After multiple investigations not one shred of hard evidence has been discovered. Bart, lets see you provide just two links to non-partisan websites showing this hard evidence that you say supposedly exists.
We're waiting....
We're waiting....
2
"That leaves now only the e-mails". And does anyone really believe that the e-mails isn't also a Republican / Fox News political ploy? Reagan illegally sold weapons to Iran during a time Iran was officially embargoed by the US, then he used the money to also illegally finance the Contras in Nicaragua. At the same time, the CIA under Reagan illegally imported cocaine from Colombia and dumped it on mostly black neighborhoods fueling the crack epidemic of the 1980s. Then they brought out fall guy Olive North, conviceted him and six others of the felonies committed, Reagan supposedly did not know anything about it, except he was the one who was most interested in helping the Contras in Nicaragua. Then when George HW Bush became president immediately after Reagan, Oliver North and the other persons convicted in the Iran-Contra SCANDAL where immediately pardoned. The Democrats really have a lot to learn on how to handle "scandals", because if Reagan can get away with all that like a Teflon coated dapper don, then the e-mails and Bengahzi seem like a pimple on someone's butt, in comparison to Iran-Contra.
5
The Reagan administration had more serious scandals, involving felonies in direct violation of Federal Law that any other administration in the history of the US. Yet, he is idolized by the Republicans as a "great president". If you were born after the Reagan era, then please read what factually went on under Reagan, and make up your own mind about the true nature of the modern-day Republican party which apparently longs for a return to the Reagan era (God helps us!):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_administration_scandals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_administration_scandals
1
Most businesses have an email archive policy. It's just good business practice. If Hillary was working for the State Dept. and used the State Dept mail server, her mail would have been archived and therefore could not have been deleted and we would have all the documentation required by the Benghazi committee. The fact that she didn't use the State Dept server makes her renegade and brings into question what she was hoping to hide.
We don't even know if the mail server she was using was sufficiently protected against intrusion and hackers which would compromise the security of classified information.
Apologies mean nothing because we simply cannot understand why you had to have a private account used for Secretary of State business. We don't get it! Nobody sets up his own private mail server without a reason.
If it was a mistake, it was a big one. Not an oversight, but a deliberate act which must have had a purpose. The American public would like to know what that purpose was. And if it was a mistake, why would we want a candidate who makes such big mistakes?
We don't even know if the mail server she was using was sufficiently protected against intrusion and hackers which would compromise the security of classified information.
Apologies mean nothing because we simply cannot understand why you had to have a private account used for Secretary of State business. We don't get it! Nobody sets up his own private mail server without a reason.
If it was a mistake, it was a big one. Not an oversight, but a deliberate act which must have had a purpose. The American public would like to know what that purpose was. And if it was a mistake, why would we want a candidate who makes such big mistakes?
6
One oversight is that once the State Department started to use email it did not implement a policy requiring the use of the State Department email system. That policy was not in place until after John Kerry became the Secretary of State. The mere fact that Hillary Clinton used private email instead of government email, as did her immediate predecessors , was not a violation of policy.
3
If you work for a corporation, you use the corporation's email for any business you conduct for them. Similarly, it should follow that if you work for a government office, you use that office's email system. If it was not official State Dept. policy, that does not make it right. If Hillary's predecessors made the same mistake, it does not absolve her of similar poor judgment.
3
So if Benghazi is the most horrific breech of national security since 911, why aren't Republicans calling for Obama's impeachment? The buck stops with the president, after all.
My guess is that impeachment hearings would be broadcast on every network and cable TV station like OJ. They know these hearings are a farce, and they don't want them broadcast on EVERY major news channel 24/7. Even CSPAN's dry, straight news coverage is not doing the GOP any favors. Benghazi has become a hashtag punchline.
The Republicans are refusing to go after President Obama on this because they know it will cost them politically, just like it did Romney. The longer this Benghazi nonsense goes on, the worse the GOP losses in 2016. Benghazi was a loser in 2012. It will be more of a loser in Nov 2016.
My guess is that impeachment hearings would be broadcast on every network and cable TV station like OJ. They know these hearings are a farce, and they don't want them broadcast on EVERY major news channel 24/7. Even CSPAN's dry, straight news coverage is not doing the GOP any favors. Benghazi has become a hashtag punchline.
The Republicans are refusing to go after President Obama on this because they know it will cost them politically, just like it did Romney. The longer this Benghazi nonsense goes on, the worse the GOP losses in 2016. Benghazi was a loser in 2012. It will be more of a loser in Nov 2016.
8
The perfect metaphor for the GOP inadequacies: this committee!
Hillary and the Democrats must, by now, take comfort in the embodiment of schoolyard bullies which have become the trademark of the Republican Party.
Hillary and the Democrats must, by now, take comfort in the embodiment of schoolyard bullies which have become the trademark of the Republican Party.
7
"...We’re going to go wherever the facts take us.”
To be relevant and believable: First you need facts. Then you need integrity. Then you need objectivity.
This committee has few of the first requirement, and none of the 2nd and 3rd.
It is a perfect reflection of our Congress today. I thinks its time for a change.
To be relevant and believable: First you need facts. Then you need integrity. Then you need objectivity.
This committee has few of the first requirement, and none of the 2nd and 3rd.
It is a perfect reflection of our Congress today. I thinks its time for a change.
11
Wait, so are you telling me the Republicans and the Press have overtly politicized an issue in order to derail or otherwise publicly harm the names or reputations of one -- or both! -- of the Clintons?
I don't think this has ever happened before! (sarcasm alert)
I don't think this has ever happened before! (sarcasm alert)
7
Let's just ignore the truth shall we? That's not the trampled body of Kevin McCarthy in the cloakroom sir, you are mistaken. There is serious business here afoot. Is it true that the President ordered a cafe latte the day that Benghazi occurred? That's very relevant, my constituents consider $5.00 lattes offensive in face of their daily hardships and depredations. What? It has everything to do with Clinton's server. She said she had had a latte on occasion as well. Also, we have information that there were guns smuggled into the Middle East, in fact, there were guns present, for a fact, in the nation of Libya. Yes, I know that our previous four committees have already looked at that and found nothing. Don't you think that very lack of evidence, like no messages from Hillary Clinton, that indicates a smoking gun has been deleted? A smoking gun to what you ask? Ah! That's the whole point. No, of course we're opposed to gun control in the United States. There have been enough tragic killings already without making it worse with gun control. I don't care if you believe we're not thinking clearly sir. We're here for a very specific purpose and we're not going to leave until we've accomplished it. When we started our work no one even knew how to say 'Benghazi' now every American knows the word and the phrase, ''What about Benghazi?'' Yes I am aware only four Americans died there and 33,000 a year die from gun related deaths. That's not relevant. Benghazi!
15
So (at least) two things can be (and are) true:
1. The GOP will do anything to trash Hillary.
2. Hillary massively messed up with her privatization of State Department email and her defensive, controlling reaction to the publicity aroudn that massive mess-up.
1. The GOP will do anything to trash Hillary.
2. Hillary massively messed up with her privatization of State Department email and her defensive, controlling reaction to the publicity aroudn that massive mess-up.
10
This is such a joke. There is not even a figment of impartiality let alone reason for these hearings. Four people died in a terrorist attack in Libya, precipitated in large part by the ambassador who refused to take more seriously security concerns. We haven't had as much investigation of Iraq, where 100,000 citizens have died, 4000 US soldiers and an unknown number of American citizens. The crazy wing of the crazy party goes to the head of the class!
7
Nice Guy Arizona opined verbatim that 'the shift in focus is understandable. Before, the committee focused on the attacks. Now, they are focusing on the cover up'.
One has to agree with him, they are now desperately focusing on the cover up about the real reason this committee came to exist in the first place.
One has to agree with him, they are now desperately focusing on the cover up about the real reason this committee came to exist in the first place.
6
Is there no end to this stupidity? It's strictly partisan behavior benefiting no one.
6
President Obama is on record last night (60 Minutes) saying that Clinton's email set up only rises to the level of a "mistake" and that its a "ginned up" controversy by republicans because Clinton is runing for president AND that at no time did Clinton's emails put our country at a security risk. The president gets the last word. Time for the media to stop shilling for the republicans and time for this non scandal to go away.
17
This is as close to character assassination as you can get. If they truly want to rectify the past by getting to the truth, why not examine what George Bush and Dick Cheney did to start the Iraq War. That Administration, specifically the Neocons, were angling to "get out from beneath Saudi Oil" by getting their hands on the treasure that lay beneath Iraq. The result and what needs to be disclosed is how they got us into the debacle that has taken, disrupted, or destroyed millions of lives throughout the world.
At home here in the United States we now have members of the military who will spend the rest of their lives in hospitals: quadriplegics, those with half their brains missing, many comatose, and then there are the tens of thousands who are paraplegics with arms and or legs missing and who knows how many unable to cope with living amongst us ever again as everyday ordinary men and women because of their PTSD. Many have already committed suicide with more to come.
And To put a dollar amount on this debacle of a war it has been estimated it will ultimately cost over three trillion dollars. And pathetically, all the while these Republicans will brow beat, over and over again, anyone they can in the Democratic Party they can find to steer attention away from the misdeeds of their own.
At home here in the United States we now have members of the military who will spend the rest of their lives in hospitals: quadriplegics, those with half their brains missing, many comatose, and then there are the tens of thousands who are paraplegics with arms and or legs missing and who knows how many unable to cope with living amongst us ever again as everyday ordinary men and women because of their PTSD. Many have already committed suicide with more to come.
And To put a dollar amount on this debacle of a war it has been estimated it will ultimately cost over three trillion dollars. And pathetically, all the while these Republicans will brow beat, over and over again, anyone they can in the Democratic Party they can find to steer attention away from the misdeeds of their own.
8
Until the United States is a third world country, depleted of its money, its resources, and its middle class. The Republicans, some hood-winked and some doing the hood-winking are lost and powerless. They will be ruled by a smaller and smaller group of oligarchs who subvert the power of the government for their own enrichment. Where's the mystery behind these hollow and ignorant men investigating Benghazi? I find none.
1
Even the headline for the article shows what's wrong with journalism today...the scandal is not and has never been Mrs. Clinton. The scandal is the "Bengahziemailgate" committee's egregious abuse of taxpayer time and money.
"Wasting taxpayer dollars on Wine Wednesdays" would be a more accurate headline.
"Wasting taxpayer dollars on Wine Wednesdays" would be a more accurate headline.
9
How about Whitewater, are they going to delve into that when they can't find anything else to get their claws into?
4
Obama lied about Benghazi, and then ordered Hillary to lie as well to cover up what actually happened.
3
I find it puzzling that the NYT has not revealed one tasty morsel in the 500 emails between Hillary and Sid Blumenthal that the State Dept. just handed over to Gowdy's Benghazi committee. Seems good old Sid revealed the name of an undercover CIA operative in Libya. Then, Lordy be, 'silly me' Hillary forwarded that email on her unsecured server. That is undeniably, flat out, a serious felony committed by Hillary and all involved, as the NYT readers learned during the 50-some daily front page screaming headlines the Times blasted about Republicans 'outing' desk jockey, Washington social butterfly Valerie Plame as a CIA worker. Laughably, the same NYT, dim witted readers, and corrupt Dems can't even muster more than stone cold silence, or comic, foam mouthed raving about the Gowdy committee. We remember all you leftists screaming for authorities to frog march Rove and Cheney? For outing a CIA agent? Rove and Cheney didn't. But Hillary and Sid did. Waiting for the NYT headline...Still waiting. Anybody awake at the Times.
4
The smoke had not yet cleared from our Benghazi consulate and we had not yet learned the names and number of the dead when Mitt Romney politicized the attack in an attempt to revive his doomed presidential bid. It has been politicized by Republicans continuously since that day, and it will continue to be politicized until the first Wednesday in November 2016 (if not 2020). And this is only the latest manifestation of Republican abuse of investigatory power. The Special Prosecutor law, adopted as a reform following the Watergate scandal, had to be abandoned after Republicans appointed Ken Star to lead an eight year inquisition of President Bill Clinton. That witch hunt began with White Water and ended up prying into the president’s sexual trysts. Will we now have to curtail the power of Congress because of continued irresponsibility on the part of the Republican Party? It is not a coincidence that every single member of the Republican Caucus sought to be appointed to this committee. They did so because it was designed to be a political witch hunt and a prosecution. Nor is it a coincidence (or news even) that the committee has transformed into a far reaching investigation of the leading Democratic presidential candidate. That was its purpose from the very beginning.
7
If only this despicable Republican Congress would limit its anti-America agenda to the refusal to engage in positive actions, instead of its continual engagement in negative actions for cheap political gain - at great cost to the country.
This Republican Congress is, in fact, less than zero.
This Republican Congress is, in fact, less than zero.
5
The Committee ... arrogant, worthless "repubs" will fail in their obscene efforts ....
congratulations, Madam President Hillary ! ! !
congratulations, Madam President Hillary ! ! !
4
If someone walked into the 7-11 and robbed it for $60, they are going to jail. If Republicans spend MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS on NINE investigations aiming to defame their democratic opponent in the next election, nobody is indicted and no one goes to jail. In America, you just have to know WHO you're going to steal from to get away with it.
9
The GOP is becoming the party of Toddlers. We will throw tantrums, refuse to cooperate, do things that have no meaning, waste time and money until we get our way. Wahwahwah.
5
This article is trying to keep a non-issue alive and to blow it up into a paper selling controversy. Its sickening. Hillary's use of a private server violated no law or State Department policy. No secure documents were lost or hacked.
This attempt is consistent to the Times other attacks on Hillary. It helps my favorite Bernie Sanders but its unfair and a lie.
How can I believe anything the Times prints?
I cancelled my NYT subscription but they gave me an extra 90 days for $0.99 in an attempt to get me to change my mind.
This attempt is consistent to the Times other attacks on Hillary. It helps my favorite Bernie Sanders but its unfair and a lie.
How can I believe anything the Times prints?
I cancelled my NYT subscription but they gave me an extra 90 days for $0.99 in an attempt to get me to change my mind.
5
You do realize the thrust of the article is to ask why an email server is the topic of the Benghazi committee, rather than the attack itself. It's building on McCarthy's admission of the political nature of this committee, and demonstrating more evidence that this is so. You really see this as an attack on Hillary?
Yes--one has to wonder---who BENEFITS when the New York Times has an unrelenting agenda to destroy the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? It is quite obvious that like Fox "News" and other outlets this has gotten to the point of rabid one sided witch hunt.
Even AFTER the admission that the Benghazi Commitees were set up TO WITCH HUNT AND DESTROY her; the Times goes right along instead of doing their JOBS and actually investigating and reporting on what ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
Even AFTER the admission that the Benghazi Commitees were set up TO WITCH HUNT AND DESTROY her; the Times goes right along instead of doing their JOBS and actually investigating and reporting on what ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
There is that Saying "It's not the crime, its the cover up". I believe it was the cover-up that took Nixon down in the Watergate investigation. An undisclosed E-Mail server sounds like part of a cover-up to me. Had it been disclosed at the start of the investigation, perhaps we would be past it, and maybe Benghazi now.
I am still curious about some aspects. Particularly: Why was Chris Steven's there right before the attack? What's the real deal with Gen. Ham and Adm. Gaouette? ( http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-868910 )
My impression is that there is a lot they we still do not know because information is not forthcoming like the existence of the server and out of necessarily take a long time.
I can wait even if the investigation continues into the next Administration. I suspect, a President Trump or Carson could grease the wheels here.
I am still curious about some aspects. Particularly: Why was Chris Steven's there right before the attack? What's the real deal with Gen. Ham and Adm. Gaouette? ( http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-868910 )
My impression is that there is a lot they we still do not know because information is not forthcoming like the existence of the server and out of necessarily take a long time.
I can wait even if the investigation continues into the next Administration. I suspect, a President Trump or Carson could grease the wheels here.
3
I am no Hillary fan, but her dignity and perseverance in the face of this witch hunt and smear campaign is making me see her in a different light: A heroine.
15
Oh this will never end if HRC or any democrat is elected POTUS. The Rs spent much more taxpayer money investigating Monica and Bill. The purpose was to damage the effectiveness of Pres. Bill Clinton. The right-wing would rather destroy America rather than see liberal elected leaders implement liberal values.
10
The brazeness and broad success of the GOP manipulation of elections and laws that run counter to the public will......like Citizen United, the closing down of Planned Parenthood, the bank bailouts and lack of prosecution for financial crimes, war profiteering and the blocking of the development of renewable energy in favor of fracking etc. is appalling. And meanwhile Federal subsidies for Big Oil and Agriculture continiue while those to higher education totally reverse their course.........this is the legacy of a very succesful coup of sorts by the Ruling Classes. It's appalling that there isn't more speculation about the role played by the assassinations of the MLK and Kennedy's, which is what really got the ball rolling for them. And the unquestioning compliance of the Media on top of it all makes you wonder.
10
The GOP, to its eternal shame, chose to capitalize on the tragic deaths of four Americans in Benghazi in an attempt to fabricate a "scandal
that did not exist, the only apparent "logic" being that the four Americans would stile alive if only Susan Rice had said the right things the next day.
Dishonest and blatantly partisan from the start, without a scintilla of evidence of any wrongdoing, now morphed into an anti-Hillary campaign committee, again without a hint of scandal other than a dumb decision to use a private email server.
If the GOP would spend a fraction of the time they spend trying to fabricate scandals on actual policies that might actually benefit Americans, maybe they could accomplish something worthwhile.
that did not exist, the only apparent "logic" being that the four Americans would stile alive if only Susan Rice had said the right things the next day.
Dishonest and blatantly partisan from the start, without a scintilla of evidence of any wrongdoing, now morphed into an anti-Hillary campaign committee, again without a hint of scandal other than a dumb decision to use a private email server.
If the GOP would spend a fraction of the time they spend trying to fabricate scandals on actual policies that might actually benefit Americans, maybe they could accomplish something worthwhile.
2
An independent counsel is needed to investigate the Benghazi panel.
1
This Benghazi investigation should never have been necessary. The Framers of our Constitution, gave special protected powers to the Press--so they would be free to perform an essential role in our system of government--the role of watchdog over our elected officials.
The special congressional investigation would never have been necessary--had the media done its job. But since the press has remained incurious in its typical partisan fashion, whenever Liberals are in the crosshairs, there needed to be some way of bringing accountability.
When U.S. soldiers mistreated Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib, over 100 stories appeared on the front pages of the NY Times. After all, George Bush's conduct of the war was being questioned--perhaps rightly so. But let IRS officials target Conservative non-profits, or let Obama officials plead the 5th, or let government agencies defy court orders to produce FOIA documents--or let government official lie to congress??-- crickets are heard from our media friends. And when a few outlets attempt to honor the role granted by our Framers--the mainstream media cries bias.
We need to realize: as the Press in this country becomes lapdogs--instead of watchdogs, the party in the media's favor feels it is free to break the law with impunity. When that happens, other entities, such as congressional committees feel the need to step in an fill the void. We need more media vigilance. Does anyone remember Watergate--Woodward & Bernstein?
The special congressional investigation would never have been necessary--had the media done its job. But since the press has remained incurious in its typical partisan fashion, whenever Liberals are in the crosshairs, there needed to be some way of bringing accountability.
When U.S. soldiers mistreated Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib, over 100 stories appeared on the front pages of the NY Times. After all, George Bush's conduct of the war was being questioned--perhaps rightly so. But let IRS officials target Conservative non-profits, or let Obama officials plead the 5th, or let government agencies defy court orders to produce FOIA documents--or let government official lie to congress??-- crickets are heard from our media friends. And when a few outlets attempt to honor the role granted by our Framers--the mainstream media cries bias.
We need to realize: as the Press in this country becomes lapdogs--instead of watchdogs, the party in the media's favor feels it is free to break the law with impunity. When that happens, other entities, such as congressional committees feel the need to step in an fill the void. We need more media vigilance. Does anyone remember Watergate--Woodward & Bernstein?
2
It looks like we might be planning on forming an investigative committee to investigate the Benghazi investigative committee.
The Benghazi events should be put to bed once and for all. The e-mail situation with Clinton should not. For anyone who has worked for a large employer, you tell me whether there were specific protocols and security measures required by your employer to insure personal e-mails were not used for much of the company's business. I know that was the case in my business. I couldn't even send an attachment to my personal home e-mail without the firewall interfering.
So do I believe Clinton's sole motivation was the ease of using "one device"? Absolutely not. The Clintons are very calculating. She knew this was a risk but she decided she wanted to control the information and the paper trail. She made a bad bet and in typical Clinton fashion has tried to brush it aside as partisan criticism.
The Benghazi events should be put to bed once and for all. The e-mail situation with Clinton should not. For anyone who has worked for a large employer, you tell me whether there were specific protocols and security measures required by your employer to insure personal e-mails were not used for much of the company's business. I know that was the case in my business. I couldn't even send an attachment to my personal home e-mail without the firewall interfering.
So do I believe Clinton's sole motivation was the ease of using "one device"? Absolutely not. The Clintons are very calculating. She knew this was a risk but she decided she wanted to control the information and the paper trail. She made a bad bet and in typical Clinton fashion has tried to brush it aside as partisan criticism.
3
There's a reason why the word "Benghazi!" as come to represent all the partisan witch-hunts launched by Republicans every since the first Clinton presidency. This one is nothing more than the latest "Whitewater" attack ... a further denigration of the congress and a shameful waste of taxpayers money.
1
There is only one fact at the bottom of these endless Benghazi investigations: The Republican Party is terrified of Hillary Clinton. The GOP knows it has no candidates capable of standing on a debate stage with her and surviving. Nor do they have any candidates capable of depriving her of a landslide election.
When I step into the voting booth next November, I will carry the image of these "investigators" fumbling with pieces of paper that they cannot manage to organize, and desperately seeking any line of attack against Clinton that's both factual and actionable. So far, their failure to do so has cost us taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, and counting.
When I step into the voting booth next November, I will carry the image of these "investigators" fumbling with pieces of paper that they cannot manage to organize, and desperately seeking any line of attack against Clinton that's both factual and actionable. So far, their failure to do so has cost us taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, and counting.
5
I have neer voted for a Republican and most likely never will but I certainly will remember these rabid dogs going after Mrs. Clinton for not better reason than that she IS Mrs. William Clinton.
1
Benghazi and the Email debacle both are illustrations of why Hillary should never be allowed to ascend to President of USA
Hillary's total incompetence was sadly Highlighted during the whole Benghazi affair: ambassadors request for Security denied, Hillary's paralysis while the attack was ongoing, her blatant lying to the public after the fact.
These alone are traits that should make anyone ineligible to ascend to US Presidency.
The Email affair illustrates Hillary's paranoia that ended up having the emails hacked not only by China but by ISIS.
This put both US National and Economic Security at risk.
During her tenure as Sect. Of State saw US influence in World erode at an alarming rate. There is nothing of note achieved during her tenure.
This is not the resume of a future US President
Hillary's total incompetence was sadly Highlighted during the whole Benghazi affair: ambassadors request for Security denied, Hillary's paralysis while the attack was ongoing, her blatant lying to the public after the fact.
These alone are traits that should make anyone ineligible to ascend to US Presidency.
The Email affair illustrates Hillary's paranoia that ended up having the emails hacked not only by China but by ISIS.
This put both US National and Economic Security at risk.
During her tenure as Sect. Of State saw US influence in World erode at an alarming rate. There is nothing of note achieved during her tenure.
This is not the resume of a future US President
5
Can they do that? Change focus like that? Apparently so but they must be called on it. Sounds like several members of the panel are ashamed of this, and certainly the chair should be ashamed. Gotta wonder what they will tackle next; Sanders?
1
The Repulicans put this committee toghether to discredit Hilary Clinton. They were concernecd about her Numbers back in 2014. Now they will keep the
e-mail issue alive. Just keep the questrions coming and all this in the Press. They are not looking for Truth, they feel if they knock out Hilary Clinton the White House is theirs. This the Party that has Donald Trump and Ben Carson leading in the polls. They always talk about Tax Payers money, yet they don't seem concerned how much they are spending for this Political Agenda.
e-mail issue alive. Just keep the questrions coming and all this in the Press. They are not looking for Truth, they feel if they knock out Hilary Clinton the White House is theirs. This the Party that has Donald Trump and Ben Carson leading in the polls. They always talk about Tax Payers money, yet they don't seem concerned how much they are spending for this Political Agenda.
4
Mr Gowdy you need to be in Jail for using Public resources for you own personal partisan agenda. You are the Criminal here.
Sanders 2016
Sanders 2016
Of COURSE they don;t care HOW MUCH money they spend--it's not THIER money! It is tax payer money which in their opinion BELONGS TO THEM---and we should all be taxed at an even higher rate so they can have MORE.
This has NEVER been about what actually happened and who died; it has ALWAYS been about how much time they could waste (and money) and how to "get" Hillary Clinton.
No more no less as affirmed by McCarthy.
This has NEVER been about what actually happened and who died; it has ALWAYS been about how much time they could waste (and money) and how to "get" Hillary Clinton.
No more no less as affirmed by McCarthy.
1
Oh, don't you see? Drinking alcohol from custom-made wine glasses during "Wine Wednesdays" House committee meetings, and fantasizing about buying uber-cool, James Bond-style handguns are all integral parts of the Republicans' very serious investigation into just exactly what happened at Benghazi. Clearly, Mrs Clinton must have personally ordered the attack on the Embassy using her private email account.
7
What a deceitful article, and not worthy of the Times. Even today's Times. It fails to mention that a lot of the "prior investigations" were stymied by the lack of information -- the ARB didn't even interview Hillary Clinton and most of these investigations concluded that more investigation was needed because of the lack of information. The Watergate committees had subpoena powers and the Speaker was not afraid to use it (unlike Boehner, for whatever reason). The fact of the matter is, you cannot investigate without the facts, and this committee still -- 17 months later -- has huge gaps in the emails, no idea what Hillary was doing the night of the attack, or what she did in response to requests for more security. Quite frankly, we have no idea why the Ambassador was even there, or why we had not withdrawn. Was this retribution for Hillary's desire to take down Qaddafi, or was it just desserts for Hillary's stupid decision to destabilize a country for no particular reason? We have no idea. And this article makes it look like "There's nothing to see here. Move along."
9
Quite obviously, the 'gap' in Secretary Clinton's e-mails was the result of the known fact that she flew to Benghazi in order to assassinate Amb. Stevens - not trusting either Ms. Abedin or Mr. Blumenthal to execute the task. I thought this had been established some time ago. I'm sure I read it on the internets.
1
So, JB we can expect this to continue until ... let me guess, the 2016 election results? Then, like most of the other "investigations" regarding the Clintons or Republicans checking for hob-goblins under the bed, it will end with a whimper or nothing of substance to justify the charades.
1
Is the job of this committee, and the US House of Representatives as a whole, to do the will of the American people, or to serve the interests of the Republican Party? On nevermind, I know the answer to this one.
6
I am an Independent voter and have probably voted 50/50 Dems vs Reps over the years. I’m pretty sure I qualify as part of the “American people” as you put it. I don’t know why, given all the military strength we have in the Mediterranean, we did such a poor job protecting our people (including our Ambassador). Why did these people have to wait 12 hours to get help? That is what I want to know as a member of the “American people”. Maybe you know? If you do, please let the “American people” know. If not, let the will of the “American people” be done.
This is all just more political theater. It is confirmation that republicans see Hillary as a threat and are trying to discredit her which if the shoe was on the other foot the democrats would also do to a credible republican candidate. It is already obvious they have found no illegal acts otherwise things would have progressed in a much quicker fashion. The only version of the Benghazi hearings that I believe will be of any value for Americans to watch will be on Saturday Night Live.
7
can you name ONE time the democrats have used the house to investigate for political purposes?id like to know when they did that?
This has been the Clintons' MO for a quarter century. Delay, stonewall and then send out the minions to ask: "Why is this investigation taking so long and costing so much?"
6
Well if its effective in dealing with GOP intransigence, I'm all for it.
1
In a quarter-century on the national stage, the Clintons have made a cottage industry out of playing the victim, which raises the question of why there is constantly something to play the victim about.
We've had countless F.B.I. investigations, grand juries, special prosecutors, congressional inquiries, inspector general reports, depositions, perjury allegations, an impeachment and even a trial in the Senate, yet the Clintons would have us believe that it's all a matter of them being picked on rather than having anything to do with their superior attitude and a predilection for wanton recklessness.
The last time they gave us a co-presidency, it was all about them, rather than about us. And now this eerily Nixon-esque mess about using an unsecure personal server to do classified government business by email and accepting foreign donations for their murky foundation amid deepening doubts about truthfulness makes a citizen wonder if we invite them back to the White House for another four or eight years, it's going to again be month after month of scandals du jour.
For a weary nation that desperately needs effective presidential leadership to concentrate full time on the people's problems, the Clintons may have overstayed their welcome in government. They seem better suited for reality TV.
We've had countless F.B.I. investigations, grand juries, special prosecutors, congressional inquiries, inspector general reports, depositions, perjury allegations, an impeachment and even a trial in the Senate, yet the Clintons would have us believe that it's all a matter of them being picked on rather than having anything to do with their superior attitude and a predilection for wanton recklessness.
The last time they gave us a co-presidency, it was all about them, rather than about us. And now this eerily Nixon-esque mess about using an unsecure personal server to do classified government business by email and accepting foreign donations for their murky foundation amid deepening doubts about truthfulness makes a citizen wonder if we invite them back to the White House for another four or eight years, it's going to again be month after month of scandals du jour.
For a weary nation that desperately needs effective presidential leadership to concentrate full time on the people's problems, the Clintons may have overstayed their welcome in government. They seem better suited for reality TV.
9
Witch hunt after witch hunt. As you say, repeated attacks, a constant string of them and always nothing. Always nothing.
Political witch hunts, keep them going, it is the only thing the Republicans have going. Keep them up, regardless of what charades they are, it gives the base a reason for their confirmatory bias.
Political witch hunts, keep them going, it is the only thing the Republicans have going. Keep them up, regardless of what charades they are, it gives the base a reason for their confirmatory bias.
1
Interesting.
A "Nixon-esque" mess -- ? Precisely, when was President Nixon accused of not securing classified documents? He wasn't. What he was accused of was quite different. This is an example of mud-slinging by the use of terms and events from the past that have no bearing whatsoever on this 'investigation.'
Foreign donations to their "murky foundation"? YOu do know that all post-Presidents have foundations to do their work after leaving office? Maybe not George Bush, apparently he's painting pictures of himself in the bathroom, or some such. But Jimmy Carter had his foundation and has built homes with Habitat for Humanity, and traveled the world as an election observer. Is he "murky" because you simply don't understand what the purveyance and prerogative of an ex-President ought to be in this country? Clinton and Bush have joined together to reduce the cost to Aids victims for their meds in Africa. He also works in areas hit by famine, and by civil unrest, and speaks about his failure to do so more strongly as a President. Maybe Africa seems "murky"? That's very interesting.
One of the reasons a vast right wing conspiracy gets called out in this country, is because the "machinery of slime" as the Italians call it in a word that has no direct English equivalent, was all that Ken Starr could drum up after looking into every piece of nonsense printed about them by the ....right wing slime machine.
A "Nixon-esque" mess -- ? Precisely, when was President Nixon accused of not securing classified documents? He wasn't. What he was accused of was quite different. This is an example of mud-slinging by the use of terms and events from the past that have no bearing whatsoever on this 'investigation.'
Foreign donations to their "murky foundation"? YOu do know that all post-Presidents have foundations to do their work after leaving office? Maybe not George Bush, apparently he's painting pictures of himself in the bathroom, or some such. But Jimmy Carter had his foundation and has built homes with Habitat for Humanity, and traveled the world as an election observer. Is he "murky" because you simply don't understand what the purveyance and prerogative of an ex-President ought to be in this country? Clinton and Bush have joined together to reduce the cost to Aids victims for their meds in Africa. He also works in areas hit by famine, and by civil unrest, and speaks about his failure to do so more strongly as a President. Maybe Africa seems "murky"? That's very interesting.
One of the reasons a vast right wing conspiracy gets called out in this country, is because the "machinery of slime" as the Italians call it in a word that has no direct English equivalent, was all that Ken Starr could drum up after looking into every piece of nonsense printed about them by the ....right wing slime machine.
1
Would you like to see some congressional leadership that concentrates full time on the people's problems? You know... jobs that pay a living wage, health care, affordable education, the right to vote...
1
The system is working as usual. It's always messy. The parties always try to win the next election and often in unseemly and sometimes illegal ways. Some committees are purely political and have no justification, some are completely legitimate and some serve both purposes. This is one of the latter. There are some pertinent questions open for the Benghazi committee such as what orders were given or should have been given to the military and CIA and whether the administration tried to cover up mistakes. We can't ever trust an administration alone to tell us as they aren't trustworthy either. That's part of the process too and there is rarely a smoking gun. Still, Clinton's emails have to be a consideration. That it is drip, drip, drip is entirely her own doing because of her political ambition. McCarthy's statement doesn't change that even if he accidently shed light on the sausage making because of his political ambition. They are going to fight this out to the end, probably through the 11/16 election and whatever is found depends as much on the next elections as it does on what comes out of the investigation. Of course Democrats are going to think that it's all political and of course Republicans are going to think it's all legitimate. As usual, for me, the sadness is that moderates/independents have so little influence, as only they can somewhat lessen partisanship. But, we can't just wait for the messiah and we get what we deserve for by voting for who we do.
3
A false equivalence here doesn't really do justice to a committee and an investigation that has gone on for 17 months, longer than any other investigation in the history of the nation?
No, I don't think that qualifies as "business as usual."
No, I don't think that qualifies as "business as usual."
1
Remember the big issue with Libya. HRC and the administration pushed out its ruler with no plan as to what came next resulting in an enormous mess. In the process, four State Department employees died (the first State employees to do so since the 70's). Other nations pulled their people out because they saw the risk. We chose to keep them there and they died. This gets lost in the endless investigation.
3
This is a rather skillful conservative attack and right out of the playbook. Always try to make your opponent prove a negative proposition. It can't be done which enables recurring an repetitive indictments. The Dems need to get some spine and goad the Reps into a formal prosecution in which both sides would have to promise to tell the truth. Meanwhile Hillary has been handed a golden opportunity to run against congress, Truman style, which would include running against all the GOP office holders now in contention, but will she take advantage?
6
We know it is a fact that Hillary lies. She has been fired from jobs for lying and the boss that fired her made that public knowledge. We know she stole from the white house and did eventually return the items. Now why would anyone believe anything this person says. Who cares how smart she is or if she thinks the presidency is owed her or that she is female. There are plenty of females who would be honest trustworthy presidents. We do not need the lying Clinton's in office again.
6
However do you manage to consume that much spam?
2
Cite the sources of your information. Some of those claims, like "stealing from the White House" were debunked years ago.
2
The political assassination attempt continues. Thanks for wasting our time and money -- how much now, $45 million or is that the bill for another Republican waste of time and money? -- trying to make Mrs. Clinton look bad. The knife is still feet from her back.....
7
$4.5 million for this, and they are not done yet. How much more money will the Republicans waste? I thought they wanted to cut the federal budget? This is a perfect place to begin.
10
Wasting tax dollars, everyone's time to what end? This is again showing the world the state of American politics. What happened to all the brains produced by the Ivys and elite schools people have spend so much money getting branded and trained? Why are the people of the USA allowing this kind of spectacle to take place when there are so many other pressing issues waiting to be addressed? And the Republicans? Feels like they are just misguided, outdated and out of touch people who spend all their energy undermining everyone else.
8
After McCarthy's admission of the obvious, it's amazing that the Republicans in Congress continue with their charades.
Oh, wait, it's the Republicans in Congress.
Oh, wait, it's the Republicans in Congress.
12
We need to find out what exactly happened there. If there was a breach of security and a lack of common sense then the American people need to know if this person is Presidential worthy. It too bad that some only want to make it political. Such as liberal publications.
6
Republicans are sinking us deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole. They are beyond shame. They cannot govern so they have their fun playing political games. As an octogenarian I do not recognize this country anymore.
10
As much as the American people are sick, sick sick of yet another politically motivated stunt by the GOP- Benghazi to the 10th degree as yet another Hillary Clinton witch hunt you might ask yourselves why do they keep doing this when it has nothing to do with the people's business of governing, passing legislation, etc? Why? Because they can- because they never suffer any political consequences for this utter waste of time and money and thus showing their total contempt for the American people- why? GERRYMANDERING. They never have to answer for anything and think they are untouchable. They get away with anything they want because of secure seats from gerrymandering. We need to get at the root cause of this behavior with impunity- gerrymandering, term limits and getting rid of money in politics. Yes, it is the foxes who are guarding the hen house so I doubt we will ever see any reforms. So sad.
8
The truth is out (like we didn't already know) about the Joe McCarthy Benghazi witch-hunt. At a tune to the cost of millions to the American Tax Payer...millions. How many people will work their entire lives to pay for this strictly political action. Now they continue with burning at the stake. Grab your torch and pitchfork.
Now considering that the GOP are indeed being medieval strictly for the political purpose of "driving down Hillary Clinton's numbers", who are the GOP trying to influence? It could only be a people who be fanatical, unstable maybe even compelled that would listen to the Judges of this witch-hunt.
This is more than an attack on Hillary Clinton. If these women hating men would do this to Hillary Clinton and also to Cecil Richards (where Planned Parenthood has been found clear of any wrong doings as well), what of the rest of the women of this country. Our grandmothers, our mothers, our sisters, our wives. They are all truly in danger of being burned at the stake. Those afraid to look at their past are doomed to repeat it and these men are without a doubt medieval.
Now considering that the GOP are indeed being medieval strictly for the political purpose of "driving down Hillary Clinton's numbers", who are the GOP trying to influence? It could only be a people who be fanatical, unstable maybe even compelled that would listen to the Judges of this witch-hunt.
This is more than an attack on Hillary Clinton. If these women hating men would do this to Hillary Clinton and also to Cecil Richards (where Planned Parenthood has been found clear of any wrong doings as well), what of the rest of the women of this country. Our grandmothers, our mothers, our sisters, our wives. They are all truly in danger of being burned at the stake. Those afraid to look at their past are doomed to repeat it and these men are without a doubt medieval.
5
Hillary should ignore the investigation. Refuse to cooperate. It is a sham and a complete waste of taxpayer money. Why didn't the Republicans open up investigations President Bush and his knowingly using false information to send our country to war in Iraq? The Republican party is an absolute joke at best and a malignant stage four tumor in our federal government at worst.
7
It had to happen that the whole Benghazi inquisition would boomerang on Congressional Republicans and would damage the entire party.
Secretary Hillary Clinton's appearance before the committee on October 22 promises to be a watershed day. My expectation is that the brilliant and capable Hillary will give the nation a fine demonstration of her qualifications for the presidency while teaching Gowdy, et. al., a lesson. She may even administer a spanking or two to some very bad boys.
Secretary Hillary Clinton's appearance before the committee on October 22 promises to be a watershed day. My expectation is that the brilliant and capable Hillary will give the nation a fine demonstration of her qualifications for the presidency while teaching Gowdy, et. al., a lesson. She may even administer a spanking or two to some very bad boys.
14
Enough with this email business and Benghazi inquiry! I'm tired of seeing it as a headline. Congress and the Times should investigate and cover more substantive issues that really impact on our well-being.
10
You are absolutely right! Especially considering the fact that there have been numerous acts of hacking into Government e-mails, website, and databases by the likes of Edward Snowdon,, Janning, Julian Asarge, Chinese and Russian criminals, etc. etc. It's another witch hunt by Republicans who are terrified of having to possibly face Hilary Clinton in the Presidential race.
1
Despite the comments of loyal conservatives, the myriad investigations of Democrats (especially Clintons) since Whitewater are drastically different from the paradigm: The Watergate Hearings.
If you remember, in those hearings, Democratic leaders fully involved the minority committee members, even virtually sharing the Chair, as Sen. Sam Ervin, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee did with Ranking Sen. Howard Baker. Republicans were fully allowed to participate, ask any questions, including those rebutting Democratic questions and had full access to ALL documents, testimony and agenda.
But that has not been so in Republican-run hearing since Whitewater. And this Benghazi investigation shows it. Democrats are kept from hearing testimony, questioning at the same length as Republicans, denied access to documents, are lied to by Republican committee members and staff, and guaranteed to have NO ability to help prove the investigation is bi-partisan and concerned with fact-finding and not cherry-picking evidence that hurts Sec. Clinton, while suppressing exculpatory evidence.
It is neither a fair nor impartial investigation and it can no longer pretend that it is. Majority Leader McCarthy inadvertently let the cat out of the bag that this was always nothing more than political witch-hunt.
Over 60, including 3 diplomats died in 12 embassy attacks under the Bush administration yet the House GOP isn't interested in comparing and contrasting those incidents with Benghazi. Why?
If you remember, in those hearings, Democratic leaders fully involved the minority committee members, even virtually sharing the Chair, as Sen. Sam Ervin, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee did with Ranking Sen. Howard Baker. Republicans were fully allowed to participate, ask any questions, including those rebutting Democratic questions and had full access to ALL documents, testimony and agenda.
But that has not been so in Republican-run hearing since Whitewater. And this Benghazi investigation shows it. Democrats are kept from hearing testimony, questioning at the same length as Republicans, denied access to documents, are lied to by Republican committee members and staff, and guaranteed to have NO ability to help prove the investigation is bi-partisan and concerned with fact-finding and not cherry-picking evidence that hurts Sec. Clinton, while suppressing exculpatory evidence.
It is neither a fair nor impartial investigation and it can no longer pretend that it is. Majority Leader McCarthy inadvertently let the cat out of the bag that this was always nothing more than political witch-hunt.
Over 60, including 3 diplomats died in 12 embassy attacks under the Bush administration yet the House GOP isn't interested in comparing and contrasting those incidents with Benghazi. Why?
15
The committee had better be careful when questioning Secretary Clinton on Oct. 22. Any questioning that appears to be attacking her rather than seeking new information will validate the perception that this is nothing more than a political fishing expedition. I predict that the most important result of Mrs. Clinton's appearance will be to discredit the committee.
15
It's not going to be public, is it?
NYTimes outs Benghazi committee minority staff
Obama adminstration refuses to allow Whitehouse staff, 2/3s of Intelligence, and 50% of DOD witnesses to be interviewed by the Benghazi committee, according to documents the NYTimes has seen.
it will be interesting to see the actual documents that the nytimes cherry picked to write it's informative and revealing article. it's unfortunate that the Times access to these documents provides it with exclusive control of the narrative .
Bias is evident but well hidden, or balanced, depending on your point of view.
like investigations , reporting depends on what information you are able to obtain , the importance you place on it's parts , and the story/stories/narratives you want to follow.
control the access, control the narrative.
your entitled to your opinion but your not entitled to your own facts - Daniel Moynihan .
except when your access is exclusive and provides you with the ability to cherry pick the facts placed into the public domain.
it's just the nature of the beast.
Obama adminstration refuses to allow Whitehouse staff, 2/3s of Intelligence, and 50% of DOD witnesses to be interviewed by the Benghazi committee, according to documents the NYTimes has seen.
it will be interesting to see the actual documents that the nytimes cherry picked to write it's informative and revealing article. it's unfortunate that the Times access to these documents provides it with exclusive control of the narrative .
Bias is evident but well hidden, or balanced, depending on your point of view.
like investigations , reporting depends on what information you are able to obtain , the importance you place on it's parts , and the story/stories/narratives you want to follow.
control the access, control the narrative.
your entitled to your opinion but your not entitled to your own facts - Daniel Moynihan .
except when your access is exclusive and provides you with the ability to cherry pick the facts placed into the public domain.
it's just the nature of the beast.
1
Scott Walker's collusion with the Wisconsin Club for Growth during his recall election is much more a cause for concern than what Hillary Clinton did with her private email server.
10
How about a better title for this article? Something like
"Benghazi, where Republicans stop spending taxes to throw made up political dirt"
"Benghazi, where Republicans stop spending taxes to throw made up political dirt"
8
If I'm correct - I believe she was found to be without fault on the issue of government emails on her personal server. Other politicians have done the same without condemnation. She's not perfect. Are you? He who is without sin shall throw the first stone. Again I say, she's not perfect. Are you?
9
Why SHOULDN'T Clinton's emails be the focus? The committee is trying to get to the bottom of the Benghazi fiasco -- which included Obama and Clinton knowingly spinning an election-year yarn about an "Internet video" being the cause of the attack, when they knew it was al-Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Sharia. (Outrageous, no?)
The committee is simply trying to find out what is in emails that were supposed to be turned over two years ago -- but weren't, because Hillary Clinton used a secret email server ... and we now know there are hundreds of emails related to Benghazi that she never turned over; and had no intention of ever turning over. (Outrageous, no?)
The Obama and Clinton true believers/spinners who keep insisting there is "no there there" and it's all a GOP "witch-hunt" are looking more and more foolish and partisan by the day.
The committee is simply trying to find out what is in emails that were supposed to be turned over two years ago -- but weren't, because Hillary Clinton used a secret email server ... and we now know there are hundreds of emails related to Benghazi that she never turned over; and had no intention of ever turning over. (Outrageous, no?)
The Obama and Clinton true believers/spinners who keep insisting there is "no there there" and it's all a GOP "witch-hunt" are looking more and more foolish and partisan by the day.
4
The guy who ran the attack said that it was about the video, the committee's mandate was to investigate Benghazi, and I'd sure be interested to know how you know what's in e-mails that you're complaining have been completely hidden.
There's plenty to criticize Clinton for that doesn't involve a witch hunt, monogrammed guns, and wine receptions with customized glasses that, I trust, we paid for.
Oh, well. None of that bothers you guys even a little. Please proceed, guv'nor.
There's plenty to criticize Clinton for that doesn't involve a witch hunt, monogrammed guns, and wine receptions with customized glasses that, I trust, we paid for.
Oh, well. None of that bothers you guys even a little. Please proceed, guv'nor.
1
This is a travesty, a national disgrace, an outrageous witch hunt for purely partisan purposes, at my expense - and that of millions of other American taxpayers. I have no idea if it's even possible, but could a citizens group, for example, not go to court to try to force Gowdy et al, to cease this foolishness - and pay from the Republican coffers for the millions of our money already wasted? These sentiments, by the way, are brought to you by someone who does not like Hillary Clinton and fervently hopes the Democrats will wake up and run someone else.
9
For many of us, outsiders, who look at America with envy and admiration, the political system seem to be the most corrupt among western countries. The abuse of the spirit of free elections, probably the keystone of democracy, is unbelievable. The groveling of candidates to a small number of super rich donors who, like Roman Caesars, can destroy a non obedient candidate on a whim is beyond perception.
The hounding of Hilary Clinton for years by a bunch of politically motivated committee members who will lose all interest in the subject a moment after the presidential elections is something to behold.
Come on, stop this nonsense. In case you don't know the world is burning outside the US, not least by horrific mistakes made by an American president. Bengazi was and is a tiny debacle compared to others occurring every day in the middle east and beyond. The drama of the emails, what a joke.
The hounding of Hilary Clinton for years by a bunch of politically motivated committee members who will lose all interest in the subject a moment after the presidential elections is something to behold.
Come on, stop this nonsense. In case you don't know the world is burning outside the US, not least by horrific mistakes made by an American president. Bengazi was and is a tiny debacle compared to others occurring every day in the middle east and beyond. The drama of the emails, what a joke.
20
I'm no fan of Hillary, but this is obviously a witch hunt.
13
The unfortunate aspect of this whole thing is that once respectable media organizations - like the NYT - have bought into the Republican narrative on the emails and Benghazi without evidencing an ounce of skepticism, thus enhancing the probability that we will have a Republican president in 2017. You can't unring a bell.
8
Recall that what seemed like an innocuous question about listening devices during one of the Watergate hearings led to the discovery of the Nixon tapes. Sometimes questions asked lead to other questions, so the shift from Benghazi to emails does not seem so far fetched, only to those who would like the issue to go away.
6
Then you suggest that we do "Fishing" investigations on all the candidates because there may be something there? That sounds so unAmerican I don't even know what else to say.
1
I'm not a fan of Mrs Clinton, but this committee is nothing short of a federally funded lynching. Its a waste of tax payer money, Congressional time, and the shredding of what little credibility the Republican conference has left. Shame on you Mr. Gowdy for distracting us from the real needs of the country.
I certainly hope they can get Kenneth Starr on this -- Whitewater investigation ended up many years later being about a marital indiscretion. Maybe Benghazi will morph as well. Taxpayer money well spent, no doubt. . . .
6
This is so much like the wasteful Kenneth Starr investigation into President Clinton and WhiteWater, that even after years was unable to find anything of substance as to illegalities or misdeeds. Result? Starr took a marital affair and tried to run with that. Once again, a sad day for democracy.
15
The N.Y. Times seems to forget that this is a very serious issue especially with the findings that Russia and China have been probing e-mails and I'm sure Hillary"s are at the top of the list. Reporting over and over that there isn't much to this doesn't negate the fact of what the FBI comes up with. Lets just wait.
2
Her e-mails were probably much more secure on her private server than they would have been on any Federal government system given their antiquity.
How many serious security breaches have happened to government agencies in the last four years?
Add to that risk those posed by provocateurs like Eric Snowdon ... .
How many serious security breaches have happened to government agencies in the last four years?
Add to that risk those posed by provocateurs like Eric Snowdon ... .
1
I am most interested in the relationship between the then-Secretary and Sidney Blumenthal. It appeared that he was advising Mrs. Clinton about Libya sotto voce, in an unofficial position, while simultaneously lobbying the Libyan government for business. I am surprised there isn't more attention being paid to those communications.
5
A newspaper should not be concerned about the public receiving too much information concerning the polemics of a government official unless its agenda is to protect that particular government official.
3
Does the recent Planned Parenthood inquisition grilling come to mind people?
17
Too much government funding for Benghazi investigation, too little government funding for embassy security.
8
Those who have lost confidence in the ability of congress to act in the public interests can use the Benghazi Committee as proof positive that all the Republicans want to do is use their control to try to damage the Democrats. In the meantime, agencies have no appropriations for fiscal year 2016. Congress has failed to perform the most basic tasks they are required to do under the Constitution in favor of political attacks against their opponents at taxpayer expense. Wine Wednesdays and gun buying indeed! What a tragic failure to govern.
6
Trey Gowdy's Benghazi IX is of course completely fair and balanced! How can anyone say otherwise? After all, he can just point to previous similar investigations such as:
The 9 investigations of the hundreds of Americans killed in 1983 in Lebanon at the embassy attack when Reagan was president, and the many attacks on embassies and consulates under Bush. Oops, no multiple investigations or accountability?
OK. Then there are all the investigations of previous private use of emails by officials, such as Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice. Oops.
Then what about the investigations of the 2 million executive emails that disappeared during the Bush administration? And that use of the RNC server by Bush officials? Oops. No multiple investigations or accountability.
Then security wise, what about that public release of confidential information by Darrell Issa during his Benghazi hearings. After all, people friendly to Americans in Libya were subsequently killed. Oops again?
Then what about those Salem witch hunts, huh? Great American tradition of justice from the beginning with solid evidence not based on hysteria or property hungry neighbors or petty enmities within the town. The evil miscreants were even executed, and Cotton Mather advocated for the use of "spectral evidence". Oops?
It is actually illegal to misuse taxpayer money for partisan purposes. Where is the investigation of what has happened to $4.5 million and counting for this? Oops?
The 9 investigations of the hundreds of Americans killed in 1983 in Lebanon at the embassy attack when Reagan was president, and the many attacks on embassies and consulates under Bush. Oops, no multiple investigations or accountability?
OK. Then there are all the investigations of previous private use of emails by officials, such as Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice. Oops.
Then what about the investigations of the 2 million executive emails that disappeared during the Bush administration? And that use of the RNC server by Bush officials? Oops. No multiple investigations or accountability.
Then security wise, what about that public release of confidential information by Darrell Issa during his Benghazi hearings. After all, people friendly to Americans in Libya were subsequently killed. Oops again?
Then what about those Salem witch hunts, huh? Great American tradition of justice from the beginning with solid evidence not based on hysteria or property hungry neighbors or petty enmities within the town. The evil miscreants were even executed, and Cotton Mather advocated for the use of "spectral evidence". Oops?
It is actually illegal to misuse taxpayer money for partisan purposes. Where is the investigation of what has happened to $4.5 million and counting for this? Oops?
16
Am I missing something or is the Times (and the commenters here) sinking to the level of Fox et al. in silly attacks on words and irrelevant matters? So... we don't like that Fox criticizes Obama for silly comments made or unmade (he doesn't call one victim but calls another, he won't call a crime a 'terrorist act' etc). So how did this make this article?: "At one point, several Republican staff members formed a gun-buying club and discussed in the committee’s conference room the 9-millimeter Glock handguns they intended to buy and what type of monograms they would inscribe on them, Major Podliska said."
5
It may have something to do with the fact that the gun club bit actually happened.
1
So the Times, in an effort to undercut the damage done by Major Podliska's revelation about the offensively political nature of his work, ties itself in knots yet again to justify its Ahab-like pursuit of the Hillary Clinton email story -- and Hillary Clinton.
This once-great paper is caught in a feedback loop of confirmation bias, seemingly unable to tell the difference between fact and fantasy -- as when this story states as fact that Sidney Blumental was helping a private businessman pursue deals in Libya. No less a source than Trey Gowdy confirmed, in a public letter to the Democrats on his committee, that Sidney Blumenthal did not write the intelligence reports he passed on to Hillary Clinton, nor did he have business interests in Libya. (For some reason, the Times has never printed that letter.)
Rather than admit what has been evident all along, the Times still can't bring itself to admit the Benghazi committee is a fishing expedition that was always aimed at taking down Hillary Clinton. (Like the Happy Days character Fonzie, they simply cannot say the words "I was wrroong.") So the general public will assume once again that the length and placement of this story indicates yet another serious "problem" with Hillary Clinton -- although by reading this story, they would still be hard pressed to define it.
After decades of haplessly trying to harpoon these perfect Clinton scandals that never turn out to be true, Times reporters could be put to better use.
This once-great paper is caught in a feedback loop of confirmation bias, seemingly unable to tell the difference between fact and fantasy -- as when this story states as fact that Sidney Blumental was helping a private businessman pursue deals in Libya. No less a source than Trey Gowdy confirmed, in a public letter to the Democrats on his committee, that Sidney Blumenthal did not write the intelligence reports he passed on to Hillary Clinton, nor did he have business interests in Libya. (For some reason, the Times has never printed that letter.)
Rather than admit what has been evident all along, the Times still can't bring itself to admit the Benghazi committee is a fishing expedition that was always aimed at taking down Hillary Clinton. (Like the Happy Days character Fonzie, they simply cannot say the words "I was wrroong.") So the general public will assume once again that the length and placement of this story indicates yet another serious "problem" with Hillary Clinton -- although by reading this story, they would still be hard pressed to define it.
After decades of haplessly trying to harpoon these perfect Clinton scandals that never turn out to be true, Times reporters could be put to better use.
9
Running what was effectively a shadow State Department on an anonymous email server outside the reach of official scrutiny, is the primary reason why Ms. Clinton is a primary target of the investigation, and rightly so.
Until all the emails on her server including those she classified as "private" are analyzed, no one can know with any certainty, "what she knew and when she knew it" during and after the attack on the Benghazi consulate.
Until all the emails on her server including those she classified as "private" are analyzed, no one can know with any certainty, "what she knew and when she knew it" during and after the attack on the Benghazi consulate.
3
The expediency of this investigation is brought to you by "The most transparent administration in history...." who lied, blaming the Benghazi attack on a Youtube video (still waiting for accountability on that one), and then promoting the woman sent out to tell that lie over and over (Susan Rice). Of course, that excuse might work on halfwits who also believe that the attack, according to Mrs. Clinton, "might have been" perpetrated by "a few guys who just decided to attack the embassy while on a late night stroll."
Then we find out that the woman who is ultimately accountable for the safety of our embassies, "didn't know any better" about having official email (that belongs to the U.S. government. i.e. we the people) on her own private email server, and then unilaterally deciding what emails to delete and which to save. Genius. How intelligent (or untrustworthy) does one have to be to not see the impropriety of that decision?
"What difference does it make?"
If this investigation has devolved into a political game then the Democrats deserve every bit of negative press. It's the least they can expect for lying to the American public over and over on these issues. After all, Democrats love to regurgitate "lies that Bush told" - like the WMDs ad nauseam. (despite the NYT and other news medias later admitting that there were WMDs in Iraq)
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/bombshell-new-york-times-reports-wmds...
Then we find out that the woman who is ultimately accountable for the safety of our embassies, "didn't know any better" about having official email (that belongs to the U.S. government. i.e. we the people) on her own private email server, and then unilaterally deciding what emails to delete and which to save. Genius. How intelligent (or untrustworthy) does one have to be to not see the impropriety of that decision?
"What difference does it make?"
If this investigation has devolved into a political game then the Democrats deserve every bit of negative press. It's the least they can expect for lying to the American public over and over on these issues. After all, Democrats love to regurgitate "lies that Bush told" - like the WMDs ad nauseam. (despite the NYT and other news medias later admitting that there were WMDs in Iraq)
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/bombshell-new-york-times-reports-wmds...
2
If you read serious pieces you would know that what you printed as reference isn't one. You would also know that the WMDs that were found were ones that the US left there and that Bush/Cheney didn't want the public to know about when they were found because it would have made them and the US look even more foolish or self-serving. They certainly were not the ones that the dynamic duo claimed were there. Ask Colin Powell.
As for serious reading about Benghazi, try the following. You will actually get some actual facts. You would find out that the video information was given to Susan Rice and Obama by the "intelligence" they had and it was not a lie. You will find out that every time any official made a comment it was prefaced with a qualifier "as far as we know now; we will get more information and this might change..." And at least one investigation (I believe the one by independent journalists) revealed that the video actually played a role in that it became a moment of opportunity for someone that had only been loosely planning something prior.
http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov
As for serious reading about Benghazi, try the following. You will actually get some actual facts. You would find out that the video information was given to Susan Rice and Obama by the "intelligence" they had and it was not a lie. You will find out that every time any official made a comment it was prefaced with a qualifier "as far as we know now; we will get more information and this might change..." And at least one investigation (I believe the one by independent journalists) revealed that the video actually played a role in that it became a moment of opportunity for someone that had only been loosely planning something prior.
http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov
1
Thank you for this clearly quantified curation of the delusions on this issue. Fragments of statements taken out of context, the entire length of which could not fill a single type-written page, finished off with a bogus "news" blog in the business of deluding you as "proof" of your conspiracy theories does not warrant the tens of millions of dollars our tax dollars are being spent for political gain. Trying to take down your political opponents with lies and accusations lacking credibility is legal, I suppose. But reasonable Americans don't want to pay for these childish games.
2
Mr. Gadsden, actually what you have suggested has been proven demonstrably to be false. There were protests in response to that You-Tube video throughout the Arab world on the date in question. Different intelligence officials and defense officials had differing views as to whether it was caused by protestors responding to that video or were the actions of people who just wanted to take advantage of the situation. At the time of the event and for a few days thereafter, different officials had divergent accounts which were communicated to their principals. President Obama did call it an "act of terror" the day after the incident but,, for political reasons, Republicans, including Mitt Romney, lied about this repeatedly, and the statements made by Rice and other officials were genuinely based on the varyiing accounts received at that time. This approach by Republican was nothing short of disgusting and represented a real departure from the approach to foreign affairs approach known as the "stops at the water's edge" maintained until the 1990's by Republicans who were not as craven as they became when Newt Gingrich became Speaker.
2
It's exactly like what happened with the Whitewater investigation. When the special prosecutor Kenneth Starr was unable to find any evidence that the Clintons were guilty of any wrongdoing, he didn't step down, but instead started investigating gossip about that the president had had an affaire, which had surfaced during the course of the investigation. So for partisan and political reasons, the whitewater investigation morphed into the Monica Lewinsky investigation.
This is the exact same story, all over again.
This is the exact same story, all over again.
17
Remember how White Water turned into Monica Lewinsky. All that is old is new again with Republican witch hunts.
15
Wasting the tax payer money they illegally turn this into a witch hunt. We should March on Washington to give notice to the right wing of the Republican Party we will not stand for anymore of this.
20
I see this as less about Republican vs Democrats than Politicians vs the Plebs.
If this were the private sector, Clinton's mode of operation would be big fines or jail.
Why are the rules different for public officials?
If this were the private sector, Clinton's mode of operation would be big fines or jail.
Why are the rules different for public officials?
4
That is unintentionally hilarious. Our private sector captains of industry and finance routinely walk free after committing heinous crimes through the corporations that shield them. The only punishment, typically, is a fine paid by the corporation.
Benghazi: There have been 24 attacks on US Embassies and Consolates since Regan was elected president. Regan had 4 attacks resulting in 70 deaths, Clinton had 3 attacks with 223 deaths, GW Bush had 8 attacks with 48 deaths. Anyone remember how many Congressional hearings were held over those deaths, if you said one, you are correct. The other 23 went unnoticed.
35
The latest is a filthy attack on a lifelong conservative republican who is devoted to honor, duty and integrity. The character assassination of Major Podliska sickens me to my core. Having been a lifelong republican for the last 50 years (since I was 25), I want to vomit over seeing what the "leaders" of the Republican Party are doing. Speaker Boehner did his best to placate the Jihadi evangelical Christians. As a Republican, Boehner should have known to never negotiate with terrorists.
Ruining a REAL conservative republican's character and career for doing his duty with honor and integrity, as Major Podliska has is going so far out of bounds..
It is time for whatever TRUE Republicans remain who are quivering in fear of the jidhadists to kick them in their teeth. And stand UP for the honor of Major Podliska. Or is "supporting our troops" only lip service?
Gowdy
Ruining a REAL conservative republican's character and career for doing his duty with honor and integrity, as Major Podliska has is going so far out of bounds..
It is time for whatever TRUE Republicans remain who are quivering in fear of the jidhadists to kick them in their teeth. And stand UP for the honor of Major Podliska. Or is "supporting our troops" only lip service?
Gowdy
6
I really do get a kick out of the posts from folks saying that this is a witch hunt and an attempt to destroy her run for POTUS. The funny part is she is dismantling her own run with her inept ways.
Can any of you supporters please let me know what this woman has accomplished to make her qualified for the WH?
Can any of you supporters please let me know what this woman has accomplished to make her qualified for the WH?
8
Pretty dam' good senator and fine Secretary of State. Good advocate for women. Effort at health care too complicated but she learned from that.
On the whole, she has endured persecution from people like you with good humor, given that you have bought the attack narrative from professional opposition, nonstop since the 1990s, and directed at every Democrat, with good humor and a sense of perspective.
Compare the bombast and rudeness of Donald Trump, who stokes hatred and thinks being a shyster is a good qualification for president.
On the whole, she has endured persecution from people like you with good humor, given that you have bought the attack narrative from professional opposition, nonstop since the 1990s, and directed at every Democrat, with good humor and a sense of perspective.
Compare the bombast and rudeness of Donald Trump, who stokes hatred and thinks being a shyster is a good qualification for president.
11
What has any of the 25 or so candidates from either party accomplished that make them qualified for the WH?
Just be honest and say you don't like the woman, no need to attack.
Just be honest and say you don't like the woman, no need to attack.
1
Chaz1954- totally agree! It is utterly astonishing to hear people defend this woman who, during her tenure, was clearly "serving" herself and, as a result, completely detached from her role as Chief diplomat of the United States. Under her watch, it is clear that carelessness prevailed. She is a deplorable candidate for President because she failed the American people when she became so self-contained that she and her cronies totally missed the eight ball on intelligence.
Of course Benghaaaaazi is a Republican witch hunt, and of course they are lying about it, and of course, lying and using government time and money for partisan scams is loudly cheered on by the tricorner hat wearing, flag waving, Constitution quoting, know-nothing hypocrites and bigots of The Right Wingnut Base.
15
Let us also note that if it weren't for W's administration's moronic obsession with deposing Saddam and Kadafi without thinking it all the way through, none of this or ISIS, the world's biggest plague today, would have happened.
11
Mike, it was Obama and Clinton who disposed of Kadafi when there was no support system in place to provide leadership or government.
What a huge surprise......
1
Benghazi is nothing but a hoped for attempt by republican politicians to invent a disgrace they can use against Hillary Clinton. All the time money and effort that should be used by these worthless pretenders should have been used doing something useful for the forgotten and neglected American people.
9
This Republican-led Congress appears incapable of doing its job--it cannot elect a speaker, it cannot conduct a non-partisan and proper investigation, and, except to repeal healthcare 50+ times, it cannot pass legislation the nation needs. The party that believes in American exceptionalism is composed of unexceptional political hacks.
9
Just like Whitewater evolved, when Kenneth Starr had announced that he was about to resign as special prosecutor, into investigating Clinton's sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, and Starr stayed on to lead it. Endless investigation then producing nothing, and the same thing now, which will produce nothing. A huge waste of time with a political bent intending to hurt Hillary Clinton but will only otherwise waste taxpayer money.
7
Poor Rupert, he so wanted to run the Punch and Judy Show for president. Hill's great at taking losers' slugs for them, but Petraeus just hasn't got the her depth. All this covering up for Petraeus has left him looking like a loser who needs to beat up a woman to get even. Perfectly pitched match for the coming year.
2
They will drag it out as long as possible, getting as close to election date as they can, then release a bunch of marginally improper sounding emails, but there will be NO smoking gun, or else we would have seen it LONG AGO!! what a waste....
5
Everyone knew from the very beginning of this so-called "Select" Committee ( the TENTH Congressional Committee on Benghazi) that the Republican's goal was to damage Hillary Clinton before the 2016 election.
Now after McCarthy's truth telling that this "committee" was formed to bring down Hillary's poll numbers, the Republican Air Force Major's whistle blowing and Chairman Trey Gowdy saying to Fox host Chris Wallace that Hillary's email account "doesn't have much to do with Benghazi", WHY does this charade continue?
Now after McCarthy's truth telling that this "committee" was formed to bring down Hillary's poll numbers, the Republican Air Force Major's whistle blowing and Chairman Trey Gowdy saying to Fox host Chris Wallace that Hillary's email account "doesn't have much to do with Benghazi", WHY does this charade continue?
7
The truth will put Hillary in jail, watch.
2
The truth will put Hillary in the White House.
1
This assumes that Obama and the partisan Justice Department allow charges to be brought against her. Our real hope for transparency is the FBI investigation involving Clinton.
If Cheney and Wolfowitz aren't in jail, why oh why would you jail HRC? Last time I looked, she was not the one who cost us a fortune in blood and treasure, nor was she the one who destabilized a fragile Middle East.
1
Republicans should be spending their time and efforts on getting their own party back together instead of on witch hunts.
7
Please. I only want to live long enough to see that party go out of existence forever.
1
I find it interesting that all of this time, money & effort is spent trying to lay blame and play politics for 4 American lives lost tragically...but what about the thousands that are lost here every day? Either to gun violence, poverty, or lack of affordability for medical care. Where's the committee for those people?
11
A political show-trial of a competent leader by incompetent politicians. Any reasonable voter can see right through this charade. Only Rabid Republicans think there is any responsibility being demonstrated by this Congress.
What's next? A government shut-down? Oh, that's right: they're already threatening just that...
What's next? A government shut-down? Oh, that's right: they're already threatening just that...
10
What difference, at this point, does it make? We all know Hillary is a liar. We all know Hillary has been bought and paid for by Wall Street contributors. We all know that Hillary out-Nixon's even Richard Nixon. We all know that Bernie Sanders cares more for the working people and the poor than Hillary will ever care. We all know that Hillary will bring the woman-abuser back into the White House to do what he does best. We all know that Hillary treats "the little people" much worse than Leona Helmsley ever did. But the Democrats will nominate Hillary for President, so what difference, at this point, does it make?
9
Hah, typical Republican stoking. Democrats who fall for this kind of attack bring people like Trump closer to the White House, and to my mind that is truly evil, though he just says what the rest of the field is promoting, leading the charge to rule by hatred and hurting.
3
"we all" know this? Don't include me in that "we", thank you
1
And so with "we all know" (not true by the way) about all of these accusations, what point is having a committee for the ninth time actually examine evidence that revealed no wrongdoing during the previous investigations?
Maybe those Whine Wednesdays are worth $4.5 million of taxpayers' money (as opposed to a better road, or health research, for example).
Maybe those Whine Wednesdays are worth $4.5 million of taxpayers' money (as opposed to a better road, or health research, for example).
1
Hillary set up a private server so no one could see what she was doing. She knew what she was doing was wrong. And of course the investigation is going to be on the partisan side. She knew that if she got caught that would be the case too. Call Hillary what you want but most of us would agree that she is smart. Way too smart to not know this may happen. Its very hard to defend her.
8
Of course she took steps to cloak her activities so no one could see what she was doing. Every politician under the sun, in an elective or appointive office, goes to great lengths to mislead opponents and supporters alike. They strive to avoid telegraphing possible future moves or being boxed-in by committing the Cardinal Sin of telling the truth or revealing their positions -- Kevin McCarthy's recent mistake that cost him the House Speakership.
You condemn her for practicing her profession.
You condemn her for practicing her profession.
Do you need to defend Powell or Rice? If not, why not? Are these absurdities reserved only for HRC?
1
Given the information recently, so kindly and recently confirmed by Kevin McCarthy, can we not simply refer to this committee as the "Destroy Hillary's Presidential Prospects Committee"?
Whatever her flaws, I do think that title provides the benefit of some clarity.
Whatever her flaws, I do think that title provides the benefit of some clarity.
41
Covertly, it was supposed to prop Petraeus up while taking Hillary out at the knees; it's a foul play they act upon. As we know, Petraeus was even looser at email security than she. She Trumps him at every turn.
1
I believe every politician makes gaffs.... it's been proven Hillary is guilty even obama admits she made a mistake
1
Another waste of taxpayer dollars from the party of No.
The sound and the fury of a pathetic political witch hunt
to destroy Clinton's run for the Presidency.
The sound and the fury of a pathetic political witch hunt
to destroy Clinton's run for the Presidency.
28
Benghazi alone was not cutting it in the smear Hillary stakes so let's up the ante by adding in her "illegal" e-mails. Could the teaparty/GOP agenda be any more blatant?
25
Who authorized the setup of a private email server in a closet and a bathroom in an apartment
The email system was not illegal, no matter how many times Republicans say so. There has been much precedent for it. What's illegal is using congress, and taxpayer money, to support Republican presidential candidates, by smearing the opposition. I'm really P.O.'d about this.
1
The House select committee on Benghazi, a Republican led partisan political fishing expedition that knows no bounds and has only one fundamental purpose -- to entangle and besmirch, Hillary Clinton.
Beyond the pale even for the GOP led House.
A daunting question -- what in heavens name was Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens (God rest his soul) doing in Benghazi at a time of heightened threat in Libya without an adequate security detail in the first place?
This committee is emblematic of the kind of self-serving, ridiculous and utterly disingenuous crap that leaves the American people with the unmitigated and gut wrenching sense that Washington politics is hopelessly petty and terribly broken.
How about a concurrent Senate investigation into the last fourteen years of continuous and ineffective military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, the fundamental cause of destabilization across the entire region. Lets get GW and Dick and the neocon henchmen in the national hot seat.
Beyond the pale even for the GOP led House.
A daunting question -- what in heavens name was Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens (God rest his soul) doing in Benghazi at a time of heightened threat in Libya without an adequate security detail in the first place?
This committee is emblematic of the kind of self-serving, ridiculous and utterly disingenuous crap that leaves the American people with the unmitigated and gut wrenching sense that Washington politics is hopelessly petty and terribly broken.
How about a concurrent Senate investigation into the last fourteen years of continuous and ineffective military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, the fundamental cause of destabilization across the entire region. Lets get GW and Dick and the neocon henchmen in the national hot seat.
30
If any other federal employee had been as flagrantly flouting government records laws as Clinton, the fbi would have them in chains in a federal high max prison but because it is a democrat running for president, the justice dept. and all the kings men and women are touting every excuse for her reprehensible behavior.
Just another reason not to vote for democrats in 2016!
Just another reason not to vote for democrats in 2016!
8
You would have a point if what Secretary Clinton did was illegal, but it wasn't.
Colin Powell used a private email account and he is not in prison. I defy you to cite one law she violated that was in effect when she established the account. You cannot and this proves the way the Republicans have treated the Clintons since the 90's, that they should be treated worse than all other citizens are treated.
1
Remind me when Lt. Col. Oliver North is next up for parole.
Isn't there anything else in the United States or world that demands more attention that this? No? Everything else in the world is just ship-shape? Or is this another example of Congress fiddling while Rome burns?
26
No it is to show some of the reasons Hillary should never ascend to US Presidency
Incompetency and lying should not be rewarded... Especially to position of US President.
Incompetency and lying should not be rewarded... Especially to position of US President.
Majority Republicans fiddle...
1
...Were intelligent reasonable people. How's this thing go so big? Now, when I turn the sound of my TV, and I have guests over, when I look at Trey Gowdy, with Halloween coming, as I hoped the truth about Benghazi would've come to light. But nothing, nothing except a couple of millions dollars. The last witness, could have been a witness before the year of 2014. It is not the Benghazi committee, but Trey Gowdy calling a liar. We'er intelligent, but, whats it all about? Granted, Rep McCarthy make a Freudian Slip. Was McCarthy's words, in texted, an act of diffusing? McCarthy said the true (paraphrase) 'cause to spread freely'. But the so-called Benghazi Committee, Trey Gowdy, the republican party, and McCarthy, were a four part shame. Abd the American People paying out the huge bill, creating shambles poor house holds. And look who's coming the fix up the GOP? Paul Ryan...
12
OMG...when are we going to protest the witch hunters using our money to political gain! Most of committee members are very wealthy....perhaps they would like to chip in so that the $2MM plus that has already been spent won't grow? This is a farce on so many levels. HRC is not my candidate of choice for president, but these guys really have to let go of the destructive Benghazi train that they have been pushing down the investigative track. There are no NEW aspects of that event. Perhaps is GWB had been investigated this thoroughly, we might now have had the economic crisis that we are still recovering from!
DISBAND this committee!!!
DISBAND this committee!!!
18
As they should be. Perhaps they contain information on why the President remained in bed that fateful night while 4 Americans died defending many others from this attack. Why he then proceeded to fly to Las Vegas for another fundraiser. Why/ where they found the hall to blame everything on a video nobody's ever seen.. The reasons to investigate HRCs emails can go on and on..
5
Why there has been more investigation concerning the deaths of four dead Americans half-way around the world, than there has been into the deaths of thousands on 911. I'm no "truther" but considering over 3000 Americans died on 911, shouldn't we be investigating Bush administration emails to this day?
1
Name me the President who didn't go to a campaign event the day after the death of at least 4 Americans in the last 50 years. You think you are making sense, but all you're doing is valuing the lives of some Americans over others to make a point.
1
The best way to steer clear of those suffering from a full fledged madness is not to mingle with them or let them freely get close and assume we can figure out what they will do, all the time, in advance.Neither the State D. or Ambassador Stevens and his colleagues should be expected to have known that people from whose shoulder a terrible dictator has been removed, by the US and Allies, will turn on them and target them.The lesson to take from Benghazi is that Dictators to retain their power tell all sorts of lies to make their subjects believe that the source of their problem are outsiders ( the US and other Westerners, Israel,etc.) and the beneficiaries of the dictatorial system readily believe that and add to that many ill informed naive 1s who know nothing of the complexity and diversity of cultures and beliefs and that followers of which can co-exist with mutual respect.Hence when a dictatorship crumbles a coherent leadership is absent and different factions, some of which follow really crazy Ideology and author a sub-human and savage rules of engagement and adhere to it.When the Turks pretend not to notice those who r joining ISIS from EU,US,Australia, etc using Ankara and other parts of Turkey as a conduit,I bet they were telling themselves that the extremists wont subject them to a horrific attack.Better to find ways to eliminate as much of the extremists as possible and quarantine the rest not use Benghazi + e-mail 2 lubricate a sluggish Republican Pol drive.TMD.
2
What with all these GOP-trumped-up scandals geared to thwart Obama governance the one real scandal still lingers, ignored and seemingly forgotten. Just what were Bush/Cheney doing on the Bush ranch when they got intelligence reports that al qaeda was going to attack the US in the summer of 2001? It was a huge intelligence failure. It was on Bush/Cheney´s watch that the biggest domestic attack in US history happened, of which the catastrophic costs are still having major repercussions ... the 30% increase in the size of gov´t ($4 trillion for Homeland Security alone and counting), two unnecessary wars (another $4 trillion and counting), and the huge cost in blood and guts. This is the scandal that warrants investigation.
27
Hillary's multiple servers were discovered as a result of the investigation. This aspect should have been moved to another inquiry panel that focused only on the legalities of this and to find out if there were breeches of National Security.
I have not heard any details about the illegal arms deal on the same night in the same area of Benghazi where the Obama administration was trying to smuggle illegal arms to Syrian rebels that night which may have triggered the attack on the compound.
I have not heard any details about the illegal arms deal on the same night in the same area of Benghazi where the Obama administration was trying to smuggle illegal arms to Syrian rebels that night which may have triggered the attack on the compound.
4
Don't forget it was Utah Republican Congressman Chafetz----now seeking the position of House Speaker---who was instrumental in cutting funding for security for State Dept outposts, including Libya.
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/10/rep-chaffetz-says-he-absolu...
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/10/rep-chaffetz-says-he-absolu...
25
Exactly. this is very important.
1
Thanks for the link. Watch this CNN interview to see how Chafetz tries to confuse the interviewer with his nonsense. However she's buying none of it. He's tried the same barrage of words tactic with others - notably Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards - shortly before she swats him away like an annoying insect.
1
Already 4.6 million dollars spent by Trey Gowdy on this committees attempt to discredit Hilary Clinton. No matter who you favor for President in the next election, this misuse of taxpayer dollars should not be allowed. If the Republicans in congress are so desperately afraid of Ms. Clinton, they should each contribute to offset the expense of "their" pet committee.
23
$500 million to train 5 rebels in the fight against Assad in Syria. You don't seem to mind the $500 million that was flushed down the toilet by Obama. So why do you care about a few million spent by Congress doing their jobs? Without this investment, we might never know how poor Hillary Clinton's judgment can be.
Misuse of taxpayer dollars? Like $500 million of taxpayer stimulus dollars on the bankrupt Solyndra under Obama's direction? Or the additional $500 million Obama spent training a measly 5 Syrian rebels?
Can anyone explain what happened to McCarthy? Is he always so vacuous, and we just could tell until he told us so? Or is it the Ambien?
5
Oh, my, I seem to be short a few syllables myself, sorry.
Starting to sound like the Whitewater "investigation" - years of completely unrelated inquiries whose sole purpose were to hurt the Clintons politically. All they do is waste more taxpayer money.
17
Sounds like the Watergate investigations - years of completely unrelated investigations whole sole purpose was to get Richard Nixon. Hillary was a lawyer on the Watergate committee investigation. Democrats did not think Watergate was a waste of taxpayer money.
Tony: a bipartisan panel investigating Richard Nixon voted two articles of impeachment against him, for obstruction of justice in covering up his and his campaign committee's involvement in a break-in at the headquarters of the Democratic Party and for contempt of Congress. Nixon broke the law in many other ways as well, primarily by using agencies of government like the FBI against his political opponents, whom he regarded as "enemies."
In short, Tony, there is no comparison between the trumped-up, phony Benghazi investigation and the bipartisan Watergate investigation of criminal activity and abuse of power orchestrated from the Oval Office.
In short, Tony, there is no comparison between the trumped-up, phony Benghazi investigation and the bipartisan Watergate investigation of criminal activity and abuse of power orchestrated from the Oval Office.
What other candidate could survive having his or her emails publicly examined?
13
All of them. And which candidate could be so stupid as to take a senior national security position and then use private email servers housed in a bathroom in Denver? Which candidate with a perfectly good government email server would spend money to set up their own private email server to avoid FOIA disclosures?
Joseph
The other candidates were not Secretary of State and did not sign a form saying what devices they would use, nor did they use such inadequate protection for the server, nor did they delete sensitive data while claiming not to have.
The other candidates were not Secretary of State and did not sign a form saying what devices they would use, nor did they use such inadequate protection for the server, nor did they delete sensitive data while claiming not to have.
Since you asked, probably Bernie Sanders.
This committee had questionable credibility from its inception. It now has absolutely no credibility left. If it were to find anything, and that is doubtful, the information would be so tainted by the revelations of its true intent to be of little value whatsoever. Congress needs to put and end to this farce and get itself sorted out. Never, ever, has such a despicable spectacle unfolded on Capitol Hill.
11
Of all the brilliant political tricks the Clintons have played in their illustrious careers, tricking the clueless Republicans into focusing almost exclusively on Hilary's e-Mail servers is proving to be the most brilliant and effective of all. It will not only take Mrs. Clinton all the way to the White House; it will give the Democrats both Houses of Congress as well.
4
Where are my smelling salts?
It really is down-the-rabbit-hole time when the conspiratorialists can maintain a straight face while crediting the Clintons with engineering investigations against themselves to achieve Clinton goals!
It really is down-the-rabbit-hole time when the conspiratorialists can maintain a straight face while crediting the Clintons with engineering investigations against themselves to achieve Clinton goals!
4.5 million dollars. That money could have been used to feed a lot of poor hungry people. What a waste of resources.
15
How about the $500 million Obama spent to train 5 Syrian rebels? or the $500 million also spent by Obama on the now bankrupt solar power company Solyndra using stimulus money. Both were taxpayer funded. If Clinton had not broken federal law by using her own server there would be no need for this investigation.
Are you complaining about the $500 million Obama spent to train 5 Syrian rebels to fight Assad? That too could have fed alot of poor hungry people.
Could, in theory feed a lot of poor folks.
In the actual Federal Government, it would have paid for a change in the letterhead at the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
In the actual Federal Government, it would have paid for a change in the letterhead at the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Congress usually gets very displeased when money is not spent for the budgeted purpose.
4
Other than to say Trey Gowdy's investigation has indeed run longer and has cost taxpayers more than the Watergate investigation, no one should compare Trey Gowdy's work to the investigation of Watergate. The Watergate investigate was conducted by real statesmen who understood their responsibilities as representatives of the people and stewards of the nation. Trey Gowdy is quite clearly a partisan hack with no similar understanding of his job in Congress. As compared to Senator Sam Ervin's Watergate committee, Trey Gowdy's Benghazi committee is a new toy that he's trying to make work in his kindergarten crib.
18
Barbara Jordan would have had Gowdy for lunch.
2
Hillary is so much better than Richard Nixon in lying and obfuscating the truth. Hillary is so much better at just ignoring Congress and cutting corners.
Not surprising, since so much about Benghazi appears to be discoverable in her emails rather than in her public statements; and particularly emails that she never turned over but that Blumenthal did. Ooops.
Particularly interesting will be the emails of other key aides, and what they have that somehow Hillary regarded as "personal" and chose not to share with State.
Particularly interesting will be the emails of other key aides, and what they have that somehow Hillary regarded as "personal" and chose not to share with State.
3
What about Benghazi in her emails are you talking about?
1
Huh?
Even Gowdy has stated publicly that there is not much about Benghazi in the emails!
Do you know something the chairman doesn't know?
Even Gowdy has stated publicly that there is not much about Benghazi in the emails!
Do you know something the chairman doesn't know?
1
Mickey & comeagain:
Are you kidding? Her emails are chock full of Benghazi intelligence, some of it regarded as classified even if not marked as such. The Times itself issued a "report" on the subject: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/us/politics/in-clinton-emails-on-bengh....
Also, it interestingly turns out that Blumenthal's emails to her contain all sorts of conversations and advice on Benghazi, even though she must have considered them "personal", because they weren't included in the ones she turned over to State. It'll be interesting to see those of Mills, Sullivan and Abedin compared with what Hillary turned in.
Are you kidding? Her emails are chock full of Benghazi intelligence, some of it regarded as classified even if not marked as such. The Times itself issued a "report" on the subject: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/us/politics/in-clinton-emails-on-bengh....
Also, it interestingly turns out that Blumenthal's emails to her contain all sorts of conversations and advice on Benghazi, even though she must have considered them "personal", because they weren't included in the ones she turned over to State. It'll be interesting to see those of Mills, Sullivan and Abedin compared with what Hillary turned in.
It seems Joe Biden is waiting in the wings when he should take over from Ms. Clinton as Presidential candidate. She has too many enemies.
2
This is a partisan witch-hunt; nothing more.
9
The committee can find no wrong doing on Secretary Clintons part pertaining to Benghazi. She has admitted that in hindsight it was a mistake to use a private server. The committee has the emails and can find nothing. So what are they doing? Drinking wine on our dime on "Wine Wednesdays." Truly unbelievable.
13
It is truly frightening that some Americans, including Ms Fiorina, continue to claim that an "embassy" was attacked. As this article points out, it was an outpost, obviously in a very dangerous area. Why anybody chose to go there, at that particular time, is of concern, but obviously there was not the security that you would find at an embassy. I read in these comments many of the Fox talking points that have been discredited over time, but people still continue to put them out there. I recall that when this was occurring in Libya, Egypt was blowing up as well. So I guess the Republicans will choose to spend our hard earned tax dollars mucking around in e-mails hoping to find some nugget of information from Ms Clinton that could embarrass her. What, you say, she doesn't want to sit at the same lunch table as so and so? Horrors!
9
That same Republican Party, guided by budgetmeister Paul Ryan, was behind the defunding of US state department security abroad. So odd that the Republicans have not chosen to investigate that.
1
Remember, its our taxpayer money used to investigate. Rebuild a dangerous bridge or highway? Investigative committees should have an end date by which a report would be issued. Not endless and endless. To bad the role of govt officials leading up to the Iraq invasion was never investigated? Treason?
8
Why wasn't the House select committee investigating why House republicans voted to cut embassy security by $128 million in 2011?
9
Because they didn't, Ken. They cut $$ from the requested increase. Smart governing and managing means you reallocate resources using the funds you have.
Josh – –
Yes, very smart. With super results.
Yes, very smart. With super results.
And the story of the former staffer who accuses the committee of targeting Hillary for partisan reasons gains more credibility. If they really were intent on investigating the Benghazi incident, they wouldn't let themselves get sidetracked by this non-story. Of course, maybe it is that they realize that there have already been several "investigations" of Benghazi with no results, so they have to switch their focus to something else. (A little reminiscent of Ken Starr's "investigation", which turned to Monica Lewinsky because it hadn't found anything else after 10s of millions of dollars worth of "investigation".)
6
This freak show of a committee needs to be searching for a new leader instead of checking out their opponents email.
8
"Now, 17 months later — longer than the Watergate investigation lasted" - might I opine that if Scty. Clinton co-operated fully with the panel, rather than trying to duck the issues at hand this mess could have ended a long time ago. Interest in her 'e'mails would also have been a non issue had she not violated the law by using her own private server.
1
The Committee has lost most, if not all, of its credibility. Those on the right will just be in their I-told-you-so mindset and those on the left will see Rep. Gowdy acting like a prosecutor looking to convict - a role he plays very well on C-Span. Those in the middle have to acknowledge the political agenda which has now been corroborated. Seems like building the (questionable) sound bites to use against Mrs. Clinton in her campaign is all they'll get. It's the law of diminished returns
16
Absolutely disgusting, and just when we thought the right wing of the republican party couldn't go any lower, they set the bar below ground.
15
Thanks for sharing the official name of the panel: "The Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi, Libya."
I had long assumed it was the "Select Committee on Smearing Hillary Clinton" or, more colloquially, "The McCarthy Hearings."
I had long assumed it was the "Select Committee on Smearing Hillary Clinton" or, more colloquially, "The McCarthy Hearings."
10
The House Select Committee is not Hillary's real problem. Her real problem is that the President does not like, has never liked her, has put the Justice Department on her tail, absolutely loves watching her twist in the wind, and has goaded his own VP to run against her for the nomination. Obama has a lot to say about the Democratic nominee, and he's saying in many ways, large and small, that it isn't going to be Hillary. The Republicans have nothing to do with that.
1
You have an enormous amount of inside information. Could you please disclose your sources?
1
Hillary is a pathological liar. Democrats don't care.
8
How about we stop making this a Republican vs Democrat issue and focus on the getting the facts. Frankly I am sick of this diversion of a political agenda and want the truth explained. The victims deserve the honest reporting without trying to make this a bias political agenda.
3
Do you care just as much about the victims of the Iraq war which was the result of blatant lying by the Republicans? Just curious.
1
This whole hubbub is a vastly overblown and unnecessary political mudslinging circus arising out of a fixation for smearing Hillary Clinton. This highly annoying distraction from real issues could disappear immediately, if Hillary Clinton would only finally do the right thing: retire from her long political career and let other better qualified and more trustworthy candidates for high office have a chance in the limelight instead.
4
Who are those more qualified candidates?
1
WHAT??!
1
So the democrats and others need to grab the bull by its horn and end this insanity. The republicans seem to always get away with whatever they do, they need to be held responsible for their actions. The got away with the Iraq war and now this... just very sad.
There was never an investigation to get to the bottom of who decided to make up the story on WMD in Iraq, which cost us 4500 american soldiers, 0.5m lives in total, trillion of dollars (that mostly a struggling middle class have to pay for), and a world that is now a lot more dangerous.
There was never an investigation to get to the bottom of who decided to make up the story on WMD in Iraq, which cost us 4500 american soldiers, 0.5m lives in total, trillion of dollars (that mostly a struggling middle class have to pay for), and a world that is now a lot more dangerous.
11
That's true, there's some sort of conspiracy against the Clinton's.
10
This committee is such an embarrassment to the nation and a total waste of taxpayer dollars. They voted over 50 times to repeal Obamacare, so does that mean there will be 50 Benghazi Committees? We are on number eight now.
6
I think that if the Republicans were smart (which they aren't), they'd put a lid on this witch hunt now that their cover was completely blown by Kevin McCarthy. But no, we've got to keep raising doubts about her rather than engaging with her on some meaningful level about the major issues of the day (a battle of ideas which they know they wouldn't win in the court of public opinion).
And once the email business turns up nothing, what then? More Whitewater? More Vince Foster? COME ON!!!
And once the email business turns up nothing, what then? More Whitewater? More Vince Foster? COME ON!!!
8
A bunch of liars seeking to destroy a presidential candidate, there is no interest in Benghazi or the lives lost there. It is shameful, disgusting and a waste of time and 4.5 million dollars but these people are so vile that this will continue for as long as they can get away with it.
5
Thank you, Republicans, for perpetuating your ever-transparent "vast, right-wing conspiracy." With each new Clinton witch hunt, you reveal yourselves more clearly. Disgusting politics at its very worst. Glad to see Gowdy has parlayed his "Forensic Files" fame into lifeguard of the cesspool.
6
Benghazi is proving to be a loser, and Republicans need to keep the show going. Like the statistical 'random walk' they keep hoping something will turn up that Republicans can glom onto that will at least embarrass Clinton, even if it doesn't damage her election prospects. Trey Gowdy is desperate for something, anything to keep his investigation alive and in the news, even if it isn'the remotely relevant to his committee's official purpose.
7
So much belaboring of the obvious -- and bemoaning of the solution.
Enough.
If Sanders survives, a new day's dawning.
Enough.
If Sanders survives, a new day's dawning.
1
For NYT to brag about breaking the story on the email server when they were snookered by openly corrupt and self-serving Gawdy to print that a criminal investigation had been opened which was an bold lie shows how in bed with Gowdy this paper has been. Still the "paper of record" hasn't retracted the widely panned story that was proven completely false. The only reason these small brained and small minded old angry white guys can target our first female candidate for president is our sick, insipid and partisan press. We are sick of the stupid lies fed to dumb reporters by hacks.
Obama can be very petty as evidenced by his "mistake" remark. I wonder if Obama remembers he was in charge of the CIA and the State Dept. and even Susan Rice, when the murder of our ambassador happened? Also, did he inform his staff they shouldn't use private servers, and if so, why didn't he protect the government servers which have been infiltrated numerous times on his watch. What a pathetic response from the person who should be questioned. And the whole world know NYT pretty much invented Whitewater and used it to sell papers. Why don't all of your male pundits, including Maureen Dowd, go make up another scandal and drop this one for a while since it is nothing but a witch hunt by the party and a paper that hates and fears females in charge?
Obama can be very petty as evidenced by his "mistake" remark. I wonder if Obama remembers he was in charge of the CIA and the State Dept. and even Susan Rice, when the murder of our ambassador happened? Also, did he inform his staff they shouldn't use private servers, and if so, why didn't he protect the government servers which have been infiltrated numerous times on his watch. What a pathetic response from the person who should be questioned. And the whole world know NYT pretty much invented Whitewater and used it to sell papers. Why don't all of your male pundits, including Maureen Dowd, go make up another scandal and drop this one for a while since it is nothing but a witch hunt by the party and a paper that hates and fears females in charge?
6
The NYT has completely and utterly lost my respect with its coverage of this issue. It's just like when they were transcriptionists for Dick Cheney about the Iraq War, and then he used the NYT story for which he had been the unnamed source to bolster his absurd public claims about WMDs. This paper makes money by engaging in corruption getting political hatchet-lies from interested sources and allowing them anonymity and then gaining news momentum when they act on the ginned-up attention they receive because the NYT is carrying their water for them. Disgusting. Shameful. Utterly unconscionable.
1
The real Benghazi scandal is not the one GOPers like to talk about but it´s real and needs to be exposed for what it is. The GOP-dominated congress slashed the diplomatic security budget by half a billion dollars. Sec. Clinton warned that this would hamper security efforts and jeopardize the safety of diplomats. They ignored that warning and lives were indeed lost because of inadequate security. The GOP has no scruples though ranting and raving about the scrambling that the Benghazi incident caused in the State Dep´t totally oblivious to their own culpability, and assessing blame on others. This is the height of shameful hypocrisy.
11
You are right on the mark. If the committee wants to target an individual, it should be Republican budget slasher Paul Ryan.
Remember how crazy Repubs went with that phony scandal about the IRS using govt power to make life difficult for right-wing groups?
But when they use the power of govy and taxpayer money for purely political purposes we're supposed to believe they're as pure as driven snow.
But when they use the power of govy and taxpayer money for purely political purposes we're supposed to believe they're as pure as driven snow.
12
Republicans only agenda is to prevent the people's agenda. 9/11 never had such an extensive Congressional Committee. If over 3,000 deaths, countless health issues and the first mainland invasion of the US isn't that important, why is this?
Exactly, partisan witch hunt at its worst.
Exactly, partisan witch hunt at its worst.
14
Anyone recall the Rose law firm billing records magical reappearance in her third floor book room? In the words of an esteemed writer for this newspaper, "She is a congenital liar".
6
No one but obsessive Clinton-hating right wing conspiratorialists. Because there was no there there. Just like there is no there here.
1
Gowdy is doing us all a favor. Biden would be a far better candidate to defeat the lunatic cresting the republican primary polls
1
If Trump becomes the Republican nominee, it will be irrelevant who runs on the Democratic side. Trump could not win a general election even if he were running against a ham sandwich. Based on sheer demographics alone, he would lose a general election in a historic landslide. And he is weakening the rest of the Republican lineup more each day with his bullying but hauntingly resonant taunts.
Every Democrat in the nation should send Trump a fruit basket. And maybe throw in one for Kevin McCarthy as well.
Every Democrat in the nation should send Trump a fruit basket. And maybe throw in one for Kevin McCarthy as well.
1
The lives lost in embassies/US offices during the Bush years were grievous.
Where is the GOP outrage for these incidents?
>June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.
>February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Truck bomb kills 17.
>February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.
>December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.
>March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomat directly targeted by the assailants.
>September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.
>July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.
>March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.
>September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy
Where is the GOP outrage for these incidents?
>June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.
>February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Truck bomb kills 17.
>February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.
>December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.
>March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomat directly targeted by the assailants.
>September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.
>July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.
>March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.
>September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy
24
The fact that you are able to list these suggests they were reported accurately by the State Department and no attempt was made to cover them up. As for outrage, I'll leave it to you to define. With Benghazi we have a very different issue. Both the SecState and POTUS went around the world selling a phony story linking the Benghazi incident to an obscure video against Islam. The question is why did they lie and what is it that they are covering up? These issues were not germane to the list of attacks you cited.
And not a single committee investigated all these attacks!
1
Coming to you once again from the party of government over-spending and over-reach!
4
The investigation into the deaths of Chris Stevens and three others conducted by the House select committee has revealed the toxic machinations of the rank-and-file Republicans, at the expense of taxpayers!!!
At the end of the day, it is all about preventing Hillary Clinton from winning the 2016 presidential election.
Of course she made a mistake by not using the government account for official emails. Her relationship with Sidney Blumenthal was dodgy, because he had business interests in Libya, and he was paid by the Clinton foundation for being an "informal adviser to Mrs. Clinton".
At the end of the day, it is all about preventing Hillary Clinton from winning the 2016 presidential election.
Of course she made a mistake by not using the government account for official emails. Her relationship with Sidney Blumenthal was dodgy, because he had business interests in Libya, and he was paid by the Clinton foundation for being an "informal adviser to Mrs. Clinton".
2
Back in the 1990s people attacked her for her hairstyles and they still criticize her "pantsuits." Maybe the Benghazi committee could take that on, too....
8
Stonewalling by the Obama administration,Clinton and Democrats has caused the prolongation of the Benghazi investigation.
More secretive and classified Clinton emails have been uncovered weekly.
Clinton's untrustworthiness and dishonesty have been highlighted by her stonewalling and deceitful statements and actions.
The facts peak loudly.
More secretive and classified Clinton emails have been uncovered weekly.
Clinton's untrustworthiness and dishonesty have been highlighted by her stonewalling and deceitful statements and actions.
The facts peak loudly.
2
I am not even a big fan of HC but this is a particularly aimless witchhunt.
To our elected House, fix the budget. That affects all Americans.
10
Investigating the Clintons is a full time job. No one believes Hillary will suddenly become more transparent, honest or law abiding if elected, which is why this investigation is a harbinger of things to come if she's elected.
5
It's a harbinger of things to come simply because this has become the new norm - pick at members of the Administration through establishing "investigative committees" that do nothing but waste taxpayer money. It is an attempt of war by attrition - constantly calling every move one makes into question, without any real evidence. There has been no actual evidence of wrong doing - these are just fishing expeditions and smear campaigns. That those serving the committee have made accusations to that effect, that have now been shown to be true, testifies to that. The ones who should be called before an ethics committee are the chairmen of these committees. This is simply politics at its worst.
2
Not elected but merely nominated. She won't be able to expound policy preferences or effectively back-pedal from statements made during the primaries to get to the left of Bernie and Biden because she'll be so busy answering changes between the convention and the election.
Personally I think they should move on to the current secretary of State. There are important questions that need to be answered regarding Mr Kerry's service aboard a swift boat during the Vietnam war.
11
How in the world could this comment become a "NYT Pick"? The Times believes there are actually doubts regarding Mr. Kerry's service during Vietnam? Is this comment meant to be facetious? Secretary of State Kerry volunteered for military service when he didn't have to; he volunteered for combat service when he could have avoided it; and he volunteered for the most hazardous combat service in which naval personnel were engaged: service on swift boats in the Mekong Delta. He served admirably and courageously, and all of the accusations against him were found to be false.
So why in the world does the NYT believe that "there are important questions that need to be answered" regarding Secretary Kerry's war service? First, the Times spends an inordinate amount of ink on the non-issue of Ms. Clinton's emails. And now it wants to resist the swiftboating of John Kerry.
Unbelievable.
So why in the world does the NYT believe that "there are important questions that need to be answered" regarding Secretary Kerry's war service? First, the Times spends an inordinate amount of ink on the non-issue of Ms. Clinton's emails. And now it wants to resist the swiftboating of John Kerry.
Unbelievable.
1
Sean:
It's called sarcasm.
It's called sarcasm.
2
Give me a break. The guy ran for President. Don't you think that Vietnam stuff has been vetted already? Seems to me you are stuck 50 years in the past.
The Republican hoopla over Benghazi began with Senators Dump and Dumber, McCain and Graham, denouncing Sec. Clinton. Anyone with a little intelligence and 15 minutes of time would see that their political grandstanding put virtually all the US foreign service, 15,000 people serving abroad in danger. They tipped off ISIS on easy kills, US representatives in so great a number that security and protection is virtually impossible.
5
It is absolutely shocking that the Republicans are using the political power that comes with controlling the House, to seek political advantage over the Democratic front runner for president. And it is not surprising that media exposure of that fact, in some sort of selfsubsuming breathless naivete, in an attempt to shame the Republicans into tolerance towards their political rivals, is no more than a high whine.
6
Clinton's emails became the focus of the committee after a political hit job by the NYT's that even the times admitted was not true, misleading and full of lies.
Gowdy and his sources leaked a load of bull to the NYT's and the Times doesn't want to stop the leak gravy train.
Gowdy and his sources leaked a load of bull to the NYT's and the Times doesn't want to stop the leak gravy train.
16
"Republican staff members and Mr. Gowdy said they were confident they had made important progress in understanding what happened in Benghazi."
Yep, they sure got to the bottom of it!
Oh wait... "it" was a wine glass.
Glacial pace, my friends, glacial pace...
Yep, they sure got to the bottom of it!
Oh wait... "it" was a wine glass.
Glacial pace, my friends, glacial pace...
4
This kangaroo court will find some confusing bits of something or other to release. To release in October 2016, that is.
The real question, (and possibly the reason her emails weRe on a private server), is if the Clintons traded Hilary's state department influence for payments to the Clinton foundation. Why else would she have set up a secret account?
Frustration and anger at the political nature of these committees is understandable, but don't any of you think the Clintons need to come clean? At the very least the arrogance and disregard for rules is breathtaking
Frustration and anger at the political nature of these committees is understandable, but don't any of you think the Clintons need to come clean? At the very least the arrogance and disregard for rules is breathtaking
3
As hard as the Republicans try to turn every scandal investigation into a Democratic Watergate...it just comes out that they a playing a partisan game...First McCarthy now Podliska....they are really scared because there are now two sources that say this is a witchhunt....Classic Republican dirty tricks...right out of the Watergate era....Howard Hunt and John Mitchell where are you?
7
Hillary Clinton is a woman,who will be the first female President of the United States.This fact,probably supersedes any political motivations of opposition republicans.There is an undisguised and undeniable misogynist rage within the conservative 'movement.America,as the world's only 'super power,is or seems to be intimidated,by the leadership qualities of her 'gentler sex.The democratic label,that opponents have christened Hillary with and to which she most surely conforms and confirms,has proven an adequate ally,for the reactionary 'war on women,American women.When she becomes President,she will be able to attest,at last to the breakage of that last 'glass ceiling.Barack Obama,in his own way,is/would be proud to have such successor...
4
I'm far more furious about a $2 billion dollar FCPA get away by NewsCorp's crooked CEO who ALSO kept a HillaryBerry which she had wiped against court orders, but the UK police declined to retrieve her contents while arresting 72 reporters and their sources from the email server the company gave police to dig through, instead.
Are we establishing a two tier system of surveillance? Inpenetrable privacy for executives and Prism for the rest of us?
Are we establishing a two tier system of surveillance? Inpenetrable privacy for executives and Prism for the rest of us?
I'll preface this by admitting my own bias, and saying that I'm a pretty conservative individual. But even for me, it's easy to see and believe that the Republicans in Congress seek to drag out the Benghazi issue solely for political grandstanding. That being said, Clinton's emails are a completely separate issue. Those of us who have worked for the government know that the security of classified information is not anything to toy with. Even liberal government workers know that any serious breach of security procedures in dealing with classified information will result in immediate dismissal from your job, permanent revocation of your security clearance, and will almost certainly land you in prison. Anyone else who sent TS information on an unclassified server would go to prison. That's not politics; that's fact.
It legitimately angers me that so many people, from Democratic politicians to voters, casually dismiss her egregious violation of federal law. If someone breaks the law, no matter who they are or whether their party is in charge, they should be held accountable, period. Republicans are just as guilty of covering for their own, but saying "he did it too!" is the most childish and pathetic excuse in the book.
It legitimately angers me that so many people, from Democratic politicians to voters, casually dismiss her egregious violation of federal law. If someone breaks the law, no matter who they are or whether their party is in charge, they should be held accountable, period. Republicans are just as guilty of covering for their own, but saying "he did it too!" is the most childish and pathetic excuse in the book.
17
Oh c'mon JAB, if we are going to talk about private email servers held secretly by elected people in USA federal govt and being against "federal law" then we need to talk about GWB's and Cheney's private email server when he was president. It isnt a secret these days and you can google to verify. The only reason it isnt a hot media topic is because all those involved are out of office. Oh and the server "crashed" so all data was lost (cough cough).
2
JAB, why do you say Secretary Clinton broke the law? I don't take her word for it either....I have read repeatedly in very reputable media sources, including the Times, that your her use of a private email server was not against federal law or regulations at the time. Was it wise? No. Was it an "egregious violation of federal law"? No.
2
According to repeated authoritative assessments, there was no violation of federal law here. Was it good judgment? Unquestionably not. I was very angry about Hillary Clinton's stupid choice when I first heard about the private email. But not quite as angry as I was about, among other things, learning that I had been lied to by my president about a reason to go to war. Among many, many other things.
Let's keep some perspective. Perfection is never one of the choices on the electoral menu.
Let's keep some perspective. Perfection is never one of the choices on the electoral menu.
This is little more than an inept attempt by the Times to help HRC before tomorrow night's "debate." An investigation by its very nature must go where the facts lead. HRC's secret email system may have been used to spin the Benghazi incident and may have intentionally misled the public. The facts are quite different from what she says and the emails that she has not turned over may show this. Sidney Blumenthal's hacked emails and his testimony already have confirmed that she did not turn over all emails related to Libya. The Democrats and the Times (somewhat redundant) should allow the investigation to proceed. The "plain view theory" of law allows for investigating things that become evident during any investigation regardless of whether they are closely connected to the original aim. It's like finding drugs in plain view while executing a search warrant for a gun. All lawful and acceptable.
3
Poor dear baby boys in the GOP.
They are simply proving their own chief failures are greed and hatred.
What a waste of time, money and tons of print!
They are simply proving their own chief failures are greed and hatred.
What a waste of time, money and tons of print!
4
Kate: Don't you want to know what happened here? Don't you think the parents and loved ones of those who were killed and injured in Benghazi want to know what really happened? Are you so enamored with Clinton that the truth is meaningless to you? We've just been through an administration that lied to the American people on everything from the economy to healthcare, the IRS, and gun-running to Mexico. Do you really want to continue this disregard for rule of law and our basic constitutional rights? If so, you must ask yourself why.
How come feel so tired...????
I have an idea-- anyone who doesn't like any candidate, simply compete and run for the office. I'm sure one of them is loved by whole world. Yarn. Tired.
Tomorrow comes early, need to work to keep me alive. News say another dozen just died somewhere. Good that we are alive and debate.
Well good morning.
I have an idea-- anyone who doesn't like any candidate, simply compete and run for the office. I'm sure one of them is loved by whole world. Yarn. Tired.
Tomorrow comes early, need to work to keep me alive. News say another dozen just died somewhere. Good that we are alive and debate.
Well good morning.
"Clinton emails now focus of Benghazi Commitee" - the perfect headline for a Borowitz Report article, one would think. Satirists have a hard time keeping up with reality these days.
8
Much ado about nothing. Just another groundless, politically motivated Republican farce that is a total waste of time and taxpayer money. Republicans have no sincere concern for fairness or justice at all. The Iraq
War, or 9-11, would take a century or more to investigate if it were examined in the same pointless detail that Benghazi and the Clinton e-mails have been subject to.
War, or 9-11, would take a century or more to investigate if it were examined in the same pointless detail that Benghazi and the Clinton e-mails have been subject to.
7
I am a registered Democrat and I want to know if some of the accusations are true before considering my vote. Even the Republican investigator who was fired never said that the Benghazi committee was established as a political ploy. He said that in recent months Republicans have tried to turn it into one, which is unfortunate. The Democrats on the committee have an interest to discover all the details, so that we can have a closure and it does not hunt us in the future. It is also the interest of a free press in a democratic country to make sure the absolute truth is uncovered. This paper would service the nation better if it demands expedited process and conclusion so that we can move on.
3
To address just one of your points, the Republican investigator would have been in no position whatsoever to understand the motivation that led to the convening of this select committee.
1
All of this political theater is entirely intended to put the Democratic presidential front-runner on the defensive. But it's been instructive to note how, even as the committee has become more and more partisan and strays further from its original mandate, most of the nation, outside of the passionate coterie of Hillary haters, is no longer paying attention.
The deft way Clinton has been shrugging it off is obviously driving Gowdy & his cohorts crazy. They will continue to try to up the ante, and she will just keep running an effective campaign to be the next president of the United States.
The deft way Clinton has been shrugging it off is obviously driving Gowdy & his cohorts crazy. They will continue to try to up the ante, and she will just keep running an effective campaign to be the next president of the United States.
59
I hope that Hilary Clinton at least sent Kevin McCarthy a fruit basket. Many stupid Republicans have been elected to the House in recent years (thank you, gerrymandering) but this one is too stupid to even follow a simple script! Proclaiming openly what we've all known all along. Poor silly dummy.
Funny times if they weren't so tragic.
Funny times if they weren't so tragic.
6
The NYT has at every turn gone out of it's way to damage Ms. Clinton and to fuel the fire of the Republican investigations.
9
The NY Times does it again. An article about the politicization of this investigation. But not until paragraph 11 that Bradey Podliska is mentioned. Not until para 28 that the McCarthy interview on Fox is mentioned. The final paragraph about how Clinton has turned it to her advantage. No mention that prior Secretaries of State have used private e-mail, though not private servers. And no mention anywhere of leaks from the committee in general and in specifically the NY Times and its role in publishing a wholly inaccurate leak. You really do not like Hillary Clinton.
7
This investigation is so much tripe. I'm not even supporting Hilary Clinton but seriously, isn't using the office for political reasons criminal? The Republicans have no shame.
9
This is, of course, an endless politically motivated hunt to find any way at all to portray Clinton in the worst possible light. Gowdy and his companions have shown themselves to be nothing more than cheap political hatchet men with no real goals. Email servers? What in the world does this have to do with Benghazi? Gowdy and his ilk have no ethics, and when it comes down to it they really aren't interested in serving America or being patriotic. It's just endless political nonsense. America should throw these bums out and get people in office who are really interested in governing.
9
I have been an ardent admirer of Bill Clinton, a "sweet, lovable & loving," but not very likable human. Since Hillary Clinton has been his right hand all these years, I admire her too. Her best time was in 2008. As they say better late than never, it's perfectly alright if she becomes the next president.
Unfortunately, Mrs.Clinton is also not very likable. Some people are that way. They can't help it often. Since she is about 75% good, that's enough for me.
Getting to the point, since she has turned over the server, and they are recovering deleted ones, I do not expect anything "earthshaking" to be discovered. The chances are she WILL be cleared of any wrong doings or gross negligence. Republicans may still fish for something incriminating. But they are unlikely to find anything.
If I may add, NYT apparently has restrained their criticisms & "attacks" on Hillary Clinton, after it was criticized for being unfair to Mrs. Clinton.
Unfortunately, Mrs.Clinton is also not very likable. Some people are that way. They can't help it often. Since she is about 75% good, that's enough for me.
Getting to the point, since she has turned over the server, and they are recovering deleted ones, I do not expect anything "earthshaking" to be discovered. The chances are she WILL be cleared of any wrong doings or gross negligence. Republicans may still fish for something incriminating. But they are unlikely to find anything.
If I may add, NYT apparently has restrained their criticisms & "attacks" on Hillary Clinton, after it was criticized for being unfair to Mrs. Clinton.
5
My husband was acquainted with both Bill and Hillary Clinton back in Arkansas days, and his Arkansan cousin even more so.
Your assertion that Bill Clinton is unlikable is strikingly out of step with the way most people feel about him – – both those who have known him personally and those who only know him through his public life. Do you know him? Have you even read the exhaustive biography "First in his Class"?
Among other strong traits, Bill Clinton's epic likability was a key to his rise. I now live not far from the Clinton home in Chappaqua, New York. I have never engaged with the Clintons personally here, but I know many people who have and do. The first thing anyone says after interacting with Bill Clinton is that he is an absolutely magnetic personality. I've heard it again and again, even from local Republicans.
Hillary Clinton is more of a mixed bag, likability-wise. My husband knew her fairly well, having worked on projects with her, and he liked her a lot, but he agrees that she often does not project warmth outside of the circle she is in close contact with. My husband says that he liked her more and more as he had more and more contact with her. And he deeply admired her intellect, integrity, and work ethic.
Basically, his take is that Bill almost always inspires affection in those who know him. Hillary almost always inspires respect.
Your assertion that Bill Clinton is unlikable is strikingly out of step with the way most people feel about him – – both those who have known him personally and those who only know him through his public life. Do you know him? Have you even read the exhaustive biography "First in his Class"?
Among other strong traits, Bill Clinton's epic likability was a key to his rise. I now live not far from the Clinton home in Chappaqua, New York. I have never engaged with the Clintons personally here, but I know many people who have and do. The first thing anyone says after interacting with Bill Clinton is that he is an absolutely magnetic personality. I've heard it again and again, even from local Republicans.
Hillary Clinton is more of a mixed bag, likability-wise. My husband knew her fairly well, having worked on projects with her, and he liked her a lot, but he agrees that she often does not project warmth outside of the circle she is in close contact with. My husband says that he liked her more and more as he had more and more contact with her. And he deeply admired her intellect, integrity, and work ethic.
Basically, his take is that Bill almost always inspires affection in those who know him. Hillary almost always inspires respect.
2
"Clinton Emails Became the New Focus of Benghazi Inquiry." Yes, the very inquiry that has been vetted ad nauseam for a few years with no nefarious coverup uncovered on the part of Hillary Clinton or anyone else, Yes, the same inquiry that former candidate for Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, admitted was a politically motivated inquiry.
11
The great tradition continues.
These are the same guys who tried to impeach Bill Clinton for lying under oath for adultery.
The original charge of the Starr Commission was of course to investigate a real estate deal called White Water on which the Clinton's lost money.
Go figure!
These are the same guys who tried to impeach Bill Clinton for lying under oath for adultery.
The original charge of the Starr Commission was of course to investigate a real estate deal called White Water on which the Clinton's lost money.
Go figure!
16
Please change your headline to read:
Clinton Emails Now Focus of Four Million Dollar Benghazi Investigation.
And then we can discuss the Return on Investment.
Clinton Emails Now Focus of Four Million Dollar Benghazi Investigation.
And then we can discuss the Return on Investment.
8
No matter how you term it, Hillary is vulnerable in so many areas that make her unfit to be President. Her email debacle alone means that her judgement is always in favor of secrecy and skirting the law. !!!
6
Compared to the republicans Greatest Hits?
Watergate,
Iran Contra,
The S&L Debacle,
Allowing bin Laden to mosey, unmolested, out of Tora Bora,
The Charge of The Fools Brigade into Iraq,
Making torture USG policy,
Subcontracting torture to, among others, Bashar al Assad of Syria
Allowing New Orleans to drown,
Fiddling while Wall Street burned 40% of US household wealth.
Puhleez.
Watergate,
Iran Contra,
The S&L Debacle,
Allowing bin Laden to mosey, unmolested, out of Tora Bora,
The Charge of The Fools Brigade into Iraq,
Making torture USG policy,
Subcontracting torture to, among others, Bashar al Assad of Syria
Allowing New Orleans to drown,
Fiddling while Wall Street burned 40% of US household wealth.
Puhleez.
2
The funny thing to me with all of this argument is, is how partisan-based it is instead of fact-based. I tend to agree with AACNY, who seems to focus more on the facts. I've seen enough of both the Clintons and Obama not to trust them one iota. Mr. Clinton should have been jailed for perjury and other crimes. His honey-bunch, well, we'll see. Obama, in a state of the union address openly claimed he would spit in the face of the people (or rather, their elected representatives, which is how we work in this country) and make all his decisions he wanted by executive orders and by vetoing laws the congress made that he didn't. Granted, he has the right to veto, but what about all these executive moves that congress does NOT agree to? With experience with people like this, it's hard to trust. Why in heaven's name did Mrs. Clinton find it necessary to delete her e-mail if it was all prissy clean? Answer me that. It stinks of wrong-doing. And nobody can argue with that.
2
People like to compare Clinton's use of her private email to former Secretary of State Colin Powell's use of private emails. The difference is that he didn't delete his emails during an investigation.
Clinton's only defense is to cry about republican harassment. There are plenty only too willing to enable her in her dishonesty.
Clinton's only defense is to cry about republican harassment. There are plenty only too willing to enable her in her dishonesty.
President Obama has presented the smallest number of executive orders since Grover Cleveland. The one order some folk are upset about, with regard to immigration, was presented in response to the extreme inaction by the Republican led legislative branch, whose motto is whine loudly and do nothing, and is in direct line with executive orders from Presidents of both parties beginning with Eisenhower, and with regard to immigration Reagan and Bush 1 and going back to Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, all of which having fielded the same complaint with regard to their constitutionality.
Insofar as the Clintons are concerned, the so called fiscally responsible Republican party have wasted untold millions and millions upon nothing burger fishing expeditions in lieu of, well, like always, actually doing the work of governing. Never mind their most heralded administrations are rife with scandal of actual legal wrong doing (the Reagan Administration was the most indicted and convicted administration in American history), the only thing that Republicans seem to come up with is keeping legislation from getting to the floor that would pass because a minority of their party blackmails the Speaker of the House. They can form the Investigative Committee to Nowhere as a front for wine tastings and monogrammed gun purchases, but they cannot find a single soul to serve our nation as its second most powerful politician, because they, themselves, know it would be a thankless position.
Insofar as the Clintons are concerned, the so called fiscally responsible Republican party have wasted untold millions and millions upon nothing burger fishing expeditions in lieu of, well, like always, actually doing the work of governing. Never mind their most heralded administrations are rife with scandal of actual legal wrong doing (the Reagan Administration was the most indicted and convicted administration in American history), the only thing that Republicans seem to come up with is keeping legislation from getting to the floor that would pass because a minority of their party blackmails the Speaker of the House. They can form the Investigative Committee to Nowhere as a front for wine tastings and monogrammed gun purchases, but they cannot find a single soul to serve our nation as its second most powerful politician, because they, themselves, know it would be a thankless position.
1
When will the Republicans exchange destructiveness for constructiveness and do some valuable work for the country? We all pay for their substantial salaries benefits, and fat retirements. We all pay for spiteful, mean-spirited, useless behavior while REAL problems of great consequence go unattended. Could we not impeach the lot of them?
6
The press will not let this go. It's too easy to use the "e-mail scandal" as filler for their 24/7 no-news drivel. The real issue here is that Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton is a woman and the "boys" and some women do not want her upsetting the dominant-male social/political model they've so carefully crafted over the years and millennia. Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the MOST QUALIFIED PERSON to be the next President of the United States of America and one tough lady. She will be endlessly attacked, just as all powerful women are, for any tiny misstep. I can't for the life of me figure out why she agreed to run but she has my vote.
25
How can Hillary be the most qualified person for any elected office if she shows such poor judgment to allow herself to become embroiled in the email scandal by being the ONLY Obama official to use a private email server? How many other poor judgments did Hillary make, voting for Iraq, supporting the TPP (before she said she was against it), supporting the Keystone pipeline (before she said she was against it), failing to get her health care plan even to a vote in 1994, etc. Hillary didn't just stand by her man, she supported him in his personal war on women. Not to mention Hillary's support for NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT, three job-killing trade agreements, and her support for the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
The only thing Hillary is qualified for is Wall Street stooge, bought and paid for by special interests.
The only thing Hillary is qualified for is Wall Street stooge, bought and paid for by special interests.
In early 2007, the Republicans were actively seeking to draft Condolezza Rice to run for President. She was then among the top candidates in the polls. The Congressional Democrats chose that time to have her testify regarding the Bush administration's Iraq policy. Her appearance was protested by ant-war activists. Political?
3
Obviously political and nefarious. After all, Rice knew nothing at all about Bush's Iraq policy.
Of COURSE it was political.
But the Democrats didn't set up a Select Congressional Investigation to harrass her. Because THAT would have been political, too.
But the Democrats didn't set up a Select Congressional Investigation to harrass her. Because THAT would have been political, too.
I watched most of that 60 minute interview...no wonder Hillary Clinton is distancing herself from the President. Obama should not have made that comment the issue is simply a tempest in a teapot.
4
It's the worst kept secret that the Clintons and Obamas don't like each other.
It took me 7 tries to post a comment on this. My comments are usually fairly liberal. Sorry if I sound paranoid, but I really don't think we have ANY "liberal" media anymore.
3
This democrat, pro Sanders, I admit, am amazed that Sec. Clinton was so reckless with her responsibility; the security of the business of the State was not silly window dressing to your aspirations for the presidency.
We do not need this reckless behavior on the left, just as I oppose the reckless group on the right.
Where have all the statesmen and women gone?
This country needs a leader we can believe in.
Hillary, go away!
We do not need this reckless behavior on the left, just as I oppose the reckless group on the right.
Where have all the statesmen and women gone?
This country needs a leader we can believe in.
Hillary, go away!
5
off topic but I can tell you that after Bernie wins NH, that's the end of the road for him. He does have alot of supporters but not nearly enough to win in the south and west.
1
this about you = the press. come on there is no story here. Just like Trump, you made him. I imagine soon you wil destroy him
8
This has nothing to do with Benghazi or emails and everything to do with smearing Ms Clinton. The republicans are spinning out in desperation, its amusing to watch. Anyhow, Hillary 2016.
17
The least of Hillary Clinton's problems are embodied in the so-called Benghazi Committee. She and the Democrats should worry about the FBI. Their investigation will not end even if the Democrats succeed in quashing the House investigation before it is finished - an unlikely possibility in any case - and they cannot be cowed by political theatrics and threats.
The best Hillary can do is try to make political hay out of playing the victim to the hilt, and hope and pray she isnot indicted by the time February rolls around.
The best Hillary can do is try to make political hay out of playing the victim to the hilt, and hope and pray she isnot indicted by the time February rolls around.
6
FYI, the FBI is not investigating Hillary Clinton, they are investigating procedures at the State Dept.
1
The FBI understands the difference between criminality and politics. And they will find no criminality.
1
for what? More Fox talk
1
My God it is Kenneth Star all over. We are unfit to govern ourselves. If Donald Trump would promise to burn down the Capitol Building and drive out the cockroaches, I'd vote for him.
Congress doesn't govern, it postures for the next election. It shadow boxes about governing.
Would we not be better off without them?
Why do we tolerate them. They obstructing the self-government. Better to burn the building down and start anew. Get them out of the way and give our kids a chance at republicanism. Tolerating them is ensuring that in the foreseeable future, nobody will care when the pretense of republicanism is just dropped.
Congress doesn't govern, it postures for the next election. It shadow boxes about governing.
Would we not be better off without them?
Why do we tolerate them. They obstructing the self-government. Better to burn the building down and start anew. Get them out of the way and give our kids a chance at republicanism. Tolerating them is ensuring that in the foreseeable future, nobody will care when the pretense of republicanism is just dropped.
2
I agree with your frustration...but its our form of government. We need to elect new blood, people who will make change...we keep elected tired, old people who are not capable of telling or knowing the truth
@A guy: Only ONE party engages in the misuse of politicical investigations in the absence of obvious criminality.
Care to guess which one?
Otherwise, please offer up some examples that were perpetrated by the Democrats in my lifetime.
Care to guess which one?
Otherwise, please offer up some examples that were perpetrated by the Democrats in my lifetime.
I have a simple solution - universal term limits.
Why doesn't the committee return the 4.5million dollars it has wasted so far and donate it to the Feed America program so hungry children in our country have food to eat.
10
Sounds rather like a classic nonsense poem, "The Hunting of the Snark" .. the Benghazi AttackHillary Committee found an abundance of snark, but not much else.
"For the Snark's a peculiar creature, that won't
Be caught in a commonplace way.
Do all that you know, and try all that you don't:
Not a chance must be wasted to-day!
...
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain—
But much yet remains to be said."
"For the Snark's a peculiar creature, that won't
Be caught in a commonplace way.
Do all that you know, and try all that you don't:
Not a chance must be wasted to-day!
...
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain—
But much yet remains to be said."
4
What about all the state department personnel killed on the republican "watch"... do they have an answer for all those deaths?... my guess would be their answer is "collateral damage"...
11
Good point. Here they are:
>June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.
>February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Truck bomb kills 17.
>February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.
>December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.
>March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.
>September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.
>July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.
>March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.
>September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy
Where is the GOP outrage for these?
>June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.
>February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Truck bomb kills 17.
>February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.
>December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.
>March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.
>September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.
>July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.
>March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.
>September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy
Where is the GOP outrage for these?
1
End. This. Travesty. NOW!
11
"Because they were there." And WHO decided they would be in an off-site server with the backup in a bathroom closet??
3
Our tax dollars hard at work on these meaningless, time-wasting frat-boy games. Meantime, average people are getting poorer, our government databases are being attacked daily, our infrastructure is crumbling daily and the world is in chaos. Disgusting. November 2016 cannot come soon enough so we can send these BIG democracy-destroying money master inept people back where they came from.
12
I wish I had a job where I could get paid spend my entire day looking for ways to trash someone else's career.
15
...and get lifetime medical and pension benefits for doing it.
2
Maybe you can join the Hillary campaign. They have people doing opposition research, which is intended to do just that.
I believe that Mrs Hillary Clinton will get rid of this garbage Republicans once again continue feeding the same political tactics but I think they will have a bad deal in the near future Hillary Clinton 2016
6
Republicans throwing away taxpayers' money on purely partisan poisonous politics. Exactly why no Republican should come within shouting distance of any level of government.
9
Below this article in the online version is a reference to another article: "Obama Says Clinton Made ‘Mistake’ on Email Server" Why is the word mistake in inverted commas here when the word scandal was not in inverted commas in the numerous NYT articles about Clinton's email account? She did make a mistake on the email server - but what she did didn't amount to a scandal, though it was called a 'scandal'.
6
I think it will come as a shock to most republicans but voters don’t care a lick about Hillary’s emails.
The average man and woman are concerned about their rent, mortgage, job, and bills.
The tired old “I’m a Ronald Reagan Republican” line does not win any votes. Hillary’s emails are of little interest to the average American. If this is all they got on her, she will win by a landslide.
The average man and woman are concerned about their rent, mortgage, job, and bills.
The tired old “I’m a Ronald Reagan Republican” line does not win any votes. Hillary’s emails are of little interest to the average American. If this is all they got on her, she will win by a landslide.
139
You are right. Ronald Reagan? If that is all the GOPs have - a bad actor and a liar - and nothing but shrubs (Bushes) since then, they are in deep trouble. Turn the Reagan Library into a shrine and go and worship there. But unfortunately, there are too many politically uneducated and apathetic (pathetic?) voters in your country that fall for this "tired old" propaganda.
2
If the average man and woman is worried about their rent, mortgage, bob and bills, Hillary would be trailing Bernie Sanders in the polls by a wide margin.
Really? Then why have her poll numbers plummeted, along with her marks for honesty and trustworthiness? Thank you Congress for doing what you can to protect us from this phony candidate.
1
Does the Unites States Congress have nothing better to do than to follow up on hearings that have already been shown to be fruitless, e.g., Benghazi and Planned Parenthood? Perhaps they could spend a little time on the ridiculously high number of gun deaths in the US.
28
The next time the GOP complains our government is too big, I hope someone has the guts on live TV to point out that it could be way smaller if Congressional commitees weren't allowed to become open ended witch hunts.
No other attacks on US embassies, costing many more lives, have ever been subject to the time, scrutiny, and partisanship this one has. I wish the Democrats had the courage to launch their own Select Committee to investigate the investigators. Details like wine clubs and gun buying metings show how far this has gone at taxpayer expense.
I want some accountability for how this 8th attempt to embarass the SOS isn't in and of itself an improper use of government funds for purely partisan purposes. I believe the GOP zeal has crossed the line from inappropriate to illegal.
Surely the public has the right to know. Thank you NYT for this detailed accounting of GOP showboating during an election year. Maybe its time to invesigate the investigators for potential govenment abuse.
No other attacks on US embassies, costing many more lives, have ever been subject to the time, scrutiny, and partisanship this one has. I wish the Democrats had the courage to launch their own Select Committee to investigate the investigators. Details like wine clubs and gun buying metings show how far this has gone at taxpayer expense.
I want some accountability for how this 8th attempt to embarass the SOS isn't in and of itself an improper use of government funds for purely partisan purposes. I believe the GOP zeal has crossed the line from inappropriate to illegal.
Surely the public has the right to know. Thank you NYT for this detailed accounting of GOP showboating during an election year. Maybe its time to invesigate the investigators for potential govenment abuse.
19
When are we going to have select committees to investigate the 2000 election, 9/11, and the sales job on the Iraq invasion? Hypocrites.
33
"She had used her private email for all of her official business, leaving open the possibility that her account contained classified information. (Having classified information outside a secure government account is illegal.)"
I have lost count at the number of verifiable lies that Hillary has told (the number keeps increasing). But arguably the most insulting thing she said was that she simply didn't stop and think about what email system there would be. By definition, when you go out of your way to use the non-standard system, you thought about what email system. The funny thing is that if a Republican did and said *exactly* what Hillary has to this point, the Hillary apologists would be calling for that person's head! It's called bias.
I have lost count at the number of verifiable lies that Hillary has told (the number keeps increasing). But arguably the most insulting thing she said was that she simply didn't stop and think about what email system there would be. By definition, when you go out of your way to use the non-standard system, you thought about what email system. The funny thing is that if a Republican did and said *exactly* what Hillary has to this point, the Hillary apologists would be calling for that person's head! It's called bias.
8
Both Rice and Powell used a private email for state business. What do you say about them?
1
Like Karl Rove? Like Dick Cheney? read up on the past
1
Then you should be leveling even more criticism of Colin Powell, Condi Rice and George W. Bush who used private servers and erased all their emails. There is a real scandal and no talk of investigation.
1
Whether or not someone messed up and cost 4 lives is clearly not the issue here. If it was then these same knuckleheads should be incensed by the 4000 or so US lives lost in Iraq. Why isn't someone investigating that?
25
Death of an Ambassador and destruction of an Embassy focusing on the State Department and it's CEO, the Sec. Of State . . . OUTRAGEOUS!
Nixon would have not been driven from office without Republican Statesmen.
Where are the Democratic Statesmen? Busy covering their Party's dishonor.
Nixon would have not been driven from office without Republican Statesmen.
Where are the Democratic Statesmen? Busy covering their Party's dishonor.
2
@Bob: Where were the "investigations" of the embassy attackes that happened under Reagan and Bush?
Those "dishonorable" Democratic Statesmen weren't out to damage their opponents for political gain.
Those "dishonorable" Democratic Statesmen weren't out to damage their opponents for political gain.
1
This so called committee has been totally discredited and should be disbanded. I think we need a committee to investigate this witch hunting committee for wasting over 4.5 million dollars of tax payer money. Republicans are OK with cutting funds for the school lunch program, food stamps and assistance for the disabled to pay for their political witch hunt. This is just sad.
21
I am sick to death of Benghazi. How about investigations into the 10+ under the last administrations, including in Saudi Arabia where 10 or more were killed. A friendly port? the hypocrisy is mind boggling. Now, dare I write it, E-Mails. Oh, Lord, help us, she wrote an E-mail. Who cares where or under what server. Really? Are we so infantile, now it is down to E-mails. What's next FB. OOOOHHHH, she said Hi to someone under her SOS title. Did not user former. How dare she. I want an investigation into the phony Iraqi war. Look how many are dead, there. Look how it led to ISIL(sorry, cannot insult the Egyptian goddess and anger her husband Osiris). As a black, 66 year old woman, I have seen a lot of stupidity in politics. Watergate and Nixon was still elected to a second term with the sword of Damocles over his head. Yes, Saddam Hussein was a despot but so was The Shah, remember, we over threw a democratically elected leader to put him on the throne, for oil and look where we are today. I am tired of the infantile so called leaders. The republicans should remember, pay back is a mother. TIP. Dole., etc. where are you. We need people with a clue and a brain about now.
7
@Sean
Re "Let's keep in mind that the Republican congress sharply reduced funds for embassy security in the months leading up to that attack."
And let's also keep in mind that 'sharply' means 40% in two separate 20%
chunks (Ryan budget). And at the time (and this is critically important) Sec. Clinton warned that this would hamper security efforts and jeopardize the safety of diplomats. They ignored that warning and lives were indeed lost because of inadequate security.
Re "Let's keep in mind that the Republican congress sharply reduced funds for embassy security in the months leading up to that attack."
And let's also keep in mind that 'sharply' means 40% in two separate 20%
chunks (Ryan budget). And at the time (and this is critically important) Sec. Clinton warned that this would hamper security efforts and jeopardize the safety of diplomats. They ignored that warning and lives were indeed lost because of inadequate security.
18
...which is why Mr. Ryan should be kept as far from the Speaker's job as possible.
2
It has been the extreme goal of republican operatives for almost two years now to destroy the political aspirations of Hilary Clinton. Hilary Clinton's preparation and subsequent candidacy for U.S. presidency is what keeps the republication strategists awake morning, noon and night. She was considered unbeatable a year ago, now, the situation is much different, the goal of stealing the White House is again in sight.
Do I think or believe she deliberately put put lives in danger, resulting in death? No. Should she have not used a privat server for her electronic correspondence? Yes. But she didn't, and the federal government was fully aware of this fact, from the get go. So why the big surprise and non-stop haranguing? Well because it is an attempt to completely derail her bid for the presidency. If she had not sought political office, there would not be an investigation by the House select committee. The entire sitation makes me sick to my stomach, more government waste, instead of helping valid American problems.
Do I think or believe she deliberately put put lives in danger, resulting in death? No. Should she have not used a privat server for her electronic correspondence? Yes. But she didn't, and the federal government was fully aware of this fact, from the get go. So why the big surprise and non-stop haranguing? Well because it is an attempt to completely derail her bid for the presidency. If she had not sought political office, there would not be an investigation by the House select committee. The entire sitation makes me sick to my stomach, more government waste, instead of helping valid American problems.
12
Where was Republican outrage after the Bush Admin ignored the Aug 8, 2001 FBI Memo that said "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US"...
Where was the Republican outrage when the Bush Admin got the country into war in Iraq under false pretenses...
Where was the Republican outrage when CIA agent Valerie Plame was outed..
When was Republican outrage when those Blackwater contracters murdered all those innocent Iraqi civilians...
This phony outrage over Clinton's e-mails and Benghazi is nothing but a pathetic dog & phony show drummed up by Republicans for 100% partsian political purposes....
Where was the Republican outrage when the Bush Admin got the country into war in Iraq under false pretenses...
Where was the Republican outrage when CIA agent Valerie Plame was outed..
When was Republican outrage when those Blackwater contracters murdered all those innocent Iraqi civilians...
This phony outrage over Clinton's e-mails and Benghazi is nothing but a pathetic dog & phony show drummed up by Republicans for 100% partsian political purposes....
29
As someone once said, "there's no "there" there...".
8
That someone being Gertrude Stein, in her book, "Everybody's Autobiography".
Honestly. this "witch hunt" is driving me into Hilliary's Camp........which I was not in before.......... and this committee has cost our government millions of dollars. Shame on Congress........this money could have been used in a positive way !
25
A "witch hunt" pure and simple. It's only purpose was to damage her politically so that one of their many flawed candidates could win the presidency and finish the job that Reagan and Bush started .....THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF WHATS LEFT OF OUR MIDDLE CLASS.
15
Its a good thing Bernie Sanders is running for president.
Sanders 2016
Sanders 2016
1
HIllary made an egregious mistake...using private e mail server for classified
government communication...and there should be NO COVERUP...and
no EXCUSES
and
The accusers...the right wing witch hunt ...is not as deplorable...but fairly
disgusting attempt to ruin Hillary's chances at being the Democratic nominee
for POTUS.
and weighing in on this soap opera...
Well...Hillary is WRONG...and should not be the candidate for POTUS
and
The right wing accusers...are just plain disgusting..and ..so
I think Hillary should just say...mea culpa...and be more trustworthy
Frankly...The Dems should nominate Bernie/and hopefully Liz Warren
or...Biden/and Liz Warren or Bernie..
and Hillary should ...go home..
government communication...and there should be NO COVERUP...and
no EXCUSES
and
The accusers...the right wing witch hunt ...is not as deplorable...but fairly
disgusting attempt to ruin Hillary's chances at being the Democratic nominee
for POTUS.
and weighing in on this soap opera...
Well...Hillary is WRONG...and should not be the candidate for POTUS
and
The right wing accusers...are just plain disgusting..and ..so
I think Hillary should just say...mea culpa...and be more trustworthy
Frankly...The Dems should nominate Bernie/and hopefully Liz Warren
or...Biden/and Liz Warren or Bernie..
and Hillary should ...go home..
2
Re "HIllary made an egregious mistake...using private e mail server for classified
government communication"
egregious? Come on! And so have a host of others ... Colin Powel has admitted it. I would also include Cheney and all his neocon co-horts for starters.
government communication"
egregious? Come on! And so have a host of others ... Colin Powel has admitted it. I would also include Cheney and all his neocon co-horts for starters.
there were no classified memos on the private server.
1
Perhaps Clinton will not accept the abuse from the Benghazi committee that the head of Planned Parenthood accepted from Jay Chafetz and his committee cohorts. Americans do not want a President who will put up with abuse, and those who will castigate Clinton for being shrill, aggressive, and unladylike for not putting up with committee abuse are not going to vote for her anyway.
And let minority (Democratic) council will call Kevin McCarthy as a witness.
And let minority (Democratic) council will call Kevin McCarthy as a witness.
7
This is an incredibly one-sided, biased, and politically motivated article, that seems more focused on discrediting Republicans for partisan reasons, and on protecting Hillary Clinton, than anything else.
I personally think that Hillary Clinton is a crook, but that the Republicans are not competent enough to expose her. I suspect very much that she used private email to avoid transparency. She probably did bad things. People don't hide good things. People hide bad things. However, it is going to take more than this Republican sideshow to unmask her.
I personally think that Hillary Clinton is a crook, but that the Republicans are not competent enough to expose her. I suspect very much that she used private email to avoid transparency. She probably did bad things. People don't hide good things. People hide bad things. However, it is going to take more than this Republican sideshow to unmask her.
19
You just describe the republicans running this committee.
1
It's about time.
How interesting that
(1) You personally think HC is a crook
(2) You suspect she used e-mail for nefarious reasons
(3) She probably did bad things.
This is a very convincing case you make. The preponderance of facts, subtle reasoning, and your incisive grasp of American jurisprudence make me wonder why Secretary Clinton is still walking around free and not sent off to the gulag for all of her crimes against the state. Perhaps Mr. Darrell Issa can put his real talents to use and go steal her car to teach her a lesson.
(1) You personally think HC is a crook
(2) You suspect she used e-mail for nefarious reasons
(3) She probably did bad things.
This is a very convincing case you make. The preponderance of facts, subtle reasoning, and your incisive grasp of American jurisprudence make me wonder why Secretary Clinton is still walking around free and not sent off to the gulag for all of her crimes against the state. Perhaps Mr. Darrell Issa can put his real talents to use and go steal her car to teach her a lesson.
3
The Benghazi committee should be re-named the 'Hillary Clinton Witch Hunt Committee'.
7
Do any senators or members of congress use non-government email providers? Have they ever? Jes' wondering.
Have there been any relevant facts found on the private server so far?
Have there been any relevant facts found on the private server so far?
3
Why, it's almost as this thing was more political than anything...
4
Hillary Clinton is Republican Lite war hawk and Wall Street supporter. We do not want her. We sympathisize with her in her harassment from Republicans, but we DO NOT want her as president.
1
@Christie—"we"? Speak for yourself please. I want Mrs. Clinton as my next president. And according to the polls plenty of other Americans do to.
1
Beautiful once again the New York Times working overtime to assist Hillary by highlighting not the Benghazi terrorist attack and the fraudulent " youtube'' lie, but instead calling into question the investigation of that event,
My, democrats sure got it good at this paper,
My, democrats sure got it good at this paper,
3
Finding the truth has NEVER been the purpose of this, and it only becomes more clear the longer it drags on. Now, as questions about GOP PAC money mount and the party implodes as its radical faction grabs for power, the need for more distraction has breathed additional life into this costly fraud.
7
I have a suggestion for the Republicans, suspend the hearings for now and wait until Mrs. Clinton wins the election. Then they can form an impeachment committee and run that committee during her presidency because God knows they will not be actually trying to govern.
9
And yet another grand GOP display of nattering nutcases wrapped in a pretext comes crashing to the floor...
9
Can you say "Swiftboating"?
7
When is this wasting of my tax dollars going to end?
9
A year ago, if you'd asked me about Trey Gowdy, I'd have said: There's a guy I fundamentally disagree with, but he's honest.
1
The Republican party has made this a showcase for their determination to smear Hillary Clinton and nothing else matters to them. If they could, one gets the impression that they would kill the unfortunate victims again if it would give them some mileage against Clinton. They are engaging in voodoo political witch hunting and have made it so obvious that it is disgusting.
Finally, Republicans, have you no shame? Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?
Finally, Republicans, have you no shame? Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?
9
And the attacks go on but now we know what we always suspected the GOP has decided that using tax payer money to do their dirty tricks is even sweeter! The GOP and its Young Guns contingent remind me of Caligula: mean spirited, childish and violent. Governing is their last concern if it even enters their minds. The "Freedom Caucus" are Nero in waiting.
10
The Republicans never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Their fear and anger at the Clintons are so unrestrained they have made them an object of sympathy.
As the ancient Greeks said: "Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."
As the ancient Greeks said: "Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."
4
The Repugs have been mad for quite some time. It is time for the gods to take it to the next level.
1
"In an interview last week, Mr. Gowdy defended the committee’s work on Benghazi and said only two of the people interviewed by the committee were related to Mrs. Clinton’s email."
In other words, the investigation is not about Hillary, Gowdy said, "... as the committee prepares to question Mrs. Clinton next week."
In other words, the investigation is not about Hillary, Gowdy said, "... as the committee prepares to question Mrs. Clinton next week."
2
Correct - as summarized by Kevin McCarthy they have bigger goals. Although it is apparently unpopular to state them plainly and publicly as he did.
It's clear that the government and Mrs. Clinton have been less than truthful from the start, at first blaming the attack on antagonism stirred up by an anti-Islam YouTube video, which no one had even seen -- and sticking to that story for a long time. Susan Rice, then National Security Adviser, went on several Sunday chat shows to push that line.
Now, there are certain unanswered questions that we need to know about:
1) Where was Mr. Obama after 5 PM, when his Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, first informed him of the attack? We know he went to dinner, then left for a California fundraiser the following morning.
2) What was the ambassador doing in Benghazi? There are rumors that he was involved in a gun-running operation to rebel troops.
3) Why had the ambassador's multiple calls for increased security gone unheeded?
4) Why were U.S. troops and planes in the Mediterannean not sent to rescue the Americans, but told instead to "stand down"? The attack unfolded over several hours, and there may indeed have been time.
5) Why did Gen. Carter Ham, long in charge of U.S. operations for Africa and that part of the Mediterranean, retire in 2013, so soon after Benghazi? It looks like he was forced out. Why?
I think email -- certainly messages caught in Mrs. Clinton's convoluted system that she may be concealing -- is fair game.
Mrs. Clinton has never, ever been forthcoming about anything. That's why most people associate the word "liar" with her.
Now, there are certain unanswered questions that we need to know about:
1) Where was Mr. Obama after 5 PM, when his Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, first informed him of the attack? We know he went to dinner, then left for a California fundraiser the following morning.
2) What was the ambassador doing in Benghazi? There are rumors that he was involved in a gun-running operation to rebel troops.
3) Why had the ambassador's multiple calls for increased security gone unheeded?
4) Why were U.S. troops and planes in the Mediterannean not sent to rescue the Americans, but told instead to "stand down"? The attack unfolded over several hours, and there may indeed have been time.
5) Why did Gen. Carter Ham, long in charge of U.S. operations for Africa and that part of the Mediterranean, retire in 2013, so soon after Benghazi? It looks like he was forced out. Why?
I think email -- certainly messages caught in Mrs. Clinton's convoluted system that she may be concealing -- is fair game.
Mrs. Clinton has never, ever been forthcoming about anything. That's why most people associate the word "liar" with her.
7
Wow....I have never liked Mrs Clinton.....but now I am willing to give her a sympathy vote.
2
This could be the introduction to a special about how aliens from outer space have infiltrated our government. How much has this committee spent so far?
Thank you for summarizing the most foolish line of false facts and fake reasoning recently foisted upon an ever gullible portion of the American public fixated upon their hatred of our first African American president.
There have been four years of hearings and findings and every claim you infer has come up empty. Your opinion is diminished by the facts and demolished by the bragging of Kevin McCarthy. It is the opinion of an intellectually bankrupt troll for the right wing witless media and it ends in a big lie that again attempts to slime and slander Hillary Clinton by calling her a 'liar.' Seems we've heard variations of that accusation, unsubstantiated from the right for mighty long time interspersed with jaw dropping revelations of their own stupid sexual indiscretions, petty theft corruptions, and wholesale legislative incompetence.
There have been four years of hearings and findings and every claim you infer has come up empty. Your opinion is diminished by the facts and demolished by the bragging of Kevin McCarthy. It is the opinion of an intellectually bankrupt troll for the right wing witless media and it ends in a big lie that again attempts to slime and slander Hillary Clinton by calling her a 'liar.' Seems we've heard variations of that accusation, unsubstantiated from the right for mighty long time interspersed with jaw dropping revelations of their own stupid sexual indiscretions, petty theft corruptions, and wholesale legislative incompetence.
1
After it got Susan Rice on spurious allegations, the GOP political spectacle machine went after Hillary Clinton. After playing along for years, as did other major media, the NYT now exposes what has obviously been already exposed by the unfortunate Kevin McCarthy (right now I'm thinking of Judith Miller and how long it took the NYT to own up to her "coverage" of Iraq). I guess it's better late than never, but undoable damage has been done, and reporters can't be passive when facing outrageous conduct under the disguise of impartiality
11
Bush & Cheney deleted how many Gigabytes of data? No inquiry. Meanwhile in Canada, Ashley Madison had over 10,000 Federal accounts with varying security levels. Again, no inquiry. Hilary's home server is a higher priority than 10,000 gateways for hackers owned by Feds looking to commit adultery. I thought the GOP was strong on homeland security and Christianity.
11
Let me tell you what happened here with the Clinton emails. Ever try to teach your mother how to work emails? Once she learns how to do it one way she's loathe to learn other online techniques. Same thing here. Hil figured out how to do this one way and didn't want to be bothered learning other ways to do essentially the same thing. It’s computer illiteracy. That's all.
I am no fan of Hillary's but aside from damaging her own campaign it doesn't look like she inflicted any damage to anyone.
I am no fan of Hillary's but aside from damaging her own campaign it doesn't look like she inflicted any damage to anyone.
159
Not exactly POTUS material.
I heard that Trump also has a case of general computer illiteracy.
(As do so many of us older people.)
I also agree that mostly likely no harm was done (except to her candidacy).
(As do so many of us older people.)
I also agree that mostly likely no harm was done (except to her candidacy).
That's a pretty sexist and ageist comment, Mike. I think that Ms. Clinton is smart enough to understand how to send and receive e-mails using different servers. In fact, there wouldn't really be any difference in how the process of e-mailing is carried out, would there? I know enough about computers and servers to know that, although I'm a woman and am about Ms. Clinton's age. Furthermore, I am still capable of learning new things, even about technology. Amazing, isn't it?
The brazeness and broad success of the GOP manipulation of elections and laws that run counter to the public will......like Citizen United, the closing down of Planned Parenthood, the bank bailouts and lack of prosecution for financial crimes, war profiteering and the blocking of the development of renewable energy in favor of fracking etc. is appalling. And meanwhile Federal subsidies for Big Oil and Agriculture continiue while those to higher education totally reverse their course.........this is the legacy of a very succesful coup of sorts by the Ruling Classes. It's appalling that there isn't more speculation about the role played by the assassinations of the MLK and Kennedy's, which is what really got the ball rolling for them. And the unquestioning compliance of the Media on top of it all makes you wonder.
9
The Benghazi select committee's chief counsel has a great sense of humour by stating that they have to see the 'entire elephant'. After all, they just have to look into the mirror to see it.
They will not give up for the next 20 years until they find an e-mail by Mrs. Clinton to Kim Jong-Il with an attachment how to bring his nukes up to par with the ones of the US.
They will not give up for the next 20 years until they find an e-mail by Mrs. Clinton to Kim Jong-Il with an attachment how to bring his nukes up to par with the ones of the US.
9
Typical GOP dirty politics.
15
The Times and other liberal pro Hillary news organizations will be publishing these type stories every day until she testifies on Oct 22.Does any rational person not believe the Dems would be doing the exact same thing if Hillary were a Repub?If Hillary were Repub,the Times would demand she withdraw from her candidacy because of Benghazi.Do the Times editors think us mere readers are so gullible?
5
Did the Dems jump on W after 9/11? Was 9/12 filled with accusations and demands that he step down? Were there endless hearings, like with Whitewater and Benghazi?
3
During GW Bush's presidency, there were at least 13 attacks on U.S. embassies and at least 60 fatalities resulting from those attacks. Where is the committee investigating those incidents? Because I'm sure there must be one if what you say is true.
3
There is little equivalency between the GOP's practice of dirty tricks and the Democrats, who actually propose programs, solutions and governance.
We don't NEED dirty tricks to distract our voters.
We don't NEED dirty tricks to distract our voters.
3
Each new "discovery" gets weaker than the last. Hillary's server was no less prone to hacking than those of the State Department, and possibly less. Hillary's alleged receipt of a non-classified email stating the name of an undercover CIA agent is not an act of law-breaking by anyone, nor was it an act of rule-breaking by Clinton.
This committee has a yet to identify any act of lawbreaking or rule-breaking. The Watergate Committee began because of a documented act of breaking and entry, and then proceded on to find, in less time, money-laundering, a criminal conspiracy to fire-bomb the Brookings Institution, and criminal conduct by the President and the Attorney General.
Mr. Gowdy is presiding over the most absurd abuse of power ever to come out of the House of Representatives.
This committee has a yet to identify any act of lawbreaking or rule-breaking. The Watergate Committee began because of a documented act of breaking and entry, and then proceded on to find, in less time, money-laundering, a criminal conspiracy to fire-bomb the Brookings Institution, and criminal conduct by the President and the Attorney General.
Mr. Gowdy is presiding over the most absurd abuse of power ever to come out of the House of Representatives.
39
Substitute the word "criminal" for the word "absurd".
Wonderful. Now that they've admitted the Benghazi committee was an orchestrated witch hunt, they're ready to move on to the next orchestrated witch hunt, yet another transparent attempt to bring down HC. Are Americans really that blind? Seems to me the committee should be investigated. Stop wasting tax payer dollars on such nonsense.
15
How come they are not nvestigating why the US military destroyed a hospital in Afghanistan? Instead of wasting their time on this, they should find out why the U S is responsible for the deaths of so many volunteers for Doctors Wuthout Borders. Were we duped by the Afghans? Was this an honest mistake or something more sinister?
6
NYT, kindly publish the names and districts of all members of this select committee for us, please, and keep publishing them.
We need to know them all by heart, their records, affiliations, contributors, maybe even their varying levels of participation in off-hours wine parties or 9mm pistol-buying clubs. Here's a good place to start: https://benghazi.house.gov/about/members
All Americans should be familiar with their legislators, their ...statesmen, holding as these men and women do, our interests and welfare, our future, our credibility, our dignity, prestige, and legitimacy in their honorable hands.
It is impossible to shame the shameless, but by all means, keep reminding us of who they are.
We need to know them all by heart, their records, affiliations, contributors, maybe even their varying levels of participation in off-hours wine parties or 9mm pistol-buying clubs. Here's a good place to start: https://benghazi.house.gov/about/members
All Americans should be familiar with their legislators, their ...statesmen, holding as these men and women do, our interests and welfare, our future, our credibility, our dignity, prestige, and legitimacy in their honorable hands.
It is impossible to shame the shameless, but by all means, keep reminding us of who they are.
28
With Hillary we get 3 for 1.....A madam President, a former President of the US, a knowledgeable Vice President! SUCH A DEAL
4
Simply reinforcing McCarthy's point that the purpose of the committee is not to investigate Benghazi, but to discredit Clinton.
14
The Benghazi hearings were no doubt all politics because it had to do with the President's and the State Department's incompetence leading to the death of four Americans and the subsequent manner in which they willfully lied to the American people about the whole incident. These actions displayed incompetence and a high level of deceit. However, nothing illegal occurred.
The e-mails are a different story. At best they show Clintons eagerness to hide what she was doing, her willingness to violate established protocols, and her distain for transparency. At worst, illegal activity occurred. If you follow the timelines and the fact of Clinton's failure to turn over subpoenaed documents, probable cause to further the legal investigation exists. This is why the FBI is involved. The Congressional hearings are politics, but the FBI investigation isn't.
Also, Clinton's failure to turn over documents in a timely manner is the reason the investigation has dragged on.
The e-mails are a different story. At best they show Clintons eagerness to hide what she was doing, her willingness to violate established protocols, and her distain for transparency. At worst, illegal activity occurred. If you follow the timelines and the fact of Clinton's failure to turn over subpoenaed documents, probable cause to further the legal investigation exists. This is why the FBI is involved. The Congressional hearings are politics, but the FBI investigation isn't.
Also, Clinton's failure to turn over documents in a timely manner is the reason the investigation has dragged on.
27
Did not VP Chaney and President Bush use private emails that were "inadvertently lost" so they could not be turned over to the national archive. How soon we forget.
1
When it comes to ideas Republicans arrive unarmed. That leaves them only with innuendo, partisan snipping and most often, complete fabrication and personal slander. It's all Benghazi. What complete juvenile nonsense.
Somewhere around paragraph 28 is this sentance, "The investigations generally agree that the administration's post attack talking points -- a matter of much dispute-- were flawed but not deliberately misleading". I defy you or anybody to recount an attack thousands of miles away by an unruly mob where talking points two days after would not be less then perfect. Your sentance that the Administraton " willfully lied" about what occurred when the diplomatic mission was attacked is false, but no doubt backed up by reams of right wing propaganda you have consumed.
1
These attacks against the former secretary of state are nothing more than a sick partisan attempt by primarily Republicans to knock Mrs. Clinton out of contention for the presidency. It's sickening to read about! If Mrs. Clinton is to be criticized, then that criticism needs to be about policy not emails. I guess the cliche from the early 1970s that "You've come a long way baby [sic]," really doesn't apply all that much in 2015...
15
$4,500,000 costs so far to get rid of Hillary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How much has it cost taxpayers to keep the Congress voting to get rid of The Affordable Care Act how many times now 78 or something ridiculous like that? Can we impeach Congress and tell them all to go back home, stay there and spend their own money writing a book about slaying dragons or something. What a joke. No wonder Randy Quaid wanted to go to Canada. Who wouldn't?
16
It was obvious fro the beginning that this committee was set up to take down Hillary Clinton, it had two purposes, one to discredit her the other one to ruin her credibility as a Presidential Candidate. It if it was not for Kevin McCarthy's gaffe at Fox's Hannity show, the mainstream media would still be giving it some credibility giving the nature of their supposed "purpose". But that has all but evaporated thanks to Kevin McCarthy, it has been exposed for what it was really created for in the firrt place. To stop Hillary Clinton from becoming the next President of these United States. That is how much the Republican establishment fears her candidacy. To the point that they are willing to use to tragic death of 4 American heroes for political purposes. It's truly disturbing if not disgusting on their part.
21
What a waste of time and money. These Republicans should be ashamed of themselves. And if anyone thinks for one minute that they would be investigating this if she wasn't running for President, then you're very naive.
16
For Pete's Sake......GIVE IT A REST!
What a Joke, "A SELECT COMMITTEE"
What are they selecting?
What a Joke, "A SELECT COMMITTEE"
What are they selecting?
14
All politics. Only politics. No substance.
Congress is becoming Americas enemy.
Congress is becoming Americas enemy.
23
Obviously this committee has been set up to get Hillary before the elections. One of the Republican investigators have quit and said that it's focus was to get Hillary. McCarthy said that it was to lower her poll numbers. Now the committee is looking into her emails. That just shows their own purpose is to get Hillary. The fact that she had a private, more secure email server has nothing to do with bengazi.
21
NYT: I dare you to print a synopsis -- short and to the point of this, instead of reporting all the nefarious headlines and false assumptions.
http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov