| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Democrats Mull Boycotting House Benghazi Probe |
| 2014-05-10 |
[An Nahar] U.S. House Democrats remained divided Friday over whether to participate in the newly-created panel to investigate the Benghazi attacks of 2012, a probe Minority Leader  Nancy San Fran NanPelosi Congresswoman-for-Life from the San Francisco Bay Area, born into a family of professional politicians. Formerly Speaker of the House, but it's not her fault they lost. Really. Noted for her heavily botoxed grimace... slammed as a "political stunt." Democratic and Republican staffers huddled behind closed doors to thrash out the terms of the select committee that the House of Representatives approved Thursday in a party line vote. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #13 What IS the Truth about Benghazi ? I'm pleasantly surprised, Hemingway. Succinct, with less than the minimum daily allowance of purple prose and trite phrasing (both known to cause bowel-irritability in lab animals.) Russia is an... option. There also are the possibilities that the 'consulate' was viewed as a competitor and eliminated, or that certain items of merchandise were being taken off the market and the action was not well-received by certain parties, or simply that the mere presence of Klingons was viewed as an impedance to Much Grander Islamic Things. I will disagree about Ambassador Stevens. He was a wanna-be operative, not a "back history gun dealer." Stevens was there because he'd cultivated relationships with the anti-Qadaffi rebels at the start of the war. And I'm not sure he was taken out to a ditch and shot, a la Qadaffi. As for the rest - it pretty much looks that way. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2014-05-10 11:30 |
| #12 O's their own Bitter tabula rasa to swallow. Very well done, Zenobia Floger6220. You've been cooking with gas, but that line-and-a-half takes it up to the next level. Big Thromuth3646, where do you see the attack on the American embassy in Cairo the same evening fitting into all this? That one was also blamed on that notorious video, but was quickly seen to be the same group Al Qaeda-linked group that attacked in Libya. I've a non-Rantburg acquaintance who was associated with the Cairo embassy at the time, who asserts they were all expecting trouble because of the date, and were prepared, unlike the Libya lot. He also mentioned that given the control the government at the time had over religious radicals (not his term), the attack in Cairo could only have happened with government approval. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2014-05-10 10:58 |
| #11 Go ahead do a boycott, no one cares what you do, its only politics right Nancy. /sarc off |
| Posted by: Mad Eye Big Foot7156 2014-05-10 09:41 |
| #10 Re: #4 How the hell does he DO that??? I've never known anyone that can roll sophisticated, complex and amazingly on point limmericks on ANY subject, no less EVERY subject, in the proverbial blink of an eye. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2014-05-10 08:55 |
| #9 Considering democrats did little during the actual Benghazi event I would suspect them not to put much effort into the investigation. Their job now is to delay and deflect. |
| Posted by: Airandee 2014-05-10 08:42 |
| #8 The last time the |
| Posted by: P2kontheroad 2014-05-10 07:57 |
| #7 There should be a special prosecutor. Not a committee. And that goes for the IRS scandal as well - that is in dire need of a special prosecutor, given that the DoJ under Holder is probably not going to prosecute nor even investigate it properly and may itself be a target, as will Congress given congressional influence of the IRS. We need a special prosecutor. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2014-05-10 07:56 |
| #6 Hat tip to you BT. You've capture it in 250 words or less. I suspect you are right about rats on both sides of the isle. I've still not convinced Congressman Mike Roger's [Chairman of the House Intel Committee] decision to leave politics didn't have something to do with his wife's former high-level connection to the UK's Aegis LLC. I further suspect Roger's gave the F.B.I. the backchannel 'wave off' which might explain their long delay in arriving at the Benghazi crime scene. One can almost hear him calling 'Main' and saying, "hey, you don't won't to go there, it's a shi* sandwich." |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2014-05-10 07:46 |
| #5 What IS the Truth about Benghazi ? The truth is both the democrats and the republicans agreed to send Stevens who was a back history gun dealer to collect all the arms in Libya we sold to the Saudis to supply the war against Kadaffy. Putin didn't like us sending everything collected that way to Syria where he had a lot of gun money of his own invested. Putin warned Obama. He was ignored. He arranged with the locals to get "spontaneous" and bring mortars and RPGs. So Stevens was put in a mail sack and capped in a ditch. And the local spontaneous was whitewashed by Obama with a blame the video song and dance BS. Susan Rice was just another say anything kind of girl. Hillary made sure that Stevens was left out to dry and she blamed it all on a video too. Now one side is making credit for political gain in an election year. Both sides were selling guns, neither side likes to admit Putin whacked Stevens and Obama especially doesn't want to take any responsibility but then , he's just that kind of a guy. Turn me over and do it again as usual. Pelosi and Hillary are such nice people and that's what America really needs...leaders who lead. Watch your step and wipe your shoes. |
| Posted by: Big Thromoth3646 2014-05-10 05:28 |
| #4 An "O" is a hard act to follow; Who could ever have known it was hollow? Though it's you they'll bemoan, In the end, O's their own Bitter tabula rasa to swallow. |
| Posted by: Zenobia Floger6220 2014-05-10 02:24 |
| #3 She's where she should have been all along, shi* scared and paranoid. They're coming after her queen. I hope the ole hag enjoys the ride. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2014-05-10 01:32 |
| #2 Republicans have seven panel seats while Democrats have five, one of several sticking points Pelosi said has caused some politicians to urge a boycott of a process they say is aimed at sullying Democrats in an election year. When you had the reigns, Ms. Pelosi, how fair were you to the other side of the aisle, you fucking hypocrite? Suck it now, and suck it hard (swallowing is optional)... |
| Posted by: Raj 2014-05-10 01:23 |
| #1 Following a short intermission, they'll be coming along like nice gentlemen. The Beast will be insistent that any possible advance warning of the panel's investigatory intent be quickly provided. No sense in pulling the Executive Privilege pin to hastily, or worse yet, too late. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2014-05-10 01:00 |