I'm sorry, but I have to call call bullsh!t.<quoted text>You are just so wrong. We can tolerate the cheating and the lying and the blow jobs and the broken promises until someone dies for those things. Benghazi is the only thing I care about. The rest is just politics as usual.
If anyone could have used it to political advantage it would have been Romney but he refused to do so. You may be able to imagine people using dead sons, husbands and brothers as pawns but it is totally off my radar screen and I think it is off those who are trying to get to the bottom of this.
There have been nine (9) "Congressional investigations" thus far. Tell me please, what security revisions enhancements have resulted? Name just one. And tell me what Republican members say when asked. I'll bet you haven't a clue. Here's a clue: "After....".
Romney refused to do so? Are you serious? Do you really have that short a memory, or are you auditioning for O'Reilly as a "fact-checker"? News from the campaign trail: Romney was waving the bloody shirt while the bodies were still warm! C'mon.......
Listen, it would be one thing if something/anything substantive had resulted from 9 (nine) investigations by now. But it has not, because Issa et al don't want it to, because they know you all don't really care about truth. All anyone wants to do is parade around some dead bodies whose names are largely forgotten for at least 2 more years and chant, "Scandal, scandal, sis-boom-bah, scandal, scandal, rah-rah-rah!". When the majority release their report first, not to the ranking members of the minority, but to Fox News, what does that say to you?
Two lifelong dedicated civil servants testified today, and their pertinent testimony was posted. Without knowing anything more about these individuals, you all immediately joined in chorus, "Cover-up!" You all don't want truth, you want political blood. Are you actually oblivious to how the accusations have morphed from Obama to Clinton? Which one may or may not be running for something before long?
C'mon, at least Valynda is honest about it.
Here's more fodder for your "Cover-up!". This time from the Stevens family:
Chris was not willing to be the kind of diplomat who would strut around in fortified compounds. He amazed and impressed the Libyans by walking the streets with the lightest of escorts, sitting in sidewalk cafes, chatting with passers-by. There was a risk to being accessible. He knew it, and he accepted it.
What Chris never would have accepted was the idea that his death would be used for political purposes......
Chris would not have wanted to be remembered as a victim. Chris knew, and accepted, that he was working under dangerous circumstances. He did so just as so many of our diplomatic and development professionals do every day because he believed the work was vitally important. He would have wanted the critical work he was doing to build bridges of mutual understanding and respect the kind of work that made him literally thousands of friends and admirers across the broader Middle East to continue.
I know, I know. Obama/Clinton got to them too. Cover-up!!