Actually, if you REALLY want to know, they convened a bipartisan Congressional committee to investigate all things Benghazi (AGAIN!) because the Republicans are batshit insane and the Democrats want someone on it to try to keep it at least somewhat grounded in reality.
Um, doorhinge, you *do *know how disparate your views of the Benghazi and Bridgegate investigations appear to us, don’t you?
Maybe it’s to provide the needed contrast for viewers and reporters. Or maybe also because you can’t make a show of walking out unless you’re there.
The hearings will be on continuous loop on Fox right up to Election Day, then they’ll adjourn the day after. It isn’t about “getting to the bottom” of something that’s already been scraped bare, it’s only about not having anything positive to campaign on and not much they can spin negative.
Actually that brings up a good point. Surely it’s the Republicans who had the most to gain by the death of an American ambassador right before an election. How do we know that they didn’t leak the security arrangements and itinerary of the ambassador to the militants. I’m sure doorhinge won’t object to all senate and congressional Republicans sending all their emails for the months leading up to the attack to the white house unredacted? If they won’t it’s clear their hiding something.
Because the CIA and the WH staff communicate with each other.
ol’ Hillary’s State Department
It’s a friendly little place, on the main street through town, just past the traffic light. A kindly old lady runs the joint and watches over the till; you pay what you can, when you can. A bunch o’ the boys will be hangin’ out around the cracker barrel and talking 'bout Ukraine and whether we should provide direct support to the rebels in Syria.
Can you honestly say that you showed the same bulldog tenacity regarding redactions during the Bush administartion?
What say you to this December 09 2013 article?
9/11 Link To Saudi Arabia Is Topic Of 28 Redacted Pages In Government Report; Congressmen Push For Release
Aren’t you curious about what is in those 28 pages? Are we to take Bush’s claim of National Security seriously?
Except on the days when her traumatic brain injury is acting up, then it’s harder for her to be the evil mastermind.
Um, who is us and why should I be concerned with what us think?
It’s obvious that several people are operating under the mistaken impression that I can stop the bipartisan Congressional committee from asking question, demanding answers, and issuing subpoenas. Boy-oh-boy, are they going to be disappointed.
Um, that it’s off-topic and that you don’t want to talk about all things Benghazi???
Did you try scrolling up to the original?
Essentially everyone else who’s been interacting with you.
Are you trying to convince anyone else of anything, or only yourself?
This is the kind of circumstance where a tu quoque is not off-topic.
No one is operating under such an impression. The show will go on. We are under the impression, however, that you find some value in this Congressional circus.
Eh tu, BrainGlutton?
I put the attempted misdirect in the same category as that previous post about Michelle’s 2nd set of teeth.
I see we (ewe and eye) agree on something. You will also find something of value.
I was attempting to debate a topic in the Great Debates forum. I have no idea if anyone has changed their mind about the topic but it’s obvious that many do not want questions to be asked or readable answers to be given. They’ve resorted to personal attacks, threats, babble about Michelle’s 2nd teeth, and other odd topics. :yawn:
Life, and the Congressional committee investigation, goes on.
Indeed. I think we’ll find further disillusionment with the congressional Republicans and some electoral advantage for the good guys. As George W. Bush would say, “Bring it on.”
They’ve already been asked, in all of the multiple hearings already held. We already know everything relevant about this incident - even those of you with a remarkably narrow focus on it and not on the many similar ones that preceded it. What we deride is the obvious nature of this latest round, which is *not *fact-finding.
Do *you *have any questions left about Christie and Bridgegate, or are you still satisfied with his own lawyers’ quick whitewash job and want the rest of us to be too?
Well, to be fair, there still is your question about whether Obama was actually asleep at 3 AM, or up taking a whiz. You still haven’t told us *why *that matters to you, only that it does. That is not *quite *enough to make us think we should spend taxpayer money, and the time of legislators who claim to be focused on job creation, on finding out.