Jack2014

Doofus Gowdy called together his first public meeting on the Benghazi , Benghazi, attack. He claims it will be bipartisan but still will spend his $3.7 million allocation slowly as to stretch the process out to the 2016 election.

Benghazi probe opens in Clinton’s shadow

By Martin Matishak - 09/17/14 05:04 PM EDT
Hillary Clinton and the 2016 contest for the White House hung like a shadow over the House Select Committee on Benghazi’s inaugural hearing on Wednesday, even as the panel’s GOP chairman insisted it would rise above politics.

In his opening statement, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) rejected arguments that it is time to “move on" from Benghazi, forcefully arguing that there are serious unanswered questions about the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that left Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead.


"Some question the need for this committee. I respect your right to disagree, but the mark of a professional, indeed the mark of character, is to do a good job even if you do not think the task should have been assigned in the first place," he said at the top of what is Congress's eighth investigation into the deadly assault.

Democrats, who at one point had threatened to boycott the Benghazi investigation, said they hoped Republicans honored their promise for a nonpartisan investigation.

"I sincerely hope the select committee will stay on the course of constructive reform and keep this goal as our North Star," Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.), the panel’s top Democrat, said in his opening statement.

But the difficulty of keeping partisanship at bay was highlighted by comments from Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio), a former chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, who at one point charged that Clinton interfered with the Independent Accountability Review Board that reviewed what went wrong in Benghazi.

Jordan noted that one of the panel’s leaders, former Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen, admitted in a previous congressional hearing that he was reporting back to senior staff at the State Department.

“He gives a heads-up to the very person he's supposed to be investigating,” Jordan said. "So of course this thing wasn't independent."

Gowdy made similar claims about the review board last year, saying "there's no objectivity" to it because the leaders were appointed by Clinton.

Clinton was secretary of State at the time of the Benghazi attack, and Republicans have repeatedly attacked her handling of the episode and questioned why warnings from Libya about a deteriorating security situation were ignored.

Democrats have portrayed the GOP’s Benghazi panel as a “political stunt” aimed at generating negative publicity for Clinton, the presumed front-runner for the Democratic nomination for the presidency in 2016.

Gowdy, a former prosecutor with a methodical style, on Wednesday made a concerted effort to keep the hearing focused on the security failures in Benghazi.

The other members of the panel followed suit, with the exception of Jordan, who was the only Republican to bring up Clinton during the more than hour-long hearing.

Jordan chided the State Department for not implementing the No. 1 recommendation from a best practices panel, which was the appointment of an Undersecretary for Diplomatic Security to prevent another Benghazi.

“I mean, talk about the arrogance of the State Department,” he said.

Jordan’s questioning prompted the hearing’s only partisan flap, as Cummings inquired why he didn’t direct his question to Greg Starr, State’s assistant secretary for diplomatic security.

Jordan replied that Cummings could use his own time to question Starr.

Gowdy repeatedly tried to show that the nearly three-hour hearing was above politics, at one point crediting a Democrat on the 12-member panel, Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), for coming up with the subject of the session.

He also praised Cummings for asking for another public hearing in December for an update on State’s implementation of the review board’s suggestions, calling it a “wonderful” idea.

With the panel meeting only for the first time and lawmakers set to leave town to campaign for reelection, it was clear Wednesday that the probe could extend well past this year — and possibly into the presidential year of 2016.

Gowdy said keeping the investigation on track would be a challenge.

“You can disagree and still treat an issue with respect,” Gowdy told The Hill after the hearing.

However, “it’s tough in this town to keep politics out.”

“That’s the challenge: to have this inquiry in such a way people respect the process," he said.

Schiff expressed concerns that the panel would struggle to keep partisanship at arm’s length and that the committee “could take on a life of its own and be a committee in search of a mission.”

He predicted there would be “enormous pressure” on Gowdy to deliver “something sensational” to satisfy Republicans who have long suspected an administration-wide cover-up of Benghazi.

Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) struck a cautious note about the panel’s future, saying its members would take the investigation “one step at a time.”
— This story was first posted at 10:46 a.m. and has been updated.

Of course the repuglican TPers on the committee have already violated Doofus Gowdy's rules.
----------------------------------------------------
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), though, charged that Clinton tampered with the Independent Accountability Review Board that studied what went wrong in Benghazi.

He also lambasted the State Department for not implementing a key recommendation from a best practices board to boost security.

“I mean, talk about the arrogance of the State Department,” he said.

all politics

Doofus Gowdy ..........wish we had a president as doofus as Gowdy. This man is lazer sharp and will get to the bottom of the Ben Gazi cover up. Don't you worry about Gowdy.

all politics

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

Jack2014

What are you saying? Get to the bottom of the bottom of the bottom? That puts him in China! He can question Romney!

Mr. Out Sourcer in chief,no less.

all politics

You must be a liberal. Perhaps you can answer a question that I have been trying to get to the bottom, bottom of. Why did you vote for Obuma? Any particular reason or just his color?

Airforceone

No had no choice you put two idiots up against him. One picked a idiot like Pahlin and he wanted to bomb bomb bomb Iran. and the other forgot who the 47% of takers actually are. So not much of a choice

archie bunker Loc: Texas

This guy is a paid democrat troll. He will support the democrat party even if they have video of obama,hillary,ried,and pelosi killing babies with ar-15s!! Ignore this idiot!!

Jack2014

As usual Archie your dead wrong. I'm an independent that got sick of your stupid lies. I voted for an honest man named Dole. FYI. What do you have now?

This thing!

Jack2014

Good ENOEGH reason for me!

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Dole? The banana guy, or the pineapple guy?
Your posts don't look very independant to me.
You do have some nice pics though. Here's one for you.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Democrats are slobbering hate all over themselves.

Good job Rep. Gowdy. You have a bright future.

Jack2014

What's the matter Archie,swallow your cigar?
Republicans used to be men and now they are either whimps or fools.

Example number one


Example number two


Examples 3&4-need I go on?

son of witless

Why are you afraid of Gowdy. Didn't your boys bury the dirt from Benghazi deep enough?

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

I kind of feel ashamed of myself for the pleasure I get watching Democrats squirm.

I'd feel worse if they didn't do it all to themselves.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Can't disagree Jack. You like to fight and sling insults. I don't anymore. Ain't worth my time! You have yourself a mighty fine evening sir! I believe I will gather up my shovel, and pail, and leave your sandbox.