Isn't that kind of
shifting the blame, when the government itself has the right information?
Well, parts of the government had some information, other parts had other information, and the emails were all about trying to get the government's parts to agree on what information to make public, while protecting those who needed protecting, like the CIA and FBI. Everyone in government knew it was a mess -- a mess with the CIA in the middle of it -- they were all just trying to make sure it was someone else's mess.
So they made it the
President's mess?
That's life -- the President runs the government, or the government runs him, it's an endless struggle. And news media feed the fight -- here's Karl again: "The White House could still clear up this confusion by releasing the full e-mail transcripts that were provided for brief review by a select number of members of Congress earlier this year. If there's "no "there' there," as President Obama himself claimed yesterday, a full release should help his case."
OK, so the White House
released the 100 emails to the public and that should be the end of the
Benghazi "scandal"?
You might think so, but I'm not sure why. There's five different Congressional Republican committee chairs planning hearings. And over at ABC News, Jonathan Karl is still acting as if they had it right all along: "The emails confirm the ABC News report that the so-called "talking points" written by the CIA on the attack underwent extensive revisions -- 12 versions -- and that substantial changes were made after the State Department expressed concerns."
But that's the State
Department, they can't impeach State, can they?
Yes and no. This all happened on Hillary Clinton's watch, so Republicans figure if they can do her enough political damage, she won't run for President in 2016 -- you could call it a kind of pre-impeachment.
Isn't there anyone in Washington who deals from the bottom of a full
deck?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
