Taking a break from Benghazi “whistleblower” testimony before a Congressional committee.
Information from the three individuals closest to the terrorist attack is fascinating by itself, furthering the supposition that the administration quickly attempted to cover-up how poorly it handled the situation costing the lives of four U.S. citizens in Libya.
Rather than delve into all the details of the attack here and now, because the information's available in many other places, I’ll address instead what I find to be simply amazing every time one of these situation arises.
Right at the outset, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, Republican from California, laid out the scenario, outlining the events as they occurred, establishing a time-line and setting a framework for the questioning to follow.
Representative. Elijah Cummings, Democrat from Delaware, also a ranking Oversight Committee member, spoke next, presenting selected items of information suggesting that all the information’s already been discussed and dealt with, and most important of all, his opinion that Chairman Issa’s a misguided liar.
So, right off the bat the Dem’s approach was to demean, vilify and disparage the person who put the hearings together while simultaneously belittling the three career diplomats by pretty much echoing in other words Hillary’s position that what actually happened in Benghazi really doesn't matter at all, because its over.
In very similar fashion, the questioning itself followed a very definitive pattern. Republicans used published comments, quotes and items of public record as guidance in inquiring what the three people directly involved experienced during the attack and its aftermath. They then built upon what they’d learned with increasingly focused queries that followed.
The Democrats, however, took a completely different tack making primarily politically motivated inquiries, and in several cases, not really asking anything substantial at all but using their five minutes to make self-serving speeches, basically ignoring the purpose of the hearing altogether.
So, concluding from what’s transpired so far, it seems to me that what the facts are proving here is that by approaching the Benghazi attack and its aftermath from a purely political position, and then compounding that mistake with additional diversion from the truth, the administration’s looking significantly more incompetent with every sentence uttered by the whistleblowers.
But, what’s even worse for the Dem's is that while those in the White House are now being exposed as seemingly unfit for the jobs they hold, their compatriots in Congress are making themselves look even worse.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment