True Blue Democrats trying to build “Blue Wall” around Obama and Clinton over Benghazi

Main Stream Media continues not to “Get It” about Benghazi  —  Republicans are after Obama and Clinton, not because they “politicized” the post-Benghazi talking points; it’s because they LIED about Benghazi from the get-go

The Benghazi lies undermine Obama’s claim of legitimacy in the 2012 election; and equally important, any claim that Hillary Clinton might make in 2016 that she can be trusted by the American people or that she did a good job as Obama’s Secretary of State through 2012

Even as news percolates over certain redacted Benghazi e-mails that were recently turned over to Judicial Watch, some of which apparently containing details being held back by the White House because those details  involve “executive deliberation,” the hub-bub in the House is whether Democrat members will participate or boycott the recently announced “Select Committee” on Benghazi.

At Waterloo, Napoleon’s soldiers largely wore blue uniforms as they arrayed their units to fend off the attacks by the Wellington-led forces that were attempting to finally neutralize their beleaguered leader. In much the same way, most true-blue Democrats at all levels are fighting any further inquiries into all of the questions swirling around what happened in and around Benghazi on 9/11/12, and what was done about Benghazi at the White House and the State Department that night and ever since. Specifically, they are digging-in to oppose any efforts by House Speaker John Boehner to establish a Select House Committee on Benghazi to be headed by Trey Goudy (R-SC).

One of the Democrats’ early obstructive tactics is House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi’s  demand for equal Democrat representation on the select committee as a condition of their “bi-partisan” participation in the process, even though they are clearly the minority party in the House of Representatives  (See “Democrats request equal representation on Benghazi committee” by Bradley Klapper, 5/6/14, PBS News Hour/ AP [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/democrats-request-equal-representation-benghazi-committee/]).  At around the same time the “Number Two Democrat” in congress, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, announced "We will urge members to vote 'no' on it...." (See “House Democrats to oppose Benghazi select committee” by Susan Davis, 5/5/14, USA Today [http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/05/05/benghazi-house-committee/8720937/]).

Needless to say, it would have been predictable that there would be some Democrat pushback on House Speaker Boehner’s announcement that he was finally going to get behind the formation of a House Select Committee on all the Benghazi related issues. However, when there was a call for a boycott by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., during an interview on "Fox News Sunday," —  "I think it's a colossal waste of time," said Schiff, also a member of the intelligence panel. "I don't think it makes sense, really, for Democrats to participate...."  —  Republicans were quick to engage on that gambit.  Long Island Republican Peter King was quick to pushback on Democrat Schiff’s pushback:  "If Democrats boycott this committee, refuse to take part, the American people are going to conclude, and I think quite rightly, that they feel [Democrats collectively] have something to hide...."  (See “GOP Rep. King blasts Dem rep’s ‘arrogant’ call to boycott Benghazi probe” by Fox News, 5/4/14 [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/04/dem-rep-schiff-calls-on-party-to-boycott-new-benghazi-investigation/

Thus the battle lines are drawn with Republicans saying that at the time of the Benghazi attacks on 9/11/12 the White House primarily was most interested in protecting Obama in the final weeks of his re-election campaign; the Obama Administration was lax in the run-up to the 9/11/12 attacks on the “Benghazi Mission,” in spite of ample warnings of extreme danger; and following the attacks that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including a U.S. Ambassador, several high level officials (possibly including President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) misled the nation. Furthermore, several Republicans in the House Leadership have accused the administration of stonewalling congressional investigations and investigators ever since. Most recently, GOP congressmen are pointing to emails written by administration officials in the days immediately after the attack, but released to Judicial Watch only last week  ---  these e-mails differ from what had earlier been turned over pursuant to House of Representative subpoenas..

For its part the Obama administration has denied and continues to deny any wrongdoing. It’s closely aligned allies, the Democrats in Congress, also say that no evidence suggests officials did anything but try to provide the public with the best information available. For the most part the Democrats in the Congress and in the Obama Administration have presented a united front accusing Republicans of trying to generate a scandal to drum up political support, and to target former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the clear front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016.

THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA CONTINUES TO FLACK FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA AND HILLARY OVER BENGHAZI CHARGES

This is what the MSM wants everybody to take away from the current state of the Benghazi “tragedy” ( I’m comfortable using the word “scandal,” but most in the MSM aren’t there yet): “What happened in Benghazi, Libya, was a tragedy -- not a scandal. And no amount of Republican witch hunting or wishful thinking will make it otherwise. ***  Now a new e-mail "reveals" what was already plainly known, that the White House participated in crafting talking points in the aftermath of attacks in Libya and around the globe. Republicans claim the White House "politicized" the talking points. The irony, of course, is that Republicans have been desperate to politicize Benghazi from day one.... ***   The facts on Benghazi simply do not undercut the Obama administration, but that won't stop Republicans from digging for mud..” (See e.g., “A guide to GOP's Benghazi obsession” by Sally Kohn, 5/6/14, CNN Opinion [http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/06/opinion/kohn-benghazi-gop/]).

Other progressive pundits would take the diversion in another direction, something like this: “...[T]he new select committee is more an effort to gain control over “internal party bickering” marring efforts to probe Benghazi than anything else (parroting Democrat Congressman Elijah Cummings). ***  Now, in order to believe that the failure to turn up the latest emails is a sign investigators were not “getting the job done,” you have to also believe that the new emails actually amount to evidence of serious wrong-doing. But... there’s not much that’s new or serious there. The real story here may be that GOP investigators are not “getting the job done” because thus far, it is not clear that there is any job to get done. ***  Of course, if the real goal is keeping the base enraged for six more months, right through election day, then the new select committee will probably get it done just fine....” ( See “Morning Plum: The real reason for that new GOP Benghazi probe” by Greg Sergent, 5/6/14, Washington Post/ The Plum Line [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/05/06/morning-plum-the-real-reason-for-that-new-gop-benghazi-probe/]).

Others weave a more complex argument that Benghazi-mania afflicts the GOP because it feels so good bash the Democrats with something whose explanations are not readily understood and are easily rejected by most doctrinaire Republicans. For example David Korn said, “The latest outbreak of Benghazi-mania on the right shows the virus is only growing more resistant to reason.” (See “Why There Is No Cure for the GOP's Benghazi Fever” by David Korn, 5/2/14, Mother Jones [http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/05/gop-benghazi-fever-issa-boehner-ben-rhodes]).  Among many other detailed nuances, Korn concluded by writing this: “For Obama's political foes, the Benghazi narrative—that is, their reality-challenged version of it—offers too much benefit to be abandoned. It serves three fundamental desires of the right. The get-Obama crusaders have long wanted to show that the president is just another weak-on-defense Democrat, to demonstrate that he is not a real American worthy of being president, and to uncover an explosive scandal that eviscerates Obama's presidency and provides cause for impeachment. Benghazi, in their feverish minds, has had the potential to do all of this. It is a candy store for many conservatives—no matter that the bins are empty. They will not—cannot—let it go. Nor can they simply focus on the real issues of what went wrong that dreadful night and what must be done to prevent another such disaster. They are love-sick for Benghazi. And for that, there is no cure.”

What Kohn, Sergent and Korn are all saying is that the only thing that is involved in the continued investigation of Benghazi is more political spin on the same old story by the Republicans in the House. What terrifies the Left is that there is much more involved.

Everybody knows what the GOP controlled House of Representatives is trying to prove  —   that both President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knowingly LIED to the American people about Benghazi in advance of the 2012 election.  Furthermore, Republicans are trying to show that from the outset both the President and the Secretary of State used the full power and resources of the White House and State Department, along with various other Executive Branch departments, to orchestrate a cover-up of all negative aspects surrounding the occurrence(s) in and around Benghazi on September 11th, 2012.