Via Markos, Republican Congressman Darrell Issa, chairman of the GOP's Benghazi Oversight Committee, gives an articulate explanation [at 0:59] on why this is the worst scandal ever in American history:
"An act of terror is different than a terrorist attack."
[Blink*Blink]
Oh yeah, it all makes sense now.
But, Lord love a duck, there's more.
Mr. Issa also 'splains his new theory:
"They began being attacked, and were attacked for more than seven hours and we're to believe that no response could even be started that could have helped them seven hours later? Quite frankly, you can take off from Washington, DC on a commercial flight and practically be in Benghazi by the end of seven hours. You certainly can take off from areas in the Mediterranean and bring at least some support in less than seven hours."
Jed Lewison deals with this:
"In Issa's world, that seven hour flight from D.C. to Benghazi is a smoking gun proving this scandal is worse than Watergate. So yeah, he's really got Obama now ... except:"
"Yeah, it'd take 27 hours to fly commercial on the shortest available flight from Washington to Benghazi, not seven. Oh well. Back to the drawing board, I guess."
The only legitimate point the conservatives have in their Benghazi hysteria is the idea that security was inadequate at our diplomatic mission in that city.
However, it's a situation that the Republicans have done all they could to worsen:
"As part of the Republican majority that has controlled the House the last two years, Mr. Issa joined in cutting nearly a half-billion dollars from the State Department’s two main security accounts. One covers things like security staffing, including local guards, armored vehicles and security technology; the other, embassy construction and upgrades. In 2011 and 2012, President Obama sought a total of $5 billion, and the House approved $4.5 billion."
Teabagging Rep. Jason Chaffetz has also been a leader of Benghazi conspiracy theories, and he has no problem declaring his votes against diplomatic security:
O’BRIEN: Is it true that you voted to cut the funding for embassy security?
CHAFFETZ: Absolutely. Look, we have to make priorities and choices in this country.
Their priorities and choices have consequences. Hillary Clinton had long warned Republicans that they were weakening national security by cutting, well, security. Back in February of 2011:
"Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emerged from a meeting with House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) sharply critical of proposed Republican cuts to the State Department budget, warning they “will be detrimental to America’s national security."'
Republicans shrugged off the criticism. They had just gerrymandered their way into control of the House, and it was time make some changes. Those changes included cutting the sort of security that might've prevented the Benghazi disaster.
Perhaps Darryl Issa and the other House Republicans should investigate that?
