Democrats Accuse Republicans Of Being Behind The Real Benghazi Cover-Up

lindsey-graham-benghaziRecently I wrote an article warning people about “passionate activists.” But in that warning I didn’t just mean activists, I meant any individual or group that is overly passionate about one particular thing. Many times I’ve found those people or groups that are overly committed to one issue tend to seek out information that confirms their beliefs on that issue, whether or not it’s actually factual or even relevant.

It reminds me of a saying I often use, “Who’s watching the watchers”?

And when it comes to political investigations, it’s especially true. Which is why when I ran across Mother Jones article detailing accusations made by Democrats that Republicans were hiding and covering up information about Benghazi, I wasn’t at all surprised.

The truth is, Republicans aren’t trying to find out what really happened in Benghazi because we already know what happened. Over a year ago we had a bipartisan report released from the Senate Intelligence Committee that debunked all of the right-wing conspiracies that have been swirling around this attack since 2012. Then, just a couple of months ago we had another report, this time from a Republican-led investigation into Benghazi, that also debunked all of the conservative nonsense that’s been driving these ridiculous conspiracies for well over two years.

Case closed, right? Of course not. Because nearly as soon as the Republican-led committee released their report debunking all of these right-wing lies, House Speaker John Boehner announced that he was going to appoint another committee to continue to investigate the 2012 terrorist attack in Libya.

Well, according to the article on Mother Jones, Democrats are accusing Republicans of cutting Democrats out of meetings with key witnesses Republicans are questioning, and trying to hide information from witness testimony that undermines the Republican conspiracies they’ve been trying to push against the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton. Not only that, but when all five Democrats from this committee sent letters Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) requesting that they be a part of all witness interviews and meetings, their request was denied.

Part of the letter Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) sent to Gowdy said:

Democrats have repeatedly been excluded from core components of the investigation, and we have been proceeding with no rules to prevent this from occurring in the future. You have…withheld or downplayed information when it undermines the allegations we are investigating.

Cummings used as an example an instance when the GOP staff interviewed a witness who verified that there was no illegal transfer of weapons from Libya to Syria:

Instead of crediting her testimony to help put this previously investigated and debunked allegation to rest, you followed up your private, Republican-only interview of this witness by requesting a broad set of documents from the State Department on this debunked allegation. In addition, your staff has now informed us that they do not intend to use this individual as a factual witness in the Committee’s investigation.

It’s so blatantly obvious what Republicans are trying to do with Benghazi. They’re going to keep investigating this attack over and over again to try to use it against Hillary Clinton in 2016.

And it won’t matter how many times their lies have been exposed, how many ridiculous conspiracies have been debunked or how shady and unethical their “investigations” are – conservatives will continue to believe their nonsense. It’s absolutely absurd that over a year since a bipartisan committee debunked these right-wing lies, and just a couple of months removed from a Republican-led investigation that determined that all of these conspiracies are baseless, we’re dealing with yet another investigation into the same exact information that’s been investigated almost continuously for the last 2 1/2 years.

The truth is, Republicans aren’t “conducting an investigation” – they’re leading a witch hunt. They’re not looking for the truth, because we already know what the truth about Benghazi is. What they’re doing now is trying to find any possible way to link anything to the Obama administration, and more importantly, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. This is nothing but disgusting partisan politics pure and simple.

Which brings me back to my question of who’s watching the watchers. Because while Republicans claim they’re the group trying to hold people accountable for a “cover up” that they know doesn’t exist, they are actually the ones hiding and concealing the truth because it doesn’t support the lies they’re trying to convince Americans are real.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Jim Bean

    I’ve never been quite able to understand this. If it is true that it took two weeks for credible, accurate information about the particulars of the Benghazi attack to reach the White House, how is that NOT scandalous?

    • Cin5456

      It didn’t. The people who needed to know found their answers quickly. It took a little longer to get corroboration from other sources to give the data a level of certainty that could not be challenged or proven wrong. The reason they wait before announcements is our political climate in which any slight mistake or misstatement is used as a political football by the right. One must be careful to the nth degree before opening one’s mouth. That is a principle that Republicans have yet to learn. Rest assured that the people who are concerned with this nation’s security are not laying down on the job. They may miss things, important things, but when they pinpoint something that they urgently need to investigate, they don’t mess around.

      • Jim Bean

        If they had said, ‘its too early for us to say with any certainty who was behind the attack” everything you just said would be dripping with wisdom. But they didn’t. So it isn’t.

      • Adam Smith

        Actually, they did. It’s all on record. You obviously have plenty of time. Use some of it to Google things so you don’t appear so flippin stupid.

      • congero

        That train has already left the station.

      • Cin5456

        It is not for you or I to say what should have been said. Should’a, would’a, could’a, does not count.

    • Because real life is not a one hour TV show?
      Because it happened on the other side of the world?
      Because ‘they’ just killed 4 Americans and were just itching to kill some more?

      • Jim Bean

        Guess we’re just lucky it was a little attack on a foreign compound and not the launch of a nuke at us, huh?

      • regressive whitetrash GOP scum

        or a revisit of the safety provided to America on 9/11/01?

    • FD Brian

      I’m certain everyone on the right would have been fine with the events that happened in Benghazi if a republican was in the white house.

      • Sean Jones

        All of the Embassy attacks during Bush the seconds time in office. The right was silent over these attacks.

        Dec. 15, 2001: Unidentified assailants gunned down a Nepalese security guard of the U.S. Embassy in Kathmandu, Nepal.

        Jan. 22, 2002: Two assailants attacked the American Center in Calcutta, India. Five policemen died, and 15 others were injured in the attack.

        March 20, 2002: A car bomb exploded near the U.S. Embassy in Lima, Peru, killing nine people and injuring 32. The U.S. State Department reported no American casualties, injuries, or damage.

        June 14, 2002: A suicide bombing in front of the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, left 12 dead and 51 injured.

        Nov. 9, 2002: The security supervisor for the U.S. embassy in Nepal was shot dead at his house in Kathmandu. Maoist rebels claimed responsibility for the incident.

        May 12, 2003: In a series of attacks, suicide bombers blew themselves up in a truck loaded with explosives in a complex that housed staff working for U.S. defense firm Vinnell in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. (The contractors worked out of the U.S. embassy.) At least eight Americans were killed in the incident. Al-Qaida was suspected responsible for the incident. This was one of three attacks, involving at least nine suicide bombers and suspected to have involved 19 perpetrators overall.

        July 30, 2004: Two people, including a suicide bomber, were killed and one person was injured as a suicide bomber set off an explosion at the U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. The Israeli Embassy and the Uzbekistan Prosecutor General’s Office in Tashkent were also attacked in related incidents.

        Oct. 24, 2004: Edward Seitz, the assistant regional security officer at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, died in a mortar or possible rocket attack at Camp Victory near the Baghdad airport. An American soldier was also injured. He was believed to be the first U.S. diplomat killed following the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

        Nov 25, 2004: Jim Mollen, the U.S. Embassy’s senior consultant to the Iraqi Ministers of Education and Higher Education, was killed just outside the Green Zone in Baghdad.

        Dec. 7, 2004: Gunmen belonging to al-Qaida in the Arabian Penninsula stormed the U.S. Consulate in Jedda, Saudi Arabia, triggering a bloody four-hour siege that left nine dead. One American was slightly injured in the assault.

        Jan. 29, 2005: Unknown attackers fired either a rocket or a mortar round at the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad. The strike killed two U.S. citizens and left four others injured.

        Sept. 7, 2005: Four American contractors employed with a private security firm supporting the regional U.S. embassy office in Basra, Iraq, were killed when a roadside bomb exploded near their convoy. Three of the contractors died instantly, and the fourth died in a military hospital after the bombing.

        March 2, 2006: An unidentified driver detonated a car bomb while driving past the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing a himself, a U.S. Consulate worker and at least three others.

        Sept. 12, 2006: Islamic militants attacked the U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria, with hand grenades, rifles, and a vehicle rigged with explosives. One guard and the four attackers died.

        July 8, 2007: Two Iraqi U.S. Embassy workers were killed when the wife went to deliver a ransom for her husband who had been kidnapped in Baghdad. One of the couple’s bodyguards was killed in the failed ransoming.

        Jan. 14, 2008: A bomb hidden on a north Beirut highway hit a U.S. Embassy vehicle, killing at least three Lebanese bystanders. The car’s Lebanese driver and an American at a nearby school were wounded.

        March 18, 2008: Al-Qaida’s wing in Yemen, Jund Al-Yemen Brigades, fired between three and five mortar rounds toward the U.S. embassy, but instead they hit a girls’ school nearby, killing a guard and a schoolgirl and injuring 19 others in Sanaa, Yemen.

        July 9, 2008: Four unknown gunmen killed three Turkish police at the U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey.

        Sept. 17, 2008: Suspected al-Qaida militants disguised as security forces detonated vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices, fired rocket propelled grenades, rockets and firearms on the U.S. Embassy in Sanaa, Yemen. A suicide bomber also blew himself up at the embassy. Six Yemeni police, four civilians (including an American civilian), and six attackers were killed while six others were wounded in the attack.

        Nov. 27, 2008: A Taliban suicide car bomber targeted the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, killing four civilians in addition to the suicide bomber and wounding 18 others. The embassy was hosting a Thanksgiving Day event as Americans and other foreigners were arriving at the venue at the time of the attack.

    • Eg Kbbs

      Jim Bean, If pterodactyls are flying around Washington DC and abducting senators, how is that not scandalous ?

      Hint: The premise behind the “If” has to be true.

      • regressive whitetrash GOP scum

        eg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, u are annoying jimbo again

    • Adam Smith

      I’ve never been quite able to understand why you keep posting about things you obviously don’t understand.

      • congero

        It thinks it is doing battle with the so called left and like the Foxtard right wing authoritarian it is, facts, truth or reason don’t matter.

  • crabjack

    It’s what they do.

  • GimmeSomeTruth

    It is indeed an evil witch hunt of the worst kind. The Party of fiscal responsibility appear to have no problems pumping millions and millions of taxpayer’s dollars into an investigation that had been proven to be non existent. The question requiring an answer is: How did the Romney campaign obtain information about this Embassy attack so quickly and wasted no time to politicize it?

    • Marilyn Olsen Scheffler

      And it’s not just THIS investigation either—-they are still trying to take Obama to court or sue him about several different things that will take even more valuable time and money from situations that truly need looking at. They just can’t give it up.

  • Gary Menten

    This is why Republicans won’t win the 2016 presidential election; they are still trying to win the 2012 election.

    • wendy

      From your mouth…

    • Charles Vincent

      Wait wasn’t that the rally cry of the left/progressives before the mid term elections?

      • Gary Menten

        It’s one thing to win state gerrymandered congressional districts or even to win heavily Republican states; quite another to get 271 electoral votes.

      • Charles Vincent

        Gerrymandered pfft you say it yet have provided no proof that it happened in the midterm election cycle. Further more it’s idiots on the left and right that are running this country into the ground and Obama happens to be just another in a line doing so and he is aided by a congress full of simpletons who would rather try bandaiding the symptom than fixing the problem, all while the other side cuts its own nose off to spite its own face and vice versa. And the rest of the far left/right proletariat gleefully follow blindly along cheering like its an accomplishment.

      • Gary Menten

        Congressional districts are gerrymandered between election cycles as a matter of practice by both parties. So much so, that it goes without hardly a comment. Sticking your head in the sand isn’t going to change that anymore than it will change electoral math at the federal level. But by all means….keep shouting “Benghazi! at the top of your lungs if it makes you feel better.”

      • Charles Vincent

        Lets talk about “PROOF” Gary. First off you saying so isnt proof and never will be unless you back it with documented and verifiable facts.
        Moreover requiring the person making a claim to provide the said proof isn’t burying ones head in the sand.

        “keep shouting “Benghazi! at the top of your lungs if it makes you feel better.””

        Ignoratio elenchi. Furthermore even saying it gives credence and a forum to the the asinine discussion and it makes you look as stupid as the retards on the other side when you mention it in or out of context.

      • Gary Menten
      • Charles Vincent

        The conclusion from the WP article seem to be its not a problem even when it happens below are the three points the authors say on this.

        So, given these facts, how much of Congress’s polarization can be
        attributed to gerrymandering? To get at this, my collaborators, Keith
        Poole of the University of Georgia and Howard Rosenthal of New York University, and I decided to try our hand at gerrymandering by using our computers to draw our own districts. For each map, we used the characteristics of the districts — partisanship, average income, racial and ethnic composition — to predict how liberal or conservative their representatives might be. But even when we tried our best to create as many heterogeneous and competitive districts as possible, the predicted level of polarization was only slightly below what we observed in the real Congress. So even if there were a radical transformation of how legislative districts are drawn, the effects on polarization would be minimal.

        Still, isn’t it just common sense to redraw districts to
        maximize competition? My answer is probably not. A system in which all districts elected middle-of-the-road candidates would deprive many groups of congressional representation. Not only would African Americans, Latinos and other racial and ethnic groups be underrepresented, so would liberal and conservative voters.
        Representative institutions such as Congress should have a membership that fully reflects the diverse interests and views of the public.

        But wouldn’t creating districts that reflect the views of these groups harm voters by eliminating partisan competition? Wouldn’t this lack of competition produce lawmakers who are low-quality, ineffective and possibly corrupt? Not necessarily. Political scientists Shigeo Hirano of Columbia University and James Snyder of Harvard University have shown that in districts dominated by a single party, the competition within primary elections does as good a job of selecting effective, talented legislators and tossing out ineffective, scandal-ridden incumbents as the general election does in districts with party competition. Reforming the redistricting process to favor party competition could reduce the representative nature of legislatures without increasing any of the supposed benefits of competition.

        Should Americans stop worrying, then, and learn to love the gerrymander? No. Even if its effects on polarization are as small as I believe them to be, the practice of elected politicians drawing districts for themselves and their political allies is an invitation to overt corruption. A key to any successful democracy is a widespread belief in the fairness and impartiality of elections. Having incumbents participate in designing districts promoting their job security does little to enhance the legitimacy of American democracy. But even if we take the politics out of drawing the
        maps, we shouldn’t expect the divisiveness and polarization of our
        current politics to wither away.

        That’s a deeper problem than mapmaking can solve.

      • Gary Menten
      • Charles Vincent

        This article tells one how to spot gerrymandering. also according to both articles gerrymandering can only happen in the house because senators run state wide not from Districts like the house of reps does.
        Moreover the gist I get from both articles is that both the democrats and the republicans are not screwing eachother they are screwing Third party candidates(not a shocker they been suppressing them for a long time) and the moderate/independent voter.
        My question is if you’re up in arms over this 1) are you mad because 3rd party and moderates are getting shafted or are you 2) Up in arms because you think the left is trying to screw the right or vice versa?

        Furthermore now that we have some actual Proof in a means to identify this practice lets see what states do this.

        Here is Colorado and is seems like you can look at any state on this site.

        http://www DOT redistrictinginamerica DOT org/colorado/

        I don’t really see any Gerrymandering that’s happened here perhaps its different in other states. Search away.

  • Eg Kbbs

    No surprise that dems are pointing out problems with the latest and greatest (but unfortunately, far from the last) Benghazi report.

    Bit news is the photo appearing to be Graham on CNN with caption that the report is “full of crap.”

    Are the repub rats fleeing the sinking ship ?

  • strayaway

    Benghazi is a misdirection. It is one of many mishaps to occur stemming from president Obama’s unconstitutional executive action war on Libya. The resulting government was so weak that it was unable to provide protection. Yesterday, another American was killed in Tripoli when an IS faction stormed a hotel killing eight. Libya has turned into another Somalia with Islamist groups running rampant and having training grounds there. Oil production is less than a quarter of what it had been. The Libyan economy is in ruins. Benghazi is just a pimple, a manifestation of Hillary/Obama’s meddling foreign policy.
    It’s Republicans who quietly supported Hillary and Obama and did nothing to head off the bombing who have now turned on Obama. They can’t very well admit that they were part of the problem so they focus on Benghazi, instead of the overthrow, and blame that on Obama. Everyone who either supported the bombing of Libya and overthrow of Khaddafi or quietly let it happen is responsible for Benghazi and the rest. Khaddafi was not harming the US, kept Islamists at bay, and provided a higher more tolerant standard of living than almost any other Arab country. Now it’s another hellhole.

  • TaxPaying American Voter

    The Republicans CAUSED the attacks. They are now trying to cover their asses by “investigating”, these loose ends. Classic repuke move, stir up crap in this hand, while screwing you with the other.

  • Rose M. McKenna