Continuing Fox News’ war-on-terrorism via semantics, Darrell Issa visited On The Record last night where, when asked what he had learned at his big Benghazi “whistleblower” hearing that day, the only thing he could point to was that it had been a “terrorist attack.” (H/T Think Progress)
VAN SUSTEREN: I’m curious, did you learn anything new today?
ISSA: I think the American people learned today from these brave witnesses, these whistleblowers, that the facts as we were told before during and after the attack at Benghazi just simply aren’t what they really were. The acting ambassador, after Ambassador Stevens was murdered, told us in great detail about what happened that day and what happened in the days to follow and why we should know that he knew and everyone else in the mission knew from the moment it happened, from the get-go, as he said, that this was a terrorist attack.
Issa pretended to be non-partisan and acting on behalf of the American people even though a Gallup poll released yesterday made it clear they want Congress to focus on jobs and the economy. He called on other Benghazi “whistleblowers” to come forward and promised to “get out” their stories. Then suggesting he’s looking forward to “clos(ing) up this investigation,” Issa said, with a straight face. “I don’t want to be chasing down every rabbit hole over how the administration was paranoid about us finding out. I’m only concerned about how do we keep this from happening in the future?”
Oh, really? Then why was this hearing held by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, rather than the Foreign Affairs Committee?
Not that Van Susteren challenged any of Issa’s preposterous statements. Instead, she asked “what prompted” one of yesterday’s witnesses to come forward now.
Supposedly liberal Van Susteren also somehow didn’t mention what her colleague Alan Colmes pointed out on his blog about the hearing: right-wing Benghazi conspiracy theories were destroyed by Issa’s own star witnesses.
Nor did she point out, as Think Progress did,
(A)s far as labeling Benghazi a terror attack, that issue has been settled long ago. President Obama referred to it as an “act of terror” the day after the attack and directly referred to the incident as “a terrorist attack” two weeks later. Issa probably didn’t need a hours-long hearing to get confirmation on that.
So what, ultimately, was the use of the hearing? Van Susteren likes to complain about government waste. But if she saw any usefulness of this dog-and-GOPony show, she kept it to herself.
And no matter that there wasn’t any news that came out of the hearing. Just the same intra-agency disputes we’ve already been hearing about, and which have been clear since Gregory Hicks’ unhappiness was voiced at a much earlier time. I didn’t hear any new information, although they did try to play up the idea that having a State Department Counselor present while Jason Chaffetz was on his fishing expedition was somehow an unheard of idea.
After more than a week of discussions about how this was going to blow the dam wide open, and how these were serious whistleblowers with a huge story to tell, all we got was a repetition of the same criticisms we’ve already heard regarding Benghazi, coupled with some truly unpleasant grandstanding by Trey Gowdy and Darrell Issa. If anything, it appears that the GOP are disappointed that their guys didn’t get their carefully rehearsed soundbites plastered over multiple networks in a live simulcast.
Gee, you don’t say… The world outside of Fox News has known that the suspects had terrorist ties for months now, Issa. Remember when those two conspirators were arrested, and they turn out to be tied to…
Oh, wait… Fox News didn’t report either arrest, and several shows said there were no arrests over the last two weeks. Since you clearly went in with not one ounce of data that wasn’t given to you by Fox News, you can hardly be blamed for not knowing about that.
Sorry for assuming you did.
But you have to admit that I’m correct with Fox News falling off the cliff everyday chasing after the President. :)
He might get more of a “takeaway” from those — especially if there’s an expensive automobile parked nearby with the keys still in the ignition . . .
The truth doesn’t matter to him, only making money for a selective few at the top, and let’s face it, it works.