Rep Boehner — resident presides over another circus act
[Speaking Truth To Power]
House Speaker John Boehner and the Republican Party’s decision to call yet another committee to investigate the Libya embassy attack that killed four Americans has rankled Democrats and the White House—who see the effort as nothing more than a vain exercise in partisan politics. Republicans maintain they are just trying to get to the bottom of what happened.
If Republicans are so interested in the death of Americans, why don’t they ever ask pertinent questions when murky decisions were used to deploy American soldiers into foreign theaters of war like Libya?
On Friday, House Speaker John Boehner announced the creation of a select committee to investigate the 2012 attack on the American embassy in Benghazi Libya. Four people were killed in the attack, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens. The Speaker has tapped Rep. Trey Gowdy, (R-S.C.) to chair the committee.
“Trey Gowdy is as dogged, focused, and serious-minded as they come,” Boehner said. “His background as a federal prosecutor and his zeal for the truth make him the ideal person to lead this panel. I know he shares my commitment to get to the bottom of this tragedy and will not tolerate any stonewalling from the Obama administration.”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) insisted the panel must be a balanced bipartisan affair. “If this review is to be fair, it must be truly bipartisan,” Pelosi said. “The panel should be equally divided between Democrats and Republicans as is done on the House Ethics Committee. It should require that witnesses are called and interviewed, subpoenas are issued, and information is shared on a bipartisan basis. Only then, could it be fair.”
Some Democrats are reportedly considering boycotting the committee because of the partisan nature of previous Benghazi “investigations” which some Democrats decry as a waste of time and money. “They’re gonna spend taxpayer money for doing something that they’ve already spent taxpayer money to do,” said Democratic whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (Md.), on Monday. “Our view is that we’ve done that and we don’t believe the administration covered it up. And we believe that this is political only.”
The Republicans latest foray into focusing on Benghazi will indeed be more GOP grandstanding and pretending that they are only trying to find out why the embassy attack led to the death of four Americans. But that is bull. This is just another tactic to torpedo the agenda of the Obama White House and Democrats—especially, as the 2014 Elections approach.
Speaker Boehner talked about the “stonewalling from the Obama administration.” Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Haven’t Republicans been “stonewalling” President Obama since he got into office? Aren’t these the same Republicans who vowed to make him a “one-term president?”
Only a few days ago, Republicans obstructed the attempt by Democrats to increase the minimum wage. Many of the people, who pretend to care about regular working people, make the empty argument that a raise in the minimum wage would hurt business.
Hasn’t this excuse been used since the creation of a minimum wage in 1938? Wasn’t President Franklin Delano Roosevelt correct when he said “no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country?”
Republicans have decided providing Americans with a livable wage—which hasn’t been keeping up with inflation and the astronomically rising cost of living—isn’t a priority. Remember these are the same Republicans who think oil companies—who make billions a year—are entitled to tax subsidies.
The Benghazi circus is another ploy to shelve the economic needs of the American people, by sabotaging the economy so they can blame President Obama and Democrats.
Speaker Boehner claims this committee will be taking a “serious” look at the issues related to Benghazi. That can only happen if the larger Libyan invasion issue is examined. Rep. Gowdy talked about a “cover-up.” The real “cover-up” is the lack of scrutiny involved in honestly talking about the terrorists who were given power, in Libya, by NATO and politicians in Washington—both Democrat and Republican. Republicans lack the moral high ground to lecture Democrats and President Obama—because they were clamoring for an earlier invasion into Iraq.
A real debate on the larger Libyan invasion—not just this narrow, politicized focus on the embassy attack—would be instructive. Indeed, Americans should be pondering whether invading Libya was wise. Capitol Hill should’ve taken a circumspect look at America’s awful and hypocritical Libyan warmongering intervention.
It’s surely true Republicans are being major league hypocrites on this issue. They don’t really give a damn about the four Americans who were killed—this is all partisan politics. If they really cared about dead Americans so much, where were the hearings relating to the thousands of dead Americans who were offered up as sacrificial lambs because of the lies told by the Bush White House to justify the Iraq War? If they care about dead Americans where are the hearings addressing the epidemic suicides among veterans—averaging a shocking 22 suicides per-day?
However, Republican pretense aside, the Democrats and President Obama deserve derision on their decision to become involved in handing over power to racist terrorists in Libya. The idea the intervention was necessary to save innocent lives should be analyzed through the current lawless events being perpetrated by those “rebels” who were given power after the fall of Colonel Muammar Quathafi.
Libya is far worse now than at any time in recent history—it has now become a melting pot of marauders and murderers. Brazen terrorists are kidnapping and assassinating people. Libya has now become Africa’s epicenter for jihadists and terrorists who are flocking there in droves for the safety and sanctuary it now provides—thanks to the NATO led invasion and President Obama decision to become involved in this fiasco; an involvement pushed hard for by Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power.
After findings, like the Sinjar Records reports—compiled and analyze at the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point— documenting the high concentration of Al-Qa’ida fighters living in Benghazi and surrounding areas, how could the Obama White House help those who no doubt have the blood of dead American soldiers on their hands? Libya was second only to Saudi Arabia on this list—and the areas around Benghazi were specifically singled out in the report.
Wasn’t the White House aware of such reports, or, were geo-political objectives just too juicy to pass on this invasion opportunity? Was the demand from covetous corporate “interests” for Libyan oil too strong? As some world powers position themselves to economically exploit Africa for the 21 Century, were other goals, like seeking a military foothold, through machinations such as AFRICOM, equally essential to the equation?
During the 2011 Egyptian revolution, against former President Hosni Mubarak, President Obama warned protesters to be peaceful—even in the face of thuggery by forces loyal to the state. So, why was it alright for armed insurgent “rebels” to wage war against the Libyan state? This is the type of two-faced duplicitous foreign policy that makes it hard for many to trust any party in Washington.
For the next several months Republicans will posture on their Benghazi “cover-up” committee. No serious look at the military intervention in Libya—and how it has escalated terrorist activity—will really be addressed, by either side. It will be nothing more than a farce and political circus—only, perhaps a little less odiously partisan than committees chaired by charlatan California Republican Darrell Issa.
Be prepared. Here comes the clown show in grand Washington style.
