McCarthy admits #Benghazi Comm strategy is to Decrease Hillary poll #'s
and the Truth comes out.
Approx @ 4:30 video McCarthy admits #Benghazi Comm strategy is to Decrease Hillary poll #'s
Top Republican Admits House Benghazi Committee Designed To Attack Hillary Clintons Poll Numbers (VIDEO)
Top Republican Admits House Benghazi Committee Designed To Attack Hillary Clintons Poll Numbers (VIDEO)
Author: Oliver Willis September 30, 2015 1:56 am
The House of Representatives Select Committee on the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi is all about attacking Hillary Clintons poll numbers, admits a senior Republican.
Current House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview on Monday night that the Select Committee, chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) that Clintons dropping poll numbers are evidence of the effectiveness of the committee.
McCarthy, who is reportedly running to take over for recently deposed House Speaker John Boehner, told Hannity:
Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee a Select Committee what are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.
It is a tacit admission by the second most powerful Republican in the House that the Committees true goal is taking out Secretary Clinton as a presidential candidate...................
It's not Benghazi or the email business, two faux scandals.
It's her pro-war history, cozy relationship with Wall Street, ever-evolving position changes and her considering Pete Peterson and Henry Kissinger buddies that I find so abhorrent.
Such as her corporate masters, lack of leadership, poor decision making at key moments, support for surveillance, cynical "evolution" on social and environmental issues and unethical manipulation of the primary process.
As far as HRC supporters who think they are the only ones who knew the Benghazi thing was a farce, give a listen outside of your echo chamber. We all knew that.
Edit to add her e-mail and Benghazi don't bother me at all.
Her silence or lack of a stand bothers me!
is enough to allow the GOP to run with Benghazi.
A 'real' issue at the core of a 'fake' issue.
and a red-meat media. The target is Huma Abedin - not Benghazi. Insofar as I can tell, the article mentions nothing about that. Sadly, no cite is provided so I can only make that determination based on the text of the OP.
How many Congressional investigations have there been about this?
They are connected.
On June 22, 2015, the Select Committee on Benghazi released emails between Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal, who had been recently deposed by the Committee. Committee chairman Gowdy issued a press release criticizing Clinton for not providing the emails to the State Department, which produced them to the committee. Clinton had said she provided all work-related emails to the State Department, and that only emails of a personal nature on her private server were destroyed. The State Department confirmed that 10 emails and parts of five others from Sidney Blumenthal regarding Benghazi, which the Committee had made public on June 22, could not be located in the Department's records, but that the 46 other, previously unreleased Libya-related Blumenthal emails published by the Committee, were in the Department's records. In response, Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill, when asked about the discrepancy said: "She has turned over 55,000 pages of materials to the State Department, including all emails in her possession from Mr. Blumenthal."
Republican Committee members were encouraged about their probe, having found emails that Clinton did not produce. Clinton campaign staff accused Gowdy and Republicans of "clinging to their invented scandal."
And one salient fact is that, despite your attempt to blame Clinton for the Benghazi hearings (about which McCarthy was boasting), she provided nothing to assist them.
No doubt the "email issue" will ultimately be formally tied to the Benghazi "scandal" but it hasn't yet. Any drop in her polling related to her server is the result of the media (and social media, thanks to spurious remarks such as yours). Not Congress.
Had Clinton been completely above board with the email server issue at State, complied with ALL FOIA requests, and not lied or distorted any of the facts around these issues, the Benghazi hearings would have died quickly.
She did not do those things. The GOP is running with it as they are naturally going to do. Facts.
than they appear to be doing right now.
Were you an adult in the 1990's? If so reflect back on all that happened. Had the Clinton's not lied, things would have stopped much sooner. Lies, distortions, and the like tend to give credence to even the most ridiculous of attacks.
How old are you?
Well, here are two that stand out.
"I did not have sex with that woman"
Hillary Clinton had no idea how the Rose Law Firm folders which had been subpoenaed and missing for months just happen to have appeared outside her White House resident.
Hillary Clinton did not have sex with that woman. I don't recall her denying it.
Apparently not, as even Ken Starr and roughly $40 million failed to prove otherwise.
FTR, this subthread, especially as it relates to the OP, is very revealing. Thanks for that.
the Rose Law Firm files? Nah, you wouldn't do that.
Read the other reply to you carefully. It reiterates the point wonderfully.
And yes, it is. People deny reality in order to continue with their stated beliefs.
The other reply to me was more blowjob fetishism. Not interested in indulging your collective fetish. Thanks anyway.
is that if I made a post responding to the excrement in yours, I would get the hide while this post would remain.
Welcome to Ignore!
to realize the facts are that the Clintons have had lies and scandal surrounding them since the Arkansas days. That is just fuel for the fire of the GOP witchhunts.
Hard to take a bogus scandal too far if there is nothing there to begin with. Remember how Obama lied and hid the fact that he really was born in Kenya and was Muslim?
Then again, we might just end up with a Republican in the WH.
" the Benghazi hearings would have died quickly..."
Given the GOP's predilection for creating scandal-- especially in places where none exists, what specifically and relevantly leads you to this precise conclusion?
Facts? (part 2)
the SoS email issues and the Benghazi investigation. Without the real email issues, there would have been nothing to keep the investigation legally going. There was no there there.
In fact, if the Republicans came out with a statement that they agreed that Benghazi was a tragedy and that there were no issues of anything wrong done by the SD or HRC and every single Republican signed off on that -- there would still be all the issues that have surfaced about the email server itself.
You may not want to hear it, but I know people in real life, who were supporters of Clinton, very unhappy with the fact that she handled her email this way. Some work for state or local government, non profits or corporations - and they are disturbed because that would not be acceptable.
that might have otherwise never been part of the public awareness. A direct parallel can be made to the 1990s -- and it is NOT the one Bill Clinton made. Then it is clear that Ken Starr was looking for anything that was an issue. He was appointed because of Whitewater, a complex real estate failure, but then given the Paula Jones lawsuit, he expanded to whether there was a pattern there -- and lucked into hearing about Monica, who bizarrely sent a stained dress to her mother (with instructions not to get it cleaned.)
This time, the committee is reviewing a security failure in a war torn country. A real case could be made that this is using a tragedy for political gain. However, what is being found really has no more connection to Libya than Monica did to Whitewater.
However, Monica and Clinton lying (or at least dissembling) under oath became an issue in and of itself. Now, the problem for Clinton include the fact that the use of a private server and her many comments on it have reinforced a negative meme that she is near Nixonesque in terms of secrecy. It also has exposed what are, at minimum, problems with one of her top aides. It doesn't help Clinton that Cheryl Mills, not HRC, signed off on an agreement that looks very suspicious. (Consider that HRC might have to throw BOTH under a bus to eliminate this issue.) Then consider that one point that virtually everyone had given her in her years as SoS was that she was that she was a skilled administrator and ran the department well. Every time she argues that she didn't understand technology or was not in the loop, she is herself countering that meme.
It is surprising that some seem to find McCarthy's comment as something that would surprise anyone. Of course, they were going to look for anything that could be used against the likely Democratic nominee. Many were completely appalled at the several Benghazi investigations and questioned what they could possibly even be looking for. (Even what they said - that the Obama team tried to manage the news to be as least bad for his campaign - is not really a devastating accusation. It is, in fact, what ANY administration would have done at any point - not just in the fall when re-election is happening. Spin is after all, not against the law.)
However, just as the country was tired of Watergate, they were far more divided on Monica - and it is lucky for Clinton that the first accusations were in early 1998 - not before the 1996 election (Though Dole was such a terrible candidate, he might still have survived.) The Monica nonsense started in November 2005.
Here, the timing is not just before an election, but before the primaries. Before she is the nominee, Democrats can consider if the strengths she brings make up for any of these negatives. After that - like in 1998 - we are stuck defending even if we would prefer not to.
More's the pity that some, in order score useless political points, are adopting it.
Funny that you and my other interlocutor are balancing this charade on the head of the Clenis.
OK, not funny. Entertaining.
of referring to it.
The point - which you missed - is that in both cases, it was reckless, indefensible Clinton actions that were the problem. That they were exposed because of unjustifiable right wing investigations does not change that when the curtain was pulled away, what we saw was not the behavior that we would want of our top elected official.
You seem to want to argue that because the RW actions led to the discovery of untoward actions, they should not be looked at or considered.
Your conflating Bill Clinton's indiscretion with Hillary Clinton's email "scandal" is the point, innit?
Yes, both were exposed as part of a right-wing inquisition. One resulted in a truly unremarkable legal parsing. It created a fiction about trustworthiness on the part of the other, which some use as a basis for political gamesmanship.
As I pointed out to my other interlocutor, it's revealing but not original. We've all seen it played out here many times since this board's inception.
As to it not being original - that is because it is completely obvious. You may call it a "fiction" of untrustworthiness, but the fact is that both Clintons have never had a policy of responding to negative charges with the complete unvarnished truth. We end up with the truth only after various half truths are disputed. You might think this clever - I don't like it.
right now they don't because they want him to beat Hillary because they know how easy it would be to beat him
Like Obama, Sanders doesn't have the scandal ridden past that the Clinton's do. Neither does he give them fuel for the fire like she did with the email issues.
The GOP don't want Sanders. They want Clinton. Coulter and others have already admitted that.
for the California Democratic Party to wage a two pronged attack on Kevin McCarthy and Daryl Issa, time to send them both packing.
Anyway, he is a sad excuse for a majority leaderm let alone for a speaker. He makes Boehner look competent.
So, the man who has been in the GOP leadership in the house for 7 years feels betrayed by the Republicans? Definitively stupid.
is that he was stupid enough to publicly admit that republicans used a congressional committee for political purposes. This is not a very bright guy.
His calling out of GOP hypocrisy in the PP hearings was a thing of beauty IMO.
They start with your inquisitions asshole!
We are tired of paying for your vendettas!
See the PP debacle for a prime example of Bullshit pretending to be for our sake.
No news to most of us here of course, but I love that he publicly bragged about the witchhunt! I can't wait to hear the backpeddle/spin the GOP puts on this.
I'm not a biggest Hillary fan in terms of her policy stances (or lack thereof), but I think the manufactured GOP attacks on her are a load of bull so I'm happy to see this.
One would hope even Repubs would be p!ssed their tax $$ was used to go after a candidate (or taxes used for anything ever) but, you know...
from the right for almost 25 years. She is not my favorite candidate for president, but I have to admire her resilience. She certainly never deserved the hatred and vitriol she's received.
...Hillary is going to "get so much done with?"
in the entire US who give a single fuck about Benghazi, and they don't even care about the actual event. It's been clear from the beginning that all of those idiotic hearings and "investigations" (which we are paying for) had the single purpose of damaging Hillary. And I say this as a Sanders supporter. Whatever disagreements I might have with her sure as hell won't be based on the GOPers' stupid shit.
This might be one of the reasons Congress is so unpopular.
I trust that the message is now crystal clear to all at DU why the GOP do what they do with their viciousness and lies regarding Clinton purely for political purposes and to spread via mass media.
All the GOP propaganda eggs are in Clinton and PP baskets...when those eggs are crushed the GOP will be lucky to escape summary execution by the public.
The Democrats on the Committee should turn their backs on Congressman McCarthy at the next hearing and force him to make a call to order.
For someone so immensely prepared she sure hasn't been very effective at fighting these so-called scandals. And there isn't a whole lot of appetite from many people to ardently defend her because they aren't enthusiastic about her policy and record.
I'd say that the results of the Benghazi investigations (nada, nil, nuttin') have proven that the SOS handled the situation quite well.
So what's to "ardently defend"?
What a fascinating thread. People Bringing up that crap in the '90's--which also wasted millions of taxpayer dollars, and defending it.
Yep, a leader making over $200,000 tax payer dollars, speaking to a multi-millionaire perpetuating and supporting a criminal called Bundy.
While at the same time as he talks out out of the sides of his proverbial mouth, while on his watch and the past drunks watch , you have 45 million children going to bed at night with no food, 5 million unemployed not getting the unemployment benefits they paid into, trying to gut and cut, Social Security, and Social Security Disability benefits, gutting the department of education, and while his county of Kern in California , is dying because of the climate , and the agriculture is being worked with immigrants legal or illegal, he standing there attacking them in the back ground------------and all he is trying to do is besmirch a individual, just like Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan George Bush I and II did and do.
And then he sits or stands there with a straight face and says basically we are wasting tax payer dollars, to just waste tax payers dollars because he was behind the effort to gut and cut funding for protection services for embassies with his republican/tea party hypocrites budget plan.
I think its time to elect responsible people into the Congress----------------this is just insane
I rest my case..........................................
Honk------------------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016
This bullshit story that the GOP are pushing really only effects FOX news people who wouldn't vote for a Democrat anyhow.
I think that republicans are trying to take credit, as always, for something they didn't do. Hillary's poll numbers are dropping because of Hillary.
They are taking credit to influence and turn out the vote against Clinton with the GOP and GOP inclined independent voters.
And Clinton has given them just enough with her own sorry actions on the email server issue to have it be quite effective. The GOP is feeling very lucky to have another Clinton to run against for sure.
Hopefully we can make the worst nightmare a reality....losing to Sanders in the General.
Hillary's supporters find this to be good news.It tells me they have more goodies up their political sleeves,they are walking this back ,they want to run against Hillary Clinton _something else will drop on her something that cannot be blamed on a conspiracy of the right wing.Wait and see.
the race. The email issue stems from the committee and their dogged pursuit to "prove" that there was a Benghaaaazi cover-up.
All the democrats that I know are smart enough to know that Bengazi is horse shit. The e mail issue is a separate issue IMO and one of her own making.
with Hillary's emails, is that they believe there is a Benghaaaaazi cover-up and there's proof somewhere in her emails.
The republicans will use anything they can to get a foot in the door. That's what they fucking do. Hillary above all people should have been aware of what they do. They have spent years doing just that to her and Bill.
What a bunch of creepy assholes
Anyone promoting either are working for hard core conservatives. Then again, I've seen Vince Foster brought up here recently. Lots and lots of righties. Know them by what the push.
Now I'm further convinced that they are the ONLY ones to deal with these thugs.....this is trench warfare and that experience may be the ONLY thing between us and the disaster of GOP win ...White House and Congress...
Perish the thought!
The Big Dog isn't just out "early" to protect Hillary's poll numbers....it is to protect the whole damned country from these THUGS!!
It''s time to unload on these creeps, over and over on this....coupled with the SAME tactic used with PP....in fact, I heard a Dem rep come out of the box and equate that "hearing" with the same crap re: Benghazi...they plan MORE hearings with PP...
They need to be castrated, all of them!
Same as the e-mail server controversy. The whole thing is overblown.
they wasted so much time with this shit. there is real policy to be discussed, and hillary's position on much of it bothers me.
but once again, the attention will be on the"right wing conspiracy" against her, while the real policy issues will be overlooked.
the repubs may have fucked themselves, but they kind of screwed the dems too, especially those who want to highlight the policy differences between hrc, om, and bs
hillary as victim will take over the news cycle instead of issues facing this country.
Forget Fox News, they were all in from the get go. I'm talking about every other so-called reputable news network. The false-equivalence bullshit is still the modus operandi. ie...the News purpose is NOT to find the truth and tell it, its to cater to both sides of an argument, scandal etc.. and above all NEVER LAY BLAME on one side or the other (even when the truth of that is screaming at you in the face) On top of that the MSM's need to steer the election process into more of a horse race, which means lowering Hillary's numbers to something within the proximity of the top Republican rival.
I fully expect whomever wins the Democratic leadership, their numbers will eventually be chipped down to even or almost even poll numbers by the time the MSM is through with them. And at the same time treating the Republican field with kid gloves so as not to dump over the apple cart and spoil all the suspense they helped to create for their advertisers.
to validate yourself and Clinton supporters is an example of cognitive dissonance.While many ofHRCs supporters use it to bash Bernie supporters.
well as cnn now. so go find it and satisfy yourself.
is noted but how do you diss the Media then praise them,I myself do not watch much of it anymore esp because of the coverage and PROPAGANDA about the IRAG WAR.I never watch Faux Newz .Bernie Bashing will commence from some supporters as well as Faux newz.I believe it is naive to think this will stop.BI-PARTISAN DOG PONY SHOW.
Americans know the GOP is afraid of Hillary winning in 2016, so they have attacked anything Clinton touches, including the fund that Bill Clinton is running. A fund that is helping tens of millions. But the Republicans care less about people and countries getting help.
White House rips McCarthy for Benghazi comments
By Jordan Fabian - 09/30/15 01:42 PM EDT
President Obamas top spokesman chided Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Wednesday for crediting the House-led Benghazi investigation for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clintons falling poll numbers.
Leader McCarthy has committed the classic Washington gaffe of saying something everyone knows is true, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters.
McCarthys comments drew the ire of Democrats, who said they were proof the Houses Benghazi probe is a partisan attempt to attack a Democratic front-runner during the presidential campaign.
Both Boehner and House Benghazi Select Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) have gone to great lengths to insist the Benghazi investigation is nonpartisan.
I love it.
In fact, this will probably be a HAT TRICK:
1. Confirm that the Benghazi committee's only purpose it to smear Hillary Clinton.
2. Make Kevin McCarthy look like a complete idiot. And,
3. Once McCarthy starts getting attacked by the media, it will rally the House GOP to defend him, and probably elect him. Then the whole GOP will continue to look stupid for electing a guy as their leader who has proven himself to be nothing more than a feeble-minded political hack.
try to give their party a leg up in the presidential election? And he admits that the GOP has exploited the tragic deaths of four Americans for political purposes? I mean, everyone should have known this already, but it's still shocking to hear one of the clowns come right out and say it...
Nice of the fascists to admit it though.
Whats really sad are the democrats that spout the same right wing lies about Hillary on the "democratic" underground.
Shame on them if they have ulterior motives. This is when you show party unity, no excuses if that's what is happening.
Democrats on this committee....if you read DU, and see this thread, I am asking..... DO YOU HAVE THE BALLS TO STAND UP TO THIS....
I believe every Democrat on this committee should stand up, walk away and not return. As a protest, they need to then call a press conference and announce their disgust for the waste of time, money, and politicizing use of the 4 dead Americans against Hillary Clinton.
and his basic obscurity involving any sort of committee or leadership roles, I have come to the belief that he's the ultra right wings, moron puppet.
he won't do a thing and allowed to be run roughshod over.
that's exactly what the morons on the right wing thing is a good thing.
no one to watch the gate.
we are about to enter into a whole different reality when dealing with the right wing.
funny thing though, with now gate keeper, the loons will be running the asylum.