What is House M.D.'s chair?

GOP House Armed Services Chair exonerates Obama, Hillary over Benghazi. Will FOX & AB's usual suspects apologize now?

• "GOP Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon..then went on to plant a not-so-subtle dig at fellow Republicans who keep harping on “Benghazi” as if there were a real scandal there." GOP Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, the Republican chair of the House Armed Services Committee, says he’s satisfied with how the US military – and ergo the Obama administration – responded to the deadly attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, including the US ambassador to Libya. The news also exonerates expected Democratic presidential nominee, and then-Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. More on that in a moment. “I think I’ve pretty well been satisfied that given where the troops were, how quickly the thing all happened and how quickly it dissipated, we probably couldn’t have done more than we did,” McKeon said to reporters today, as quoted by AP. McKeon then went on to plant a not-so-subtle dig at fellow Republicans who keep harping on “Benghazi” as if there were a real scandal there. “We have been working on this for a long time. We issued a preliminary report,” McKeon said. “At some point, when we run out of people to talk to, or we run out of people to talk to two or three times, at some point, we think we’ll have as much of this story as we’re going to get and move on.” Put a fork in that GOP talking point. http://americablog.com/2014/04/poof-benghazi-story-imploded-help-big-house-republican.html

• Answer:

  Oh come on. You had the CIA coordinator guy fall on his sword last week and admit that he was the problem. His explanation was that he assumed it was both a terrorist attack as describe by the guys in the field who were there AND a protest as suggested by the guys back in Washington who were not there. So by claiming both, he admitted that he was the decision maker and didn't know what was going on and that gave Hillary and obama the cover they needed. Now, the fact that evidently Hillary, obama and Susan Rice all thought that it was a multiple choice question and they could pick any reason, seems a little dubious. You didn't hear Rice or obama going around and saying that it was either a terrorist attack like the guys who were killed said it was or it was a protest like the anonymous analyst suggested. Go back and look at the construction of the words of the speeches by obama, rice and hillary and you will see that it was definitely a protest, no hint of a terrorist attack. So, the question is why. The answer is that this terrorist attack was back before obama's foreign policy crumbled and he was adamant that his pro-radical islamist policy be preserved, thinking that he could lie his way out of it. You sure don't hear obama mention "Arab spring" in his speeches anymore, do you? Or "red line"? Or "Iranian bomb"?