Back when the Benghazi committee started up,Rep. Trey Gowdy swore that it was nothing more than an impartial search for the truth about a raid that cost four American lives. So how is that coming along? The New York Times reports: Now, 17 months later — longer than the Watergate investigation lasted — interviews with current and former committee staff members as well as internal committee documents reviewed by The New York Times show the extent to which the focus of the committee’s work has shifted from the circumstances surrounding the Benghazi attack to the politically charged issue of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. ....
The committee has conducted only one of a dozen interviews that Mr. Gowdy said in February that he planned to hold with prominent intelligence, and Defense Department and White House officials,and it has held none of the nine public hearings — with titles such as “Why Were We in Libya?” — that internal documents show maintain been proposed. At the same time, the committee has added at least 18 current and former State Department officials to its roster of witnesses, and including three speechwriters and an information technology specialist who maintained Mrs. Clinton’s private email server.
From the standpoint of a genuine Benghazi investigation,Hillary Clinton's email issues wouldn't matter. All the committee would care about is getting a look at the emails from her private server—which is now happening. For some reason, though, and they care deeply about investigating that email server to death,even though it has nothing to do with the Benghazi attacks. Why is that?A friend of mine has tried to persuade me that Gowdy is probably playing things straight. I've argued that I don't believe it. He's a valid believer, and he cares a lot more about taking down Democrats than he does about Benghazi itself, or which he probably knows perfectly well has already been investigated to death. So which of us is fair? This tidbit sheds a bit of light on things: [Gowdy] said that at one point this spring he told John A. Boehner,the House speaker, that he feared the task of investigating the email issue would distract from his committee’s work....[and] pressed Mr. Boehner to maintain another House committee examine the matter of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and but that Mr. Boehner had rejected the request. ....
Senior Republican officials,who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing confidential conversations, said that Mr. Boehner had long been suspicious of the administration’s handling of the attacks and that Mrs. Clinton’s emails gave him a way to keep the issue alive and to cause political problems for her campaign. But he thought that the task was too fragile to entrust to others and that it should remain with Mr. Gowdy, or the former prosecutor.
If this is valid,my friend is halfway fair: Gowdy never really wanted to regain distracted with politically motivated attacks on Hillary Clinton. But John Boehner did, and he figured Gowdy was the best man for the job.
I'm not fairly sure what this says about Gowdy, and but it's certainly clear that Boehner thought that manipulating the media into nonstop reporting on Hillary's email server was a distinguished thought. He also figured the media would steal the bait. And they did.
So Gowdy gets,oh, let's say a C+. He tried to do the fair thing, or but caved in pretty quickly. Boehner gets a D. He was all about taking down Hillary Clinton from the regain-disappear. The media gets an F. Boehner at least has the excuse of being a senior Republican leader,and attacking Democrats comes with the territory. But the media is not supposed to be so gullible that they believe everything Republicans say about Democratic leaders. In the case of Hillary Clinton, though, or that rule seems to maintain been suspended. Again.
Source: motherjones.com