Getty Images
John Brennan, nominated to head the CIA
There's nothing wrong with congressional Republicans -- and congressional Democrats, for that matter -- asking tough questions about the September attack in Benghazi. Four Americans were killed and policymakers have a duty to understand what happened and try to prevent it from happening again.
The problem comes when some GOP lawmakers throw tantrums for no reason. Benghazi was used as an excuse to justify the first-ever filibuster of a cabinet nominee yesterday, and it's being used as an excuse to block President Obama's choice to lead the CIA.
A trio of Republican senators will delay the nomination of John Brennan to be head of the CIA if they don't receive an answer from the White House about who changed talking points in the days after the attacks on the consulate in Benghazi.
Sen. Lindsey Graham said he, along with Sens. John McCain and Kelly Ayotte, are determined to receive an answer.
"When Brennan comes before the Congress, we're going to find out who changed those talking points or die trying," Graham, the South Carolina Republican, said.
Senators asking questions about a terrorist attack makes sense. Senators asking questions they already know the answer to doesn't make sense.
Graham is desperate to "find out who changed those talking points"? That information is already in the public record. It's not classified; it's not a secret; it's not some important detail that's been shielded from Congress or the public.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Dec. 4 -- well over two months ago -- that CIA, not the White House as Republicans suggested, made a deliberate decision to omit references to al Qaeda from the talking points. Why? Because as NPR reported the same day, the initial draft was changed "to protect sources and protect investigations, before the talking points were shared with the White House."
In other words, Graham and his cohorts don't need to "die trying" to get an answer to their question; it's already been answered.
Indeed, even David Petraeus -- whom the Three Amigos presumably find credible -- told them what happened with the talking points. It was litigated in great detail months ago.
And therein lies the larger point. Given how often Graham and McCain whine incessantly about the lack of Benghazi information, some, including many reporters, start to think they may have legitimate questions that have gone unanswered. But they don't -- they're playing a political game, using a terrorist attack as a partisan toy, demanding information they already have.
Update: Adam Serwer added that there are "legitimate reasons" to use the Brennan nomination to get information from the White House, but Graham only wants to "feed the fever swamp." Agreed.
Leave a Comment:
" we're going to find out who changed those talking points or die trying,""
Be careful what you wish for, Lindsay.
"...Eleanor Rigby died in the church and was buried along with her name...nobody came"
How many of the people complaining that they don't have all of the information SKIPPED THE MEETINGS!!
*sigh*
... to hold a press conference about how they're not getting answers to their questions -- which were presented in the meetings
Grandstanding for the public about their "efforts" on behalf of the American people...
Oh, they got answers to their questions but they didn't get the answers they want. They want an admission that Obama gave those talking points and they will keep hammering at anyone in front of them until someone "admits" this. They aren't looking for just any answer, they want THE answer that implicates Obama somehow. Inquisition, anyone?
Maybe they should have a waterboard set up in the hearing room. I'll bet that they can get the answers they want that way.
I think that Lindsey should put the waterboarding apparatus away before he drowns himself in willful ignorance.
Their hate of the President has affected them to the point of irrationality, and in turn they've infected each other, rabidly searching to find something, anything with which to destroy him, while he works to lift the country, their country, up out of Republican-born recession.
It's so freakin' awful to watch these bullies rule over the playground of what used to be Congress.
What makes me mad is that we desperately need a serious debate about U.S. defense policy, accountability for the CIA's actions, and generally our behavior overseas. Yet the people in the best possible position to move the debate forward would rather indulge in baseless conspiracy theories for purely partisan reasons.
The problem is that for the most part Republicans agree with the President's foreign policy. If the debate was about the real issues it would be a love fest.
No one in authority seems to be interested asking the serious questions you raise. That is why we are left with this kind of stuff.
Where was all of this Republican unrest when Bush and Chaney sent young men and women into harm's way in Iraq due to "misinformation?"
Because the war benefited the Republicans.
Because the Iraq war benefited the repuknicans and the repuknicans' funders.
John McCain has turned into a dotty old man who is well past his "use by" date. I respect his daughter and follow Meghan on Twitter but his actions have reduced the poor woman to making excuses for his actions and comments.
More to the point, as Jurgan noted above, there needs to be a serious, open discussion about US military and foreign policy. But the Senate - the natural home for such a debate - is becoming a parody of itself. We see 40+ Republican Sen. Phineas Claghorn's acting crazy when they truly know better, mostly because they're terrified of even crazier tea baggers mounting a primary challenge.
Not so many years ago, the Senate was rightly called "the world's greatest deliberative bod," and it was. Now, it seems more like a bad SNL skit.
If filibustering the nomination of Chuck Hagel was all about demanding answers about Bengazi, then why didn't McCain and Graham filibuster the confirmation of John Kerry as well?
Because Kerry's nomination benefited the Republicans.
Or the repukes believed that Kerry's nomination would benefit them by getting Scottie Brown back into the senate by another back door. Time will tell if Massachusetts elects a repuke to the open senate seat. Probably not because the dumbocraps do not seem to be running a candidate who is too lazy to campaign this time.
The talking points were just a clue that something wasn't right internally. Now we know that the President did not talk to the heads of his intelligence agencies or the Secretary of State or the leaders from Libya where the attack was happening DURING the attack. He just said, "you guys do what you have to do."
Don't you want to know why the President didn't talk to these people DURING the attack?
Please continue, Robdon.
Rob: You know Kenyans are not allowed to talk DURING attacks... They must first cowtow to the actual Americans in the room, and the Americans were eating popcorn watching the live feed laughing their kiesters off. Leon Panetta was playing twister with Susan Rice while Brennan played beer pong with Valerie Jarret...
RobDick's comment: Don't you want to know why the President didn't talk to these people DURING the attack?
Answer: Because he was still busy in a photo op reading 'My Pet Goat' to the grade schoolers?
Washington Times.
I'm glad you've finally given up on the act of being a "concerned" independent. No on was buying anyway.
Because he trusts that his people who are directly involved have the brainpower and information to make decisions, and that requiring micromanaging such as making them have him approve every decision would make the response even slower?
You know, we have these positions for a REASON.
As my 7 year old daughter would say "Those boys need consequences". Although realistically it is hard to give Senators consequences for poor behavior, if we could the Senate and House might function better. These questions have been asked and answered multiple times. Seriously does common sense leave once you become a Senator or Congressman? There was a lot going on and most likely realizing that his folks had a lot of data etc to gather get through the President let Mr. Panetta and his folks DO THEIR JOBS knowing that anything of importance and verifide would be communicated to him immediately.
They have all the answers to their questions. They are just too stupid to understand those answers.
Another chapter in "America held hostage by the Republicans and the large Corporations, who would have no trouble eating us for dinner" Why don't they just take off their masks, it'll save us all a little time and trouble, come clean, just what the heck are they trying to do? Explain yourselves, and stop screwing with our heads. Admit they're not working for the President.
How many hints to that effect do citizens need. They've done everything BUT come right out and say it. Their actions continually speak for them.
The Obama team needs to send Lindsay and friends literal clippings from newspapers (not emails or copies) underlined and highlighted. And every time one of them asks for the already supplied information, pretend its question time in Parliment and say "I refer you to the previous question."
If they are going to behave like children, treat them like children. If there is a congressional equivalent of a time out room, now is the time to use it.
Obama has to admit it was ACORN to make these jackasses happy.
They live in a world of lies, into which truth burns like hell.
It's time for McCain & Graham to go. They are a danger to the public, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.
'Therein lies the problem'. The PROBLEM is that we are spending ALL THIS TIME on TALKING POINTS. We should IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM, FIND A SOLUTION and MOVE ON. This posturing and attacking and trying to ruin reputations is POINTLESS. Watch Jon Stewart's interview with Susan Rice. POINT GAME MATCH.
Oooh - promise?
Again and again - - why are they never called out on these wrongs during their interview? Why isn't the message getting out there to the media in the same way they're putting their lies out on the wire? It's got to be repeated and repeated just as often. Everytime they have something they do this same song and dance. People are listening to them and believe their lies! Scares the heck out of me! Things that have been done and changes going on in some states - - it's a shame.
I don't just want the answer "the CIA changed the talking points." I want the name of the individual who did it. I want him or her to testify. I want to know whether he or she acted alone. I want to why he or she first didn't ask me, Lindsey Graham, whether it was okay to do that. I want to know about any other past documents for which he or she may have changed the talking points and then I demand that we hold separate hearings for each one of those instances.
This is just like Obama's birth certificate. "All we demand is to see his long form birth certificate and we'll be satisfied. Yeah. Right.