A third conservative congressman has come clean about the Clinton/Benghazi witch hunt that has been plaguing Hillary Clinton for the past three+ years, stating that one accomplishment of the investigations has been a lowering of Clinton’s poll numbers in the current election, proving what was likely considered a preemptive attack against the presumed 2016 democratic front-runner at the time.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) stated Friday morning on Boston Herald Radio:
‘You know, people often ask Trey Gowdy and myself, what did our investigations do? Well, what they did is that they opened up an opportunity for the American people to sort of smell what’s in the garbage can,’
It certainly helps, too, when folks in a position to do so drum up wild visions of fish bones and dirty diapers for voters across the nation to whiff and sniff with extreme prejudice from their presumptive armchairs — and how nice of them to passive-aggressively refer to Clinton as trash.
Issa chaired the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee when he investigated Clinton and the Benghazi “scandal” back in 2012. Gowdy, on the other hand, remains chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi even now, in all his actual failure toward what would have been any sincere inquiry into the lives lost that day in 2012. No, instead, Issa’s statement proves once again that the Benghazi investigations were not about seeking truth and justice for the victims of that attack, but a smear campaign against the very person they presumed would be the GOP’s steepest obstacle to winning the presidency in the 2016 election. They had no inkling that so much of America would be “feeling the Bern” back then. It was all-Hillary, all-the-way then, and Benghazi offered the perfect excuse to keep dogging her – and that’s just what they did.
‘And I think that’s the reason that a devout socialist who wants to nationalize almost everything in America is close to and probably will beat Hillary here in New Hampshire. It’s not because they like Republicans. It’s because they don’t trust Hillary.’
Listen in for yourself, just after the 6-minute mark:
Last fall saw two Republican congressmen come forth and say essentially the same thing. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) kicked up a bunch of dust over his statement last September, when he claimed the Benghazi Committee was most likely responsible for lowering Clinton in the polls. Saying as much is viewed as the main reason McCarthy lost his bid for House Speaker, too. One month later, Rep. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.) confessed it was all “designed to go after” Clinton.
But would they be so adamant in tearing down Clinton simply to gain a few points for the red, or was it because, until Sanders rose out of the democratic ashes, the democratic nomination was largely viewed as “her turn”?
Not to be deterred by never turning up a thing they could actually hold against Clinton, Issa even planted the seed in listeners’ ears that “she and Huma and perhaps others knowingly broke the law and endangered men and women in harm’s way,” by speculating that he “believes” FBI Director James Comey had reached that conclusion. Issa went beyond that, as well, implying further corruption by Democrats when he said he doubted whether Obama or Attorney General Loretta Lynch would ever let Clinton face an indictment.
They say that, if you repeat something enough, it becomes true, which is why one should expect Republicans to keep right on talking about it… all the way up through the election, and if Clinton wins the Oval Office, expect to hear it for the next four or eight years beyond that.
Featured image by Center for Data Innovation via Flickr, available under Public Domain.