Saw a press conference on TV just now where the Benghazi committee is releasing its report. Apparently the Democrats on the committee refused to even participate in writing the report, so that they could later accuse the Republicans of "bias" without fouling their own nest.
Some CNN reporter kept asking if the fact that they didn't say much about Hillary, means they "haven't got the goods" on her, which in turn means she did nothing wrong.
Gowdy asked her if she's read the report, and she said she hadn't. He suggested that she do so, and pointed out that since she's going to write her article anyway, it might benefit her readers if she'd read it before telling everyone what it did and didn't say.
He kept emphasizing that the House had never asked him to "find the goods" on anybody, but just to find out what happened, who said what to whom, who went where, establish a timeline, etc., and the report contained those things in extreme detail with references and quotations. He kept saying he wanted everyone to read the report, and then draw their own conclusions.
That's the worst thing that could happen to Democrats, of course. Bringing out the truth about what they did and didn't do, always looks bad for them.
I haven't read the report myself (when was it released?), but I will. Depending on how recently it was released, maybe nobody has had a chance to read it yet. I am curious about a number of things, both about what happened in the weeks and months before the attack, and what happened during the attack. Finding out that politicians lied about it afterward, isn't particularly important to me. If the Democrats HADN'T lied and tried hard to totally politicize the attack, that would be news. I doubt they made any such news.
