"What are we doing back here? We had... um.... 'Benghazi 1,' that was with Susan Rice. Now we're having Benghazi 2 with Hillary Clinton? ...Enough Benghazi."
That's the message from Democrat Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton, who's sick and tired of having to defend Hilary Clinton against the scurrilous Republicans. There's simply no reason to find out exactly why our consulate was denied rescue, nor do we need to know why the administration invented a non-existnt "spontaneous uprising" to cover-up their willful failure.
Republicans who want answers are just wasting everyone's time.
"The buildup to this hearing," Holmes Norton says. "Almost a full week's buildup. For a while there, I thought we would have trailers before we got there. And then, what's the big deal here? I dare anybody who covered that hearing to tell me what new we heard."
Um....how 'bout this:
We heard that the night of the attacks, while Ambassador Stevens was still missing, Hillary Clinton was briefed on the situation at 2 AM. She was told it was a terror attack, she knew there were no protests, she knew "the video" had nothing to do with it, and yet she went before the American people and testified that she knew of nothing at the time that would have contradicted Ambassador Susan Rice's lies.
"I certainly did not know of any reports that contradicted the IC talking points at the time that Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows." - Hillary Clinton January 23rd.
Evidence of dereliction of duty and perjury, Ms. Holmes Norton. That's "what new we heard."
