Why Grayson Would Make Perfect Opponent to Gowdy on Benghazi Committee

Florida Rep. Alan Grayson at a 2009 congressional hearing.  (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File )

The work of the House of Representatives Select Committee on Talk Points—as the new committee to investigate the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, would be more accurately named—began in earnest Friday, as the seven Republican members met for the first time with Speaker John Boehner, and then among themselves.

In protest of Republican rules granting Chairman Trey Gowdy unilateral subpoena power, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi has yet to appoint minority members. Democrats received no guarantee they will be allowed access to interview witnesses before public testimony is given.

Regardless of Democratic participation, there is no doubt this committee is, in Nancy Pelosi’s words, a “political stunt”—simply the latest attempt by Republicans to convert tragedy into scandal.

The process will undoubtedly waste millions of dollars and thousands of hours, ultimately to reach the same conclusion as investigations conducted by the Accountability Review Board, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the House Armed Services Committee and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

This is reflected by the list of ostensibly damning questions Chairman Gowdy intends to ask, whose answers (not so damning)  have been known for months.  

While many progressives have argued for a boycott of the process, that would be a colossal error. Even with limited power, ceding the committee room to Republicans—not to mention the televised hearings—will only allow them to parade their Benghazi myths unimpeded by relevant facts framed in questions from the minority.

The critical question is:  Whom should Democrats appoint as ranking member of the committee?

The answer, to me, is crystal clear: Florida Representative Alan Grayson.

The pugnacious former litigator has demonstrated the exact skill set needed to cut through the Republican mythology, the work ethic necessary to fully immerse himself in the issue, and the temperament to weather the blistering attacks sure to come from the conservative media.

In the aftermath of the Iraq War, Grayson’s courtroom prowess resulted in millions of dollars in judgments against war profiteers. This skill was on display in September when the congressman used his five minutes as a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee to dismantle conservative Benghazi mythology while questioning Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy:

Too often members of Congress waste their limited time in the committee room on questions that are nothing more than self-congratulatory statements. Grayson has never demonstrated the compunction for these sorts of  legislative prerogatives.

Even worse are when hearings devolve into meandering soliloquies that never provide any relevant information. Grayson has a clear track record, demonstrated during his tenure Finance Committee, of asking questions designed to craft specific narratives and elicit from witnesses—both friendly and hostile—clear answers.

Trey Gowdy has cast himself as prosecutor, necessitating Democrats provide a countervailing force focused solely on the truth. It’s this talent Democrats need on the select committee on Benghazi—one for which Grayson’s gift is well-proven.

 

 

 

Comments

------ You can make your dreams come true. Start working at home with Google. It’s a great work at home opportunity. Just work for few hours. I earn up to $500 a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. Pow6.com

How embarrassing it is for the author of this article to reveal his sordid agenda for everyone to see: he is not interested in the failure at Benghazi, but only wants to foist upon the American public another effort to block accountability hide deceit, and exploit for political gain.
If the Democrats select the rabid Alan Grayson, who is the crude joke of congress, to represent them in the select committee, this indicates that they have only the intention of obscuration—not actually a desire to determine 1) why after repeated requests for additional security from the embassy in Benghazi, it was denied; 2) why there was no apparent concern for the ongoing plight to our embassy staff there as they fought for their lives during the attack; 3) why there was no effort whatsoever to try and help them; and 4) why, within two hours from the start of the attack when it was already known that it was a planned terrorist attack, Rice, Clinton, Obama, and others lied about it for 14 days afterward in a cover-up that continues today. Faced with Alan Grayson, Trey Gowdy should cut the Democrats completely from any involvement in the select committee.

The remarks from Grayson remind me of when captured terrorists want to defend themselves in court, but then just cause deliberate disruption and chaos; and insult our legal system with their illiterate antics. What happened in Benghazi is not a game, we need to ascertain and hold all those in our government accountable for their complicity in the disgraceful disregard for the safety, and the eventual death of the embassy staff, and we don’t need the planned obfuscation by the terrorist Grayson. If the Democrats choose this congressional low life to represent them, Trey Gowdy should bar all the Democrats from any involvement at all. Also he should make it clear to all those who participate, that the purpose is to completely expose the cover-up; and anyone who tries to hinder the investigation will be removed.

You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)

Connect
, after login or registration your account will be connected.
Advertisement