62% of House GOP Now Co-Sponsoring Bill for Special Committee on Benghazi (Hello RINO Boehner?)

Cybercast News Service ^ | 5/9/13

[drewh]

Sixty-two percent of the Republican members of the House of Representatives--143 of 231--are now co-sponsoring a bill that would authorize a special committee to investigate the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

The only thing standing between this super-majority of House Republicans and the special investigative committee they seek is House Speaker John Boehner, who controls the legislation the Republican majority brings to the floor for a vote.

"In the last few days the public has learned stunning new revelations about the Benghazi terrorist attack and the Obama Administration’s troubling response in the hours and days that followed," Rep. Frank Wolf (R.-Va.), the principal sponsor the legislation, said today in a letter to Boehner. "Much of this new information has come as brave whistleblowers have sought to right the record and, in doing so, may have jeopardized their careers. Increasingly it is becoming clear that we have only scratched the tip of the iceberg."

While applauding the hearing that House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R.-Calif.) held yesterday, Wolf argued that that hearing actually demonstrated the need for the special investigative committee that a super-majority of Boehner's Republican colleagues now seek.

"Chairman Issa’s hearing yesterday was a positive step forward in the effort to investigate the administration for its apparent cover up of key information about the nature of the attack and its response," Wolf told Boehner. "I appreciate your leadership and that of the committees to advance the investigation to this point.

"However, the hearing also made clear that a thorough inquiry will require witnesses from across government--including the Defense Department, State Department, Intelligence Community, Justice Department and even the White House," said Wolf. "Only a Select Committee would be able to bring the cross-jurisdictional expertise and subpoena authority to compel answers from these agencies."

[randita]

Pickering has been invited to testify a couple of months ago, but declined. Now he’s saying he offered to testify at a different time-Issa denies that.

Wonder what would happen if he were subpoenaed.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ambassador-pickering-i-was-willing-to-testify-on

[what's up]

It will be more effective if Pickering testifies later if/when the story gains steam.

If he (or any of the other witnesses) doesn't come willingly there will be more reason for a select committee.

[okie01]

Wonder what would happen if he [Pickering] were subpoenaed.

You can assume that Pickering's purpose in testifying would be a.) self-serving and/or b.) obfuscation.

Better to bypass him for the time being. After all, his ARB is under investigation by the State Department's IG and we wouldn't want to interfere with that process, now, would we?