White House Blasts Benghazi Report As 'In-Kind Contribution' To RNC

[DonViejo]

Source: Talking Points Memo

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest tore into House Republicans' Benghazi committee report on Tuesday, sarcastically questioning whether the Republican National Committee counted the investigation as a campaign contribution.

"Is the RNC going to disclose the in-kind contribution that they received from House Republicans today?” Earnest said at his daily media briefing. Earnest went on to note that House Republicans spent $7 million taxpayer dollars on their investigation, which he said was intended to "tear down Secretary Clinton's poll numbers."

Clinton herself responded to the report earlier in the day, saying it was "time to move on." House Republicans determined in their report that President Obama's administration acted too slowly in response to the attacks.

"The variety of conspiracy theories that have been flowering on the Republican side of the aisle are politically motivated fantasies," Earnest said.


###

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/white-house-in-kind-rnc-contribution

[underpants]

1. Dayum!

[christx30]

2. Benghazi killed 4 people, but

more time and money have been spent on it than on 9/11, which killed nearly 3000. I guess it's because it's easier to manufacture blame for Hillary for Benghazi than for 9/11.
Not to mention the roughly 13 attacks on embassies, with roughly 60 deaths under Bush. No one wants to investigate those.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. ... but sainted (stained?) Reagan's Beirut cost over 200 & was NEVER investigated like this. nt

[DemFromPittsburgh]

5. How about the Marine barracks bombing in 1983. They killed over 230 marines

Congress had a two month investigation.

They had a gate wide open and the sentries were unarmed.

No calls for impeachment there.

[Scientific]

8. That attack under Republicans left 241 of our soldiers dead

And the Republicans never took responsibility, never pointed a finger at Reagan and cabinet who ignored clear warnings, and never showed any honor or integrity.

Read the New Yorker story about the shameful, disgraceful, covered-up Republican Benghazi

RONALD REAGAN’S BENGHAZI
By Jane Mayer , The New Yorker - May 5, 2014

"...There were more than enough opportunities to lay blame for the horrific losses at high U.S. officials’ feet. But unlike today’s Congress, congressmen did not talk of impeaching Ronald Reagan, who was then President, nor were any subpoenas sent to cabinet members. This was true even though then, as now, the opposition party (Democrats) controlled the majority in the House..."

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/ronald-reagans-benghazi

[louis-t]

6. 13 attacks, some were multiple attacks on same facility!

Not a word out of repugs.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

3. Great headline ! . . . nt

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Remember that this all happened right before the 2012 election

and RMoney failed miserably at using it as an election talking point. It was a segue away from the "Fast and Furious" nonsense.



And even Creepy Crawly managed to redeem herself to torpedo the thing - it was that bad.



So what does the GOP do? Try try again and again and again (the definition of insanity).

[tblue37]

10. That smirk on Romney's face really ticks me off. nt

[liberalmuse]

9. This is the world we live in.

Where Republicans can get away with the same shit over and over again. Their supporters turn a blind eye to this nonsense, but god help anyone who takes a couple pennies out of their paychecks to feed a hungry child.

[riversedge]

11. another $7M down the hole.

[Hekate]

12. I just love it that the WH has taken the gloves off

An in-kind contribution indeed.