House Benghazi Hearing Open Thread

It’s on.

If you want to watch online, the second video here seems to be the least glitchy feed.

So far the “whistleblowers” are testifying what they’ve previously been reported as saying — that there was no demonstration prior to the attack and that rapid rescue troops in the country were ordered (by somebody) to stand down — and the Democrats on the panel are doing their best to protect Hillary’s 2016 campaign. That’s evidenced by Elijah Cummings’ opening statement:

Dems keep citing the Accountability Review Board, but they’re not reminding everyone that the panel is now under investigation for failing to interview key witnesses (I’ll bet my house that those witnesses coincidentally all have stories that go against the administration’s version of the attack and its aftermath).

Dem Rep. Clay was the first (that I’ve heard at this hearing) to blame the attack on GOP cuts. Not that it would matter to the Dems, but that was covered:

Remember Hillary’s “what difference does it make” while watching part of the opening statement of Eric Nordstrom, a former regional security officer in Libya:

Update: Hicks testified that the State Department told him not to meet with congressional investigators. #Transparency

If you’re watching the hearing, you might have noticed that some of the libs on the committee are being careful not to impugn the witnesses credibility or experience, but rather decrying Republicans using their testimony “for political purposes” which insinuates the witnesses are lying. The Dems know these guys are credible so they’re being careful not to square off directly with them but rather are doing so through an intermediary GOP straw man. Other Dems, like Cummings, are taking a more simple approach: “The witnesses are wrong because the Obama administration says they are.”

Update II: And the paper that took down Nixon simply yawns these days: