called the select committee a farce. nancy pelosi is not interested in an impartial proceeding but wants to run for the white house. how does that pair up for the republicans? they have trey gouty who is not exactly, let s say he s been critical of the administration when it comes to benghazi. look at the rest of the members who and who isn t on the committ committee. you have democrats who are vocal and on the other side where is frank wolf from virginia? he came up with the idea. john culverson from texas, some of the strongest, most vocal voices on benghazi were not named. i m not sure why but it speaks to an imbalance where are the seven democrats who voted for the committee, none of them have been named. their goal there, their goal there is to go and sort of cast as spirgss on the investigation,
as spirgss on the investigation, they are not open minded, they are going to go in there and try to tow the line for administration? that s what the modern democrat party does is question the credibility of even having voices of defense. how dare you question anything the president did or did not do? let me ask you this, even if that is true and we perceive with this select committee, won t the media at least have to pay more attention? if you had a republican side show with seven gopers talking about benghazi, it would be dismissed. you heard about republicans or if the media covered it, just fox, just you and your fox colleagues. won t the main stream media have to pay more attention? they will pair it anything elijah cummings and adam shift say. they were going to boycott the committee. that s the modern version of democrats in congress is not showing up to work on important