The 2015 House Select Committee’s investigation into the events at Benghazi during an Islamic terrorist attack on the US consulate there on September 11, 2012 – aimed at being “in aid of legislation” – began and continued as a “hearing in aid of Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy.”
This is the almost unanimous observation of political and congressional analysts who coincidentally point out that the probe was in reality “an attempt to prosecute” Clinton for the unfortunate event instead of seeking information to help prevent future incidents of the nature.
The proceeding has provided and continues to provide Clinton’s presidential campaign with $1 billion worth of free favorable publicity.
The committee provided Clinton an opportunity to shine and display her knowledge of world conditions and understanding of US international relations and policies. The entire show was and continues to be a boon to Clinton’s presidential aspirations.
The “investigation” was a flop for Republicans who were trying their best to have the entire show end as quickly as possible without too much political fall-out for them. Clinton went along with Republican congressmen who were nit-picking on little issues that had no relevance to the hearing’s objectives, ending up embarrassing several Republican committee members, including the chairman himself, over their misinformation.
Separate attacks on two US consulate compounds in Benghazi were undertaken by Islamic militants who killed US Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith and two CIA contractors, and injured ten others. The attacks were blamed on security lapses for which Clinton took responsibility as Secretary of State.
The man said to be responsible for the attacks – militia leader Ahmed Abu Khattala, head of terror group Ansar al-Sharia – was eventually captured by US Army Special Forces and charged with the crimes.