Only Crimes Issa Has Exposed Are His Own.

For more than two years, Congressman Issa has been digging under rocks to find dirt on President Obama and his administration. He has claimed that his investigations would prove that the federal loan to Solyndra would expose a “sweetheart” deal for one of Obama’s political contributors. Instead, he proved that the loan process was well underway during the Bush administration.

Issa claimed that his investigation into Fast & Furious would show the president or, at least his Attorney General, ordered ATFE agents to allow gun trafficking to Mexican drug cartels. What he proved was that, out of frustration, a single unit of the ATFE allowed guns to “walk” in hopes of them leading to cartel leadership.

Most recently, Issa claimed that an investigation would show that President Obama, or his campaign, ordered extra scrutiny for Tea Party groups seeking non-profit status for their political operations. What Issa proved is that a self-professed conservative Republican agent in Cincinnati used search terms to learn more about the groups, and that those search terms included Tea Party, Patriots, and 9/12. They also included words like Democrat, Blue, Progressives, and Liberals. (I can attest to this because I’m a member of a Democratic group targeted, and I filled out the paperwork myself.)

Instead of proving that these “scandals” led to the White House, Issa proved that there were no scandals at all! Indeed, all he has accomplished is to prove otherwise. He has also caused writers like me to look into his sordid past. On doing so, I learned that Issa was twice indicted for Grand Theft Auto. I also learned that he quite likely torched his own business shortly after increasing the insurance by more than 400 percent!

It appears the only reason Issa is so determined to prove crime by others is to damage a presidency, ingratiate himself to other members of his own party and to rationalize his own past.

31 To 5.

Teapublicans continue to demand accountability for the deaths of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three others in Benghazi. They might begin with some simple addition and subtraction.

For example, under President George W. Bush, the US State Department suffered the following attacks:

  • 2002 Karachi, Pakistan Embassy – 10 dead
  • 2004 Tashkent, Uzbekistan Embassy – 2 dead
  • 2004 Jidda, Saudi Arabia Consulate – 8 dead
  • 2006 Damascus, Syria Embassy – 1 dead
  • 2007 Athens, Greece
  • 2008 Belgrade, Serbia Embassy
  • 2008 Sana, Yemen Embassy – 10 dead

That adds up to a total of 31 who died at embassies on Bush’s watch.

During the Obama administration, the US State Department has thus far suffered the following attacks:

  • 2012 Benghazi, Libya Embassy – 4 dead
  • 2013 Ankra, Turkey Embassy – 1 dead

That adds up to a total of 5 who have died on Obama’s watch.

Now for the subtraction. Since 2010, the Teapublican-controlled House cut the State Department’s budget for embassy security by $296 million.¬†Okay, Rep. Issa, investigate that!

You simply can’t be “outraged” by the events in Benghazi, if you weren’t equally outraged by the many events that preceded it. And you can’t blame the State Department for failed security if you don’t fully fund its requests.