Pentagon Condemns House Benghazi Committee’s Wasteful “Speculative” Investigation

[Bill USA]

Pentagon Condemns House Benghazi Committee’s Wasteful “Speculative” Investigation
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/05/01/pentagon-condemns-house-benghazi-committees-wasteful-speculative-investigation.html

In the Pentagon letter to the committee, specifically addressed to Republican chairman Trey Gowdy and issued Thursday, Hedger wrote,

~~
~~

The Department is working diligently to accommodate your staff’s multiple and changing requests; however, we are concerned by the continuous threats from your staff to subpoena witnesses that we are not able accommodate.”

Mr. Hedger particularly took issue with the committee’s demand for an interview with an anonymous Sean Hannity radio call-in “individual;” an anonymous individual Hedger said the Pentagon “expended significant resources to locate to no avail. The Department of Defense continues to believe that interviewing these ‘individuals’ is unnecessary because it is unclear what additional information could be gained from these interviews.”

Hedger requested a meeting with Gowdy to identify a “productive way to help it finish its investigation” while respecting the men and women and resources of the Department of Defense.” It is noteworthy that the $6.7 million cost as of last year did not include the Pentagon’s cost in searching out individuals with no clear connection to the Defense Department or the events surrounding the Benghazi attack. It is likely that Republicans will expend any sum during an election to attack Mrs. Clinton even if it robs money and critical assets from the military.

In the strongest language possible, the Pentagon is criticizing the Republicans for “prompting and encouraging Department of Defense interviewees to go on the record and speculate on hypotheticals posed by Committee members regardless of the interviewees’ actual knowledge or expertise.” Hedger concluded his condemnation by “respectfully requesting that you ensure pending interviews remain focused on facts; rather than ‘encouraging’ speculation.”
(more)