By and large, within days of the tragedy, we knew what had happened. An ambassador and three other Americans in a not very secure consulate were killed in a completely unstable country. HRC's study was asked to determine what could have done better to make our diplomats more secure. The results of that were out - I think - before she left office and the State Department has worked on this.
Every other committee has tried to answer POLITICAL questions - like did the administration make up the "cover story" that everything happened due to a movie. In fact, both Obama and Clinton spoke of it as an act of terror -- even if they didn't use the special magic words the Republicans wanted.
That said, of course it is political ..... and of course they will not limit themselves to Benghazi - any more than Ken Starr limited himself to Whitewater.
Yesterday, there goal was to either get proof that there were emails - already under FOIA that HRC wiped from her server - OR further attack the SD as "covering up for HRC".
In fact, they might be doing a conscientious job in sorting emails, digitizing them, and redacting as needed before they can be put on the web.The people assigned to do this are not partisan, but career professionals. Note this is NOT coming from the Republican demands, but because HRC promised this to get people off her back. While doing that, the SD also is responding to FOIA. Given the emails came in as 55.000 pages of paper and then had to be scanned in, it is absolutely understandable if they missed some that should have gone to the committee. THEY have been given a no win job -- where as hard as they work (they have 12 people committed full time) they will be called too slow -- likely by both the Republicans and HRC. Not to mention, no matter how careful they are -- there will be something that they should have redacted that was missed.
= new reply since forum marked as read