Re: "Elk - Are YOU satisfied with the administrations explanation for the attack on our consulate and the deaths of those American citizens? Answer that coward."
Get over it, nobeach. McCain and Graham have managed to get you working yourself into a full monty wedgie over this but fact is they hardly give a dam about this particular incident nor do they think Rice did anything so terrible. As Graham let slip today, it is all about payback for John Bolton:
|| ……When asked about the possibility of supporting Rice to be the next secretary of state, Graham insisted that she could not be confirmed until Congress was provided more information from the FBI investigation into the Benghazi attack.
“I remember the John Bolton episode pretty well,” he pointed out. “Our Democrat friends felt like John Bolton — they didn’t have the information needed to make an informed decision about Ambassador Bolton’s qualifications — John Bolton to be ambassador — and Democrats dug in their heels and said, ‘We’re not going to vote, we’re not going to consider this nomination until we get basic answers to our concerns.’”
“All I can tell you is that the concerns I have are greater today that they were before. We’re not even close to getting the basic answers.”
In 2005, President George W. Bush recess-appointed Bolton to the post of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations after Democrats filibustered the nomination because the White House refused to provide information about his mishandling of N.S.A documents and his questionable assessment of Syria’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs.
“This is about partisan politics, not documents,” White House spokesperson Scott McClellan said at the time. “They have the information they need.”
After Bolton was forced to resign as ambassador, Graham opined that the Democrats’ filibuster “unfairly undermines President Bush’s prerogative to appoint his own people to his team.” ||