Video: Elijah Cummings assuming same role he did in Fast and Furious

For nearly two years, we watched as ranking member of the House Oversight committee ran interference for the Department of Justice and the Obama administration in the Fast and Furious investigation. He's picking right up where he left off with the investigation into what happened at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

It really is shameful to watch someone be this much of a partisan hack when it comes to defending policies and operations that led to murder.

For Cummings to say that the investigation into what happened in Benghazi is a 'witch hunt' is beyond disgraceful.

Note how Cummings makes the charge that people are reaching conclusions too soon while completely avoiding the fact that the Obama administration concluded rather early that the attack was the result of the anti-Muhammad video. It has now been caught pushing a demonstrably false narrative and Cummings doesn't want to talk about that?!

He also takes a page out of the 'never let a crisis go to waste' manual by pointing to a Congressional vote to cut funding for security. That is a straw man for a couple of reasons. During testimony at last week's hearing, State Department officials said reduced security had nothing to do with a lack of funding.

Moreover, Cummings decries politicizing this while pointing to the attack as a reason for more 'supplemental' funding for security.

Also, let's not forget that Cummings is registered member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus, which is just a nice way of saying the Lying Communists Caucus (LCC).

Here is Cummings' interview on Face the Nation:



h/t Right Newz

**UPDATE** One of the arguments in the video above from Cummings is that Republicans voted to cut funding for security. Despite the aforementioned testimony from State Department officials that funding had nothing to do with short-changing the consulate, it appears Mr. Cummings has himself another problem.

Via POLITICO:

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) says the State Department is sitting on $2.2 billion that should be spent on upgrading security at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide, but the Obama administration will not spend the funds.

Issa made his comment during an appearance on CBS's "Face the Nation" to discuss the recent attack in Benghazi, Libya, that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead. Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, held a highly partisan hearing on the incident last week.

Issa claims the State Department will not spend the already approved funds because they didn't want to the appearance of needing increased security.

 Yet another fact ready and waiting for the likes of Elijah Cummings to ignore.

Video: Chris Wallace vs. a very Pale-looking David Axelrod

In this exchange between a very pale-looking David Axelrod, senior adviser to Barack Obama, and Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, Axelrod is asked to respond to Obama campaign manager Stephanie Cutter's remarks that the Benghazi attack is such a big story is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Expectedly, Axelrod doubles down and charges that Romney has politicized the attack and points to an interview Ambassador Chris Stevens' father gave to Bloomberg in which the senior Stevens denounced the politicization of his son's murder.

Axelrod then implies that anyone who discusses the attack isn't honoring the wishes of Stevens' father by saying everyone should wait until the investigation into the attack is completed. Forget the fact that the administration, at minimum, has a conflict of interest when leading any such investigation because it's shaping up to be a major scandal. Simply leaving it in the hands of people who answer to the administration is not acceptable.

Wallace, who was visibly agitated at the insinuation, stops him and points out that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice told five different Sunday talk shows on September 16th that the attack was in response to a video, which proved to be demonstrably false.



h/t Free Beacon

Gingrich: Rove would rather have Harry Reid as majority leader than Todd Akin in Senate

Newt Gingrich definitely has a way of contrasting and simplifying things. In an interview with the Daily Caller, he called out the Republican Party establishment for its inexplicable treatment of Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), who is in a dead heat with extreme liberal Claire McCaskill for a U.S. Senate seat in Missouri.

Newt pulls no punches here, calling Charlie Crist a 'snake' while pointing to the establishment's decision to back him two years ago over Marco Rubio. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), who heads the National Republican Senate Committee (NRSC) was wrong then and he's wrong now.

Gingrich also singled out Karl Rove, again referring to the Fox News contributor's comments at a fundraiser that involved joking about Akin's murder. At the essence of Gingrich's take here is that the Republican establishment seems to have more animus for the conservative wing of its party than it does for the Democrats. That sentiment is clearly not mutual when one considers how conservatives have rallied behind Romney.

The conservative wing of the Party clearly would rather have Romney than Obama but it doesn't seem to be getting reciprocal sentiment from the establishment wing.

Though not doing so by name, at the end of this clip, Gingrich calls out the likes of Rove, Cornyn, and RNC Chairman Reince Priebus when he says that anyone who refuses to support Akin in a race that is neck and neck, would rather have Harry Reid remain on as Senate majority leader than have Akin in the U.S. Senate.

He's absolutely right.

Via the DC: