Our nation's attorney general has spent more time testifying before Congress then he does in his own office. The investigation subjects have been numerous and varied, but his basic defense has been similar in just about all the cases -- that is, he didn't know anything about it nor did he have anything to do with it.
There are many things wrong with the entire Benghazi story before, during and after the attack, and President Obama doesn't seem to know anything about any of it. He wasn't aware of a problem in Libya before the attack, turned over operations to someone/anyone else during the attack and had nothing to do with the changing story or cover up after the episode.
Speaking of Benghazi, we also have former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who was responsible for all our foreign embassies. She would be the one who shook hands with the family members of those killed in Benghazi while telling them not to worry, that she would get the man responsible for the video. After dodging Congress for several weeks, her story evolved form the video falsehood to a response of "What difference does it possibly make?" with regard to why this happened.
Now it appears the IRS went directly after groups that caused the president and Democrats so much trouble during the 2010 midterm elections. This went on for two years leading up to the presidential election last fall, but according to President Obama the first he knew about it was when he read about it in the newspaper a couple weeks ago.
So there you have it, three of the top Democrats, all in high-ranking leadership positions and all either being extremely dishonest or completely clueless. Which of these traits do you prefer in your national leaders?
Elk Grove Village