The other week, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who was on his way to being Speaker of the House, explained proudly that the House Special Committee on Benghazi he helped create was actually done with one goal in mind -- to use taxpayer money not to investigate anything about Benghazi, but rather do whatever it could to tarnish Hillary Clinton in her run for the White House.
Republicans cried in upset at his admission, insisting that oh, no, that wasn't the reason at all.
It turns out, though, that now another Republican House member has followed Mr. McCarthy's lead. This time it was Rep. Richard Hanna (R-NY). He was being interviewed Wednesday on a radio show from upstate New York, WBIX First News with Keeler in the Morning when he went rogue.
“This may not be politically correct," Rep Hanna said, "but I think that there was a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and an individual, Hillary Clinton.”
Mr. Hanna also noted that Kevin McCarthy's comments may likely have played at least a part in him dropping out of contention to become Speaker. "Sometimes the biggest sin you can commit in D.C. is to tell the truth," Hanna noted.
It will not come as a shock that Republicans again were up in arms that someone spilled the beans of the worst-kept secret in America. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), chairman of the committee was once again called in to try and paint over the big oil spill --
“There are seven members of the Benghazi Committee who are intimately familiar with the work of the committee, the motives behind the work, and the results of that work," Gowdy explained. "Congressman Hanna is not one of them. The Members of the committee do not discuss its work in Conference, and Mr. Hanna has never asked for a briefing by the committee staff."
Now, in fairness, it's quite possible that what Mr. Gowdy says is true. And in equal fairness, it's also possible that Congressmen do discuss their work out of school and brag and leak material -- all the time.
Just for the record, the committee has been "investigating" for 17 months at a cost of $4.5 million, trying to come to a different conclusion than that of seven other House reports on the same subject which have found no wrong-doing by Ms. Clinton. Or perhaps they're still looking for WMDs in Iraq.