>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/us/politics/clinton-emails-became-the-new-focus-of-benghazi-inquiry.html?
>
>This is approaching hilarious.


Bill, part of the problem has been stall tactics by the State Department, which has prolonged the process.

There's an old saying - before you can potentially connect the dots, you have to collect the dots. This administration excels at one thing - delaying in providing information.

HC is already guilty of violating a subpoena by not turning over all records.

The NYT article you posted is also false in the statement that "the select committee has been able to unearth new information on Benghazi". It absolutely HAS uncovered new information - including communications between HC and Sidney Blumenthal and the naming (and passing on) of a CIA source. And communications that Hillary was using Blumenthal (against the orders of the White House) as an advisor, when Blumenthal had business interests tied to the new Libyan govt. So it has uncovered new information - it's just not information that Democrats feel comfortable about.

It is indeed unfortunate that otherwise intelligent people are having difficulty in doing even basic analysis on these subjects. Just reading superficial pieces in the NYT won't cut it. The Benghazi attacks (and our inability to anticipate and respond) didn't just happen in a vacuum - it (very likely) was the result of a series of feckless and underhanded actions by the administration at the time - and then a 5-star whopper of a lie about the nature of the 9/11/2012 attack on the embassy.