Why Won’t Republicans Release the Benghazi Committee’s Interview with Sidney Blumenthal?

Republicans have brought up his name repeatedly but blocked a request to unseal a transcript of his testimony.

<a href=http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Congress-Benghazi/898a8467add642089c9a23412115b149/1/1>Evan Vucci</a>/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The first session of Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the House Select Committee on Benghazi was mostly a snoozer Thursday morning, featuring much rehashing of old, minor points about whether Clinton, as secretary of state, received requests for further security at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, before it was attacked on September 11, 2012. But just before the panel broke for lunch, a tussle erupted between the committee’s ranking member, Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), and chairman, Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.). The subject: Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton associate who regularly emailed Clinton to pass along advice and intel he had picked up on the situation in Libya. Blumenthal, who served as a senior adviser to Bill Clinton during his presidency, has become an obsession of Republicans eager to drag Clinton through the mud. His name came up more than 40 times during the first half of the hearing.

Gowdy (R-S.C.), who had been peppering Clinton with questions about her correspondence with Blumenthal, was poised to adjourn the hearing for lunch when Cummings objected. He made a seemingly simple request: If Gowdy considered Blumenthal’s messages to Clinton so crucial to the investigation at hand, why not release the transcript of the panel’s behind-closed-doors interview with Blumenthal in June? Blumenthal’s own lawyer has requested that the full transcript be released for public consumption.

Cummings, his voice growing in anger, demanded that the committee vote on unsealing the transcript. But Gowdy disputed whether Cummings had the power to call for such a vote, before abruptly recessing the session. When the committee reconvened 45 minutes later, Gowdy had apparently learned he’d been mistaken. He quietly called for a vote on whether Blumenthal’s transcript should become public. The seven Republicans on the committee quickly voted against the measure. (Kansas Rep. Tom Pompeo, momentarily confused, voted yes before switching his to a no vote), overruling the five Democrats who voted in favor. With that matter resolved, Gowdy returned to his questioning of Clinton and turned once again to the subject of…Blumenthal.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate