“…The House Committee investigating Benghazi is asking Hillary Clinton to appear for two public hearings on the 2012 terrorist attacks and her email use, according to a letter sent to her lawyer on Thursday.
This is a departure from what Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy originally requested from the former secretary of state. The South Carolina Republican wanted a private, transcribed interview on Clinton’s email use and a public hearing on the terrorist attacks.
But Clinton had refused to appear in private to take questions on her use of a private email address while at the State Department. Her lawyer, David Kendall, had insisted that Clinton was prepared to take questions about her emails, the server that stored them and the Benghazi attacks during a single, public hearing.
Gowdy wrote to Kendall Thursday saying the committee plans to schedule a hearing by the week of May 18 on the emails…”
The reason she won’t do the private interview is that it will be sworn and transcribed as well as able to delve into classified materials – where she is extremely vulnerable.
That and it’s easier to play the victim of mean Ed Grimley spike hair if it’s in public. She’ll get her way – they have the best lawyers.
The Colonel April 28, 2015 at 3:42 pm
Iiiiii don’t know, Howdy Gowdy (google Howdy Doody, the hair style similarities are striking) can be a handful when he gets his back up, even in public.
shifty henry April 28, 2015 at 7:49 pm
If you have it and are reading this — check out the guy’s hair in the ad below for “7 Alzheimer’s warning signs”
Torch April 29, 2015 at 12:58 pm
I thought his style was more like Cobblepot on the Gotham series. At least the one on this website. Was on the .gov site but has been changed as has his hair style.
Correct, as usual. One could build ten+ A-10’s for the price of one F-35. Even more if the air refueling tanker support fleet were just remodeled instead of scrapped and replaced with new.
Key word that kills that idea – cheaply. The procurement office has never been about cheaply unless its boots and t-shirts. When it comes to anything with wings, tracks or high-technology – the sky is the limit.
You know, I finally got what I consider to be a good pair of boots from the Army two years ago. Every other pair I’ve been issued up to this point was crap. I asked the civilian running the issue point in Bagram about the boots – she said they were commercial off the shelf “interim issue”….
FastEddy23 April 28, 2015 at 3:32 pm
… and has been the case since the Civil War.
Rocky April 28, 2015 at 3:38 pm
What the Hell is “iterim issue” – geesh.
The Colonel April 28, 2015 at 3:41 pm
Stuff they gave us because it was immediately available and worked and that they could issue until they had time to get government procurement involved to completely screw them up?
E Norma Scok April 28, 2015 at 6:07 pm
Gubmint purchasing no longer uses JOC for large ongoing projects?
FastEddy23 April 28, 2015 at 3:31 pm
… all too often, all too true.
FastEddy23 April 28, 2015 at 3:29 pm
True. But if we are going to send someone to be judge, jury and executioner, he should be on the scene. (My opinion: Remote controlled Death From Above can devolve into little more than a parlor/video game. Just because Obama does it does not make it right or just.)
We’ve been heading that way since 1988. The difference between a Tomahawk and a drone, the drone doesn’t need to crash itself into the target to deliver a payload.
FastEddy23 April 28, 2015 at 6:54 pm
Yeah, reusable… Just like the reset button on your game boy.
The Colonel April 28, 2015 at 3:35 pm
Not suggesting “no manned tactical aircraft”, just “no NEW manned tactical aircraft”. The F-16, F-18 and F-15, EA-6, AV-8 are still quite capable. Upgrades are generally far cheaper than new programs and the next gen of tactical aircraft will be powered by pixie dust or some such silliness – the F-35 just isn’t that revolutionary.
CNSYD April 28, 2015 at 7:16 pm
The air frames you mention only have so much structural life in them.
The Colonel April 28, 2015 at 7:18 pm
Kind of like the B-52?
CNSYD April 28, 2015 at 7:23 pm
B-52s are up to at least model G now. Submarine hulls also have only a finite number of dives in them. Nuclear reactors have concerns with neutron bombardment over time. Nothing material lasts forever.
The Colonel April 28, 2015 at 7:26 pm
No argument that nothing lasts forever, however all of the aircraft I mentioned are decades younger than the BUFF. Extending their lives allows for the development of truly revolutionary weapons of war rather than the not so effective F-35.
Next generation is going to have to be full on unmanned. You can’t compete with a plane that isn’t limited by pilot g-force limits and airframe limitations aren’t structural anymore, but on board pilot related.(at least in air to air close combat)
War via Nintendo is becoming the norm, nay, required.
Pimple faced kids at the height of their reaction times controlling high performance drones seem to be the way in the short term future.
Maybe even one day land based terminators until Skynet can do the chore.
Ready the Mountain Dew & Cheetos for the future of combat.
If we ever get into a shooting war with either the Chinese or the Russians no number of super jets on either side are going to save any of us. But, build away! That provides jobs and boosts the economy…for now.
Airforce picked the locheed f35 they liked the way it looked, looked like a cool fighter a/c. The Boeing JSF was a tad on the ugly side Signed tax payer now stuck paying for a cool looking fighter.
40 comments
Trey Gowdy needs to investigate this.
He could if Hillary would come clean and stop committing additional crimes…
I think that she has agreed to testify publicly but Gowdy wants it in private. So much for government transparency.
He’s got open invitations for both: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/hillary-clinton-benghazi-email-hearings-117286.html
“…The House Committee investigating Benghazi is asking Hillary Clinton to appear for two public hearings on the 2012 terrorist attacks and her email use, according to a letter sent to her lawyer on Thursday.
This is a departure from what Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy originally requested from the former secretary of state. The South Carolina Republican wanted a private, transcribed interview on Clinton’s email use and a public hearing on the terrorist attacks.
But Clinton had refused to appear in private to take questions on her use of a private email address while at the State Department. Her lawyer, David Kendall, had insisted that Clinton was prepared to take questions about her emails, the server that stored them and the Benghazi attacks during a single, public hearing.
Gowdy wrote to Kendall Thursday saying the committee plans to schedule a hearing by the week of May 18 on the emails…”
The reason she won’t do the private interview is that it will be sworn and transcribed as well as able to delve into classified materials – where she is extremely vulnerable.
That and it’s easier to play the victim of mean Ed Grimley spike hair if it’s in public. She’ll get her way – they have the best lawyers.
Iiiiii don’t know, Howdy Gowdy (google Howdy Doody, the hair style similarities are striking) can be a handful when he gets his back up, even in public.
If you have it and are reading this — check out the guy’s hair in the ad below for “7 Alzheimer’s warning signs”
I thought his style was more like Cobblepot on the Gotham series. At least the one on this website. Was on the .gov site but has been changed as has his hair style.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/trey_gowdy/412473
Trey Gowdy “investigating” anything is the joke.
He’s simply a frontman carrying out his orders.
Will, for once, you’ve got a military issue right. The F-35 is a boondoggle and needs to be canceled.
Hating based on his ignorance…is NEVER right….
No credit given….
THat makes no sense. Please – sit down and shut up.
*flagged as inappropriate*
“flagged as YOU are a MORON”
Correct, as usual. One could build ten+ A-10’s for the price of one F-35. Even more if the air refueling tanker support fleet were just remodeled instead of scrapped and replaced with new.
Or upgrade 30-40 A-10s. We don’t need new manned tactical aircraft. UAV’s are far more capable aerodynamically and can be built far more cheaply.
Key word that kills that idea – cheaply. The procurement office has never been about cheaply unless its boots and t-shirts. When it comes to anything with wings, tracks or high-technology – the sky is the limit.
You know, I finally got what I consider to be a good pair of boots from the Army two years ago. Every other pair I’ve been issued up to this point was crap. I asked the civilian running the issue point in Bagram about the boots – she said they were commercial off the shelf “interim issue”….
… and has been the case since the Civil War.
What the Hell is “iterim issue” – geesh.
Stuff they gave us because it was immediately available and worked and that they could issue until they had time to get government procurement involved to completely screw them up?
Gubmint purchasing no longer uses JOC for large ongoing projects?
… all too often, all too true.
True. But if we are going to send someone to be judge, jury and executioner, he should be on the scene. (My opinion: Remote controlled Death From Above can devolve into little more than a parlor/video game. Just because Obama does it does not make it right or just.)
We’ve been heading that way since 1988. The difference between a Tomahawk and a drone, the drone doesn’t need to crash itself into the target to deliver a payload.
Yeah, reusable… Just like the reset button on your game boy.
Not suggesting “no manned tactical aircraft”, just “no NEW manned tactical aircraft”. The F-16, F-18 and F-15, EA-6, AV-8 are still quite capable. Upgrades are generally far cheaper than new programs and the next gen of tactical aircraft will be powered by pixie dust or some such silliness – the F-35 just isn’t that revolutionary.
The air frames you mention only have so much structural life in them.
Kind of like the B-52?
B-52s are up to at least model G now. Submarine hulls also have only a finite number of dives in them. Nuclear reactors have concerns with neutron bombardment over time. Nothing material lasts forever.
No argument that nothing lasts forever, however all of the aircraft I mentioned are decades younger than the BUFF. Extending their lives allows for the development of truly revolutionary weapons of war rather than the not so effective F-35.
An excellent comparison of the F-15 Strike Eagle and the F-35. The author explains why the F-35 isn’t nearly as revolutionary as it might seem. http://randomthoughtsandguns.blogspot.com/2013/09/f-35-vs-f-15se.html
Or just build 30-40 new A-10’s for a fraction of the cost
“… “The F-35 is double inferior,” the analysts concluded after their tests, saying the plane “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run.” …”
Uh, that would be triple inferior.
Next generation is going to have to be full on unmanned. You can’t compete with a plane that isn’t limited by pilot g-force limits and airframe limitations aren’t structural anymore, but on board pilot related.(at least in air to air close combat)
War via Nintendo is becoming the norm, nay, required.
Pimple faced kids at the height of their reaction times controlling high performance drones seem to be the way in the short term future.
Maybe even one day land based terminators until Skynet can do the chore.
Ready the Mountain Dew & Cheetos for the future of combat.
What a stupid, fucking comment.You prove once again you are clueless.
I’m really sorry I boned your mom. Please forgive me.
News flash for Folks. Pratt and Whitney is not a government-run company. Its free market.
If we ever get into a shooting war with either the Chinese or the Russians no number of super jets on either side are going to save any of us. But, build away! That provides jobs and boosts the economy…for now.
Airforce picked the locheed f35 they liked the way it looked, looked like a cool fighter a/c. The Boeing JSF was a tad on the ugly side Signed tax payer now stuck paying for a cool looking fighter.