He was telling an important story for sure, but he was also drawing in conservative grassroots voters on the basis of their resentment of Hillary Clinton.
The congressman was also drawing in support for himself by showing he asked a tough question about terrorism.
Is this an emotional diversion from another issue?
WHAT DID THIS CONGRESSMAN TELL THE FOLKS ABOUT AMNESTY??????
Help me out here, because I see similar comments in a lot of posts?
Why can't we have a discussion on a topic (here being Benghazi) without bringing up something else (here amnesty)?
If you believe that amnesty is the most important subject, then post articles about it.
The sentiment that everything except our "favorite outrage" is somehow just a diversion grows increasingly tiresome and basically useless.