When Republicans created the Benghazi Committee, and shaped it to be as brazenly partisan and political as possible, there was considerable talk in Democratic circles about simply refusing to participate in the charade. House Dems eventually decided it would be worthwhile to have some role in the process, so the boycott chatter was waved off.
More recently, when Republicans began to admit that the entire exercise is a taxpayer-funded election scheme, the discussion began anew, but again, Democrats decided to stick around for a while longer.
But after yesterday's 11-hour spectacle, do Dems on the committee intend to remain on the panel indefinitely? Rachel asked Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) about this last night. The California Democrat, who also happens to be the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, conceded he was glad to have been on the dais for Hillary Clinton's testimony, but he added that the future is murky.
MADDOW: Now that this has happened, Chairman Gowdy was asked by reporters as he was leaving the committee room if he could identify a single new piece of information that he learned from today`s hearing. He could not name one. Now that that has happened and this is behind you and you saw how it went, what about that question of whether or not Democrats should continue to participate? Is this still an open question for you guys?
SCHIFF: Well, I think it is an open question. And part of the reason why it`s still open is the Republicans haven`t given us any idea what happens tomorrow. In other words, everything`s been building up to today. They don`t -- they haven`t told us. My guess is they don`t even know themselves where they want to go from here.
I'd guess the same thing. In fact, it's why I find it hard to imagine how anyone, anywhere, will be able to justify the committee's continued existence with a straight face.