{"id":987,"date":"2015-10-14T13:44:24","date_gmt":"2015-10-14T18:44:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/?p=987"},"modified":"2017-11-20T20:45:18","modified_gmt":"2017-11-21T01:45:18","slug":"house-select-committee-on-benghazi-will-it-fall-like-a-house-of-cards","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/2015\/10\/14\/house-select-committee-on-benghazi-will-it-fall-like-a-house-of-cards\/","title":{"rendered":"House Select Committee on Benghazi: Will it Fall like a House of Cards?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Courtesy<\/a>
Courtesy of Netflix and House of Cards<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

House Select Committee on Benghazi: Will it Fall like a House of Cards?<\/strong><\/p>\n

By Katie Burns, Staff Writer<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

For people who watch the burgeoning Netflix series House of Cards<\/em>, fictitious politician Frank Underwood\u2019s words that \u201cthere\u2019s no better way to overpower a trickle of doubt than with a flood of naked truth\u201d[1] may come to mind when thinking about ex-House Select Committee on Benghazi investigator Bradley Podliska, and his recent accusation that this Republican-led committee sponsored a \u201cpartisan investigation\u201d to unfairly target former Secretary of State and Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton.[2] However, as any good House of Cards<\/em> fan knows, it\u2019s sometimes difficult to ascertain who\u2019s actually telling the truth in controversies affecting the federal government.<\/p>\n

On Monday, October 11, 2015, Podliska\u2019s attorneys claimed that House Select Committee on Benghazi Chair, Congressman Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, violated the Congressional Accountability Act for speaking publicly about confidential employment mediation proceedings between the special committee and Podliska.\u00a0[3] Over the weekend, the committee headed by Congressman Gowdy released a statement about Podliska saying that, \u201cdirectly contrary to his brand-new assertion, the employee actually was terminated, in part, because he himself manifested improper partiality and animus in his investigative work.\u201d [4]<\/p>\n

Of course, this allegation came after Podliska publicly chastised the Republican-led special committee for conducting an unfair partisan investigation aimed at destroying Hillary Clinton\u2019s reputation as she vies for her place on the Democratic ticket in the 2016 Presidential election.\u00a0[5] Specifically, Podliska alleges that the House Select Committee on Benghazi wrongfully fired him from the investigation because he refused to focus efforts solely on the State Department and Hillary Clinton\u2019s role in failing to prevent the terrorist attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012.\u00a0[6] He also asserts that the committee retaliated against him for taking time off from the investigation to fulfill his U.S. Air Force Reserve duties by firing him.\u00a0[7] This constitutes unlawful termination under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act of 1994.\u00a0[8]<\/p>\n

According to the New York Times<\/em> and CNN, Podliska intends to file a complaint against this Congressional committee and Congressman Gowdy for these alleged indiscretions. However, the real question is: who is actually telling the truth, the House Select Committee on Benghazi or Podliska? This question will ultimately be determined by the persuasiveness with which both sides present their case to fact finders. If the fact finders determine that the committee\u2019s statement about Podliska were authentic, then Podliska\u2019s claim for wrongful termination will fail. He will not be able to prove he participated in a protected activity, and, as a result, suffered an adverse action in the workplace that was causally connected to the protected activity.\u00a0[9] However, if the fact finder determines that the Podliska\u2019s claims of unfair partisan behavior are valid, then the House Select Committee on Benghazi stands to suffer a humiliating judicial defeat that could serve to undermine the Republican Party\u2019s legitimacy in the House of Representatives.<\/p>\n

While we will not know what the outcome of this dispute will be in the near future, it is, nonetheless, an interesting question to think about: will the House of Representative Select Committee on Benghazi be victorious over serious accusations of bias or will it fall like a house of cards when unfair prejudices are exposed?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[1] House of Cards<\/em>, Season 1: Ch. 7.<\/p>\n

[2] http:\/\/www.nbcnews.com\/news\/us-news\/ex-benghazi-investigator-alleges-rep-gowdy-violated-federal-law-n443166.<\/p>\n

[3] Id.<\/em><\/p>\n

[4] http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2015\/10\/11\/us\/politics\/former-benghazi-investigator-says-he-was-fired-unlawfully.html?_r=0.<\/p>\n

[5] Id.<\/em><\/p>\n

[6] http:\/\/www.cnn.com\/2015\/10\/10\/politics\/benghazi-committee-investigation-political-hillary-clinton-brad-podliska-lawsuit\/\/<\/p>\n

[7] http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2015\/10\/11\/us\/politics\/former-benghazi-investigator-says-he-was-fired-unlawfully.html?_r=0.<\/p>\n

[8] Id.<\/em><\/p>\n

[9] See e.g.<\/em>, Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 562 U.S. 411 (2011).<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

House Select Committee on Benghazi: Will it Fall like a House of Cards? By Katie Burns, Staff Writer   For people who watch the burgeoning Netflix series House of Cards, fictitious politician Frank Underwood\u2019s words that \u201cthere\u2019s no better way to overpower a trickle of doubt than with a flood [\u2026] <\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":988,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-987","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-juris-blog","category-posts"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/987","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=987"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/987\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1000,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/987\/revisions\/1000"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/988"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=987"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=987"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.law.duq.edu\/juris\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=987"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}