Bradley Podliska, an ex-investigator for the House Select Committee on Benghazi, is planning on suing the panel for what he believes is an unlawful firing. Air Force Reserve Maj. Bradley F. Podliska denounced the Republicans who head the panel and, according to The Blaze, says he was wrongfully terminated in part because he sought to conduct a comprehensive probe into the deadly attacks on the U.S. compound instead of focusing on Hillary Rodham Clinton and the State Department.
The New York Times wrote that Podliska also alleges that the committee’s majority staff retaliated against him for taking leave for several weeks to go on active duty. If these allegations are proved to be true, the retaliation would violate the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994, which protects the rights of military personnel in the United States.
Podliska says he was also fired because he objected to the committee’s politically motivated investigation, which targeted Hillary Clinton.
“I knew that we needed to get to the truth to the victims’ families. And the victims’ families, they deserve the truth — whether or not Hillary Clinton was involved, whether or not other individuals were involved,” he said in a TV interview with CNN. “The victims’ families are not going to get the truth and that’s the most unfortunate thing about this.”
The panel of the House, led by Republican Trey Gowdy, was established with the purpose of investigating the terrorist attack on September 2012 to the diplomatic compound in Benghazi in which four Americans were killed, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith.
Democrats called for the dismantling of the panel after former candidate for the speaker of the House of Representatives, Republican Kevin McCarthy, said last week that the House’s committee on Benghazi was an attempt to hurt Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers. Clinton, who leads the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, was Secretary of State at the time of the attack.
The attack sparked controversy for months between the Democratic administration and the Republican Congress with corresponding hearings, inquiries and reports.
Just after the attack on Benghazi, the Obama administration had explained that it was a spontaneous act in response to an anti-Muslim video that was circulating on the Internet. Republicans, however, felt that it was a premeditated act of terrorism and accused the White House of trying to mislead the public a few weeks before the presidential election.
Podliska said the results of the investigations of the committee may not be fair or honest. However, the panel refuted Podliska’s claims and strongly denied the allegations, saying the officer had been fired precisely because of their “impartiality”.
“Thus, directly 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,” a statement regarding the matter read. “The committee vigorously denies all of his allegations. Moreover, once legally permitted to do, the committee stands ready to prove his termination was legal, justified and warranted — on multiple levels.One reason, among others, for which the employee was terminated was his repeated efforts, of his own volition, to develop and direct Committee resources to a PowerPoint ‘hit piece’ on members of the Obama Administration – including Secretary Clinton – that bore no relationship whatsoever to the Committee’s current investigative tone, focus or investigative plan.”
Breitbart wrote that Podliska says that a superior told him he was fired for using work email for social purposes, failing to secure classified information, and giving an intern an “unauthorized assignment” to do. Meanwhile, Podliska and other opponents accuse the committee of leading a partisan investigation.
[Image via Mark Wilson/Getty Images News]