Seeing Secretary Kerry and others, who have worked to obstruct critical oversight of Congress’ investigations into Benghazi, attempt to use the upcoming June 12 hearing as a shield against the Select Committee tells me it’s time to reassess. [...] While Speaker Boehner and I had both originally concluded that Secretary Kerry needed to promptly testify and explain why his Department had withheld subpoenaed documents, neither of us immediately recognized how opponents of congressional oversight would use this as an opportunity to distract from the Select Committee’s effort. [...] I am extremely proud that the Oversight Committee’s investigation led to a bipartisan vote to establish the Select Committee.This is a big load of baloney. First of all, Kerry was a senator during the attack. His testimony won't shed any light on what happened. It would, however, have shed light on the foolishness of Issa's hacktacular investigation, which is presumably why Kerry agreed to do it.
Second, while it might be true that Kerry accepted the subpoena because he thought doing so would be funny, Issa is the one who wanted to distract attention from the Select Committee. How else you can explain his decision to press forward with his "investigation" even after the creation of the Select Committee? He's only giving up now because Republicans with more clout than him are forcing him to.
And finally to the extent that Issa's committee is responsible for creating Select Committee, it's because Republicans lost faith in his ability to conduct an investigation. In their eyes, Issa was a bumbling incompetent moron whose buffoonery was the only thing preventing them from uncovering the facts that will lead to President Obama's impeachment. In Issa's defense, however, while he may be all those things, the reason he was unable to uncover the smoking gun is far more mundane: The smoking gun simply doesn't exist.