"Hillary Clinton’s world was so worried about a Republican investigation of the Benghazi attacks, they sent a message to House Democrats: We need backup."

"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) publicly considered boycotting the panel, an idea that Clinton supporters feared would leave the potential 2016 candidate exposed to the enemy fire of House Republicans. So Clinton emissaries launched a back channel campaign, contacting several House Democratic lawmakers and aides to say they’d prefer Democrats participate, according to sources familiar with the conversations. Pelosi’s staff said they have not heard from Clinton’s camp."

So begins the article in Politico. What's supposed to be surprising here? Obviously, the Democrats care about the effect on the investigation on upcoming elections, and they've been trying to figure out whether their attacks on what the Republicans are doing will be more effective from the outside or the inside. I suspect the wavering position on whether or not to participate — assuming it wasn't always only theater — has to do with the whether one focuses on the 2014 elections or looks further ahead to 2016. If the Clintons sent what Politico tellingly terms a "We need backup" message, they were trying to drag the House Democrats away from their immediate concern about winning their districts this fall and into the service of Hillary Clinton's 2016 interests. Think about why staying out of the hearings seems like a good position for fighting to win this October, but getting friendly faces on the inside is so important to the longer game of Hillary's winning the presidency in 2016. Is she not woman enough to face down that panel of Republicans on her own? She needs Elijah Cummings and company to back her up?

"We need backup" is a reminder of the failure of the United States to respond to the request for backup from those under attack in Benghazi.