To me the most shocking piece of recent news wasn’t Obama’s end run around Congress and the Constitution regarding immigration, but the way the House Intelligence Committee allegedly investigating Benghazi dumped its report late on a Friday afternoon. That is traditionally when Washington insiders get the word out when they don’t want the media to get the word out. In this case, it’s no wonder.

For one thing, the investigation seemed to be over before it even began. It generally takes a few years for Congress to decide what to name a new post office. For another, I never heard about the committee holding even a single hearing, and I’m a pretty devoted Fox viewer.

That is what led me to send the committee’s chairman, Mike Rogers, the following letter: “Dear Rep. Rogers: I can’t help being curious about your committee’s report, a report that apparently found nothing amiss in the attack on the Benghazi consulate, not in the run-up to the butchery committed on 9/11/12, not during the attack itself and not even in the shameful aftermath.

You found nothing amiss in the statements by Sec. Rice and President Obama, which even weeks after the bloody affair, blamed it all on an inane video? You found nothing questionable about Obama’s absence and silence during the evening of the attack? It didn’t strike you as peculiar that there wasn’t a military response during the seven hours the attack was taking place? You folks didn’t find anything even mildly suggestive about Sec. Clinton’s "What difference at this point does it make?” response during a congressional enquiry? You and your committee didn’t regard it as even slightly curious that the talking points from the intelligence community were edited and revised by members of the administration before Susan Rice went on all those Sunday news shows?

“Was Mrs. Clinton even questioned by your committee? Was Susan Rice? Was the President? What about the Navy Seals and those members of the consulate who survived the attack?

"It has even gotten around that you based most of your conclusions on the questionable testimony of former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell, who after months of insisting he had nothing to do with editing the talking points was finally forced to admit he had almost everything to do with it.

"Just curious, but is it possible that one of your Democratic colleagues has been holding your dog for ransom? Best wishes, Burt Prelutsky”

Moving on to other matters, what gives with the Supreme Court? These people are paid a good deal of money ($244,400 for the eight regular justices, $255,500 for the chief justice, not to mention their book royalties and speaking fees) for a very short work year. They’re only in session from Oct.1st until late June. In addition, they have any number of clerks to help with the heavy lifting, which consists of looking up legal precedents, typing up decisions and bringing lunch to their lordships.

I would think that in exchange for all the money and glory, they could squeeze in a little time during which they can try to rein in a president who seems to be doing his best to act as if the Constitution isn’t worth the parchment it’s written on.

Why, for instance, can’t a president or a majority of the House get a constitutional question fast-tracked to the Supremes? Why does it have to go through a maze of lesser courts before it can finally be placed before the Court that counts? The gestation period of elephants doesn’t take as long. Even Congress manages to name post offices in half the time.

Finally, a friend sent me an op-ed piece from the Manitoba Herald, which proved that Canadians are aware of the absurdity of our border policy and take considerable comfort in the fact that the United States acts as a 2,000 mile buffer to the endless onslaught of illegal aliens who would otherwise be turning Toronto, Montreal and Quebec, into third world pueblos.

A few of the highlights include: “The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The recent actions of the Tea Party and the fact Republicans won the Senate are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they’ll soon be required to hunt, pray and to agree with Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck.

"Canadian border farmers say it’s not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night. ‘I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn,’ said Southern Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. ‘The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn’t have any, he left before I even had a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?’”

After going on in this vein for a few more paragraphs, it concluded with “In an effort to ease tensions between the U.S. and Canada, Vice President Joe Biden met with the Canadian ambassador and pledged that the administration would take steps to reassure liberals. A source close to President Obama said, ‘We’re going to have some Paul McCartney and Peter, Paul & Mary concerts. And we might even put some endangered species on postage stamps. The President is determined to reach out,’ he concluded.”

Is there a red-blooded conservative in America who, in his heart of hearts, doesn’t wish to God this had been a legitimate news story?

Surely I can’t be the only one.