U.S. Mission After the Sep 2012 Attack
(Photo: Gianluigi Guercia/AFP/GettyImages)
RIGHT UP FRONT: Some key fact about Benghazi to date. It has been investigated by these:
1. The Independent State Department Accountability Review Board,
2. The Senate Intelligence Committee,
3. The Senate Armed Services Committee,
4. The House Intelligence Committee,
5. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee,
6. The House Armed Services Committee,
7. The House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform,
8. The House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
1. The Independent State Department Accountability Review Board,
2. The Senate Intelligence Committee,
3. The Senate Armed Services Committee,
4. The House Intelligence Committee,
5. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee,
6. The House Armed Services Committee,
7. The House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform,
8. The House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Q: How many have uncovered evidence of any Obama/White House/DEM/or Clinton cover-up?
A. None, Nada, Nil, Zero, Zilch, Naught, Goose Egg. Yet the GOP has another “select committee” now on-going that is run by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) in the same Issa-style witch hunt with HILLARY being their #1 target hunt for that witch!!!… (Note: don’t think so? Ha… ask Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) who spilled the beans and then quickly took himself out of the running for speaker as Boehner prepares to step down and then retire from Congress … DEMS and others like me have been correct all along).
Now this more
comprehensive look back
from Vox.com
(1) What is the Benghazi controversy? The controversy has centered on
Republican accusations that the Obama administration did not take heed of
intelligence warnings before the attack, that during the attack it refused to
call in available military support, and that after the attack it deliberately
covered up what had happened. Repeated
independent investigations have disproved all of these allegations (refer back to th list of investigations above).
(2) What actually
happened in Benghazi on September 11, 2012? (Review the timeline time at the link) – it is quite detailed.
(3) Who were the attackers, and why did they
do it? The attackers were an informal group of Islamist fighters
from an assortment of local Libyan
militias; a number came from an extremist group called Ansar al-Sharia; and, few had ties to
al-Qaeda. But this was no carefully preplanned attack. It was
much more spontaneous — and in some ways a product of Libya's chaos.
(4) Could the Obama administration have stopped the attack? The attack was too spontaneous, for the
reasons described above, for US intelligence to see this specific incident
coming. But what about once it had begun? One of the biggest myths about
Benghazi is that the US had military assets in range — but refused to deploy
them. “Military personnel were ready,
willing, and able, and within proximity, but the Pentagon told them they had no
authority and to stand down,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said in 2013. This is flatly false. The bipartisan Senate
Intelligence report, perhaps the most comprehensive review of
the attack, found that “there were no US military resources in position to
intervene in short order in Benghazi to help defend the Temporary Mission
Facility and its Annex.”
(5) What's the “Susan Rice talking points” controversy? Did the White House
hide the truth about Benghazi? The "talking points" in question are the official administration
talking points, from just after the attack, on how to describe what had
happened. Susan Rice, then the US ambassador to the UN, used these talking
points when she appeared on Sunday talk shows that week. Rice claimed, in her appearances, that the
attack had grown out of a spontaneous protest against the anti-Islam film Innocence
of Muslims. She didn't make this up; it was the CIA's assessment at the
time. But this claim turned out to be wrong. While some of the attackers really were
incensed by the film, closed circuit footage from the diplomatic building
showed that there was no protest.
(6) What have the investigations into Benghazi found? Nine different bodies have investigated
Benghazi: the State Department's Accountability Review Board and eight separate
congressional committees or staff reports. All of them, aside from the House
Select Committee, have completed investigations. Each has identified problems
with the way the incident was handled, but none have uncovered real evidence of
an administration cover-up or failure to properly respond to the attacks.
(7) See contents of this point at the link – some sort of “cute song.”
(8) If there's no evidence of a cover-up or wrongdoing,
why are Republicans still looking into this? Republicans' interest in
Benghazi isn't just cynical politics (although there is for sure some of
that). Conservatives have long seen Obama as a feckless, incompetent liar — the
idea that he failed to prevent a terrorist attack, then covered it up, fits
with their preexisting beliefs. The fact that independent reporting vindicated
the administration didn't help, as conservatives see the mainstream media as
hopelessly in the tank for the president. So long as conservative leaders argue
there's a scandal here, some Republicans will continue believing that more
investigations are necessary.
(9) What does this have to do with the Hillary Clinton email scandal and
the House speaker election? In May 2014, House Speaker John Boehner
set up the House Select Committee on Benghazi. The committee, for its
investigation, asked the State Department to turn over emails Clinton had sent
to her aides about the attack. Some of those emails turned out to have been
sent from Clinton's private email account — which, according to the New York
Times, is how Clinton's use of a private email server for
official State Department business first came to light. That's become a big campaign
scandal for her. Then, in a September 29
appearance on Fox News, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy seemed to admit
something that Republicans aren't supposed to say — that the real purpose of
the Benghazi Select Committee is to hurt Clinton's campaign.
The GOP witch hunt at this point (and attempts to smear Hillary Clinton) are as a pitiful as that image of the burned out Mission in Benghazi photo above ... in short as they say: "There ain't no there, there."
No comments:
Post a Comment