[guest post by Dana]
The Benghazi Select Committee released its report this morning. While the New York Times is in full Hillary-defense mode on the front page: “2-Year Panel On Benghazi Ends, Finding No New Fault By Clinton,” Chairman Trey Gowdy gives Americans far more credit for their intelligence:
Now, I simply ask the American people to read this report for themselves, look at the evidence we have collected, and reach their own conclusions. You can read this report in less time than our fellow citizens were taking fire and fighting for their lives on the rooftops and in the streets of Benghazi.
The Weekly Standard provides a look at the supplemental “additional views” report, which lays out the devastating timeline confirming that the “Obama administration knowingly provided the American people a false story about the Benghazi attack, its causes and its consequences”. Who’s surprised? Lies, lies, and more lies:
Secretary Clinton’s 10:08 p.m. Statement on the Attack in Benghazi:
“I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. * * * Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”
Secretary Clinton’s E-mail to daughter at 11:23 p.m.:
“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Quedalike [sic] group[.]”
Secretary Clinton’s Remarks on the Deaths of American Personnel in Benghazi, Libya morning of September 12, 2012:
“We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the internet.”
Summary of Discussion between Acting Assistant Secretary Beth Jones and Libyan Ambassador Aujali at 9:45 a.m.:
“I told him that the group that conducted the attacks—Ansar Al Sharia—is affiliated with Islamic extremists.”
Jacob Sullivan in e-mail to embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan:
“There was not really violence in Egypt [and] “we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.'”
Secretary Clinton’s Statements to Egyptian Prime Minister Kandil at 3:04 p.m.:
“We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack – not a protest. . . . Based on the information we saw today we believe the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al Qaeda.”
Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy to congressional staff briefing:
When asked whether “this [was] an attack under the cover of a protest” Kennedy said, “No the attack was a direct breaching attack.” More to the point, he was then asked whether “we believe [this was] coordinated with [the] Cairo [protests] to which Kennedy responded, “Attack in Cairo was a demonstration. There were no weapons shown or used. A few cans of spray paint.”
Secretary Clinton’s Morocco Remarks:
“I also want to take a moment to address the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries. * * *
To us, to me personally, this video is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage. But as I said yesterday, there is no justification, none at all, for responding to this video with violence. * * *
Violence, we believe, has no place in religion and is no way to honor religion. Islam, like other religions, respects the fundamental dignity of human beings, and it is a violation of that fundamental dignity to wage attacks on innocents. As long as there are those who are willing to shed blood and take innocent life in the name of God, the world will never know a true and lasting peace. It is especially wrong for violence to be directed against diplomatic missions. . . .
Stephen Hayes makes two solid points in light of the report:
What makes #Benghazi report so damaging to WH/Clinton, it’s not Gowdy/GOP opinions, it’s WH/State/CIA own documents/emails/testimony.
Key unanswered question in #Benghazi report: Why were assets not deployed even after Obama/Panetta gave orders to send them?
Could it have been the result of yet another moment of fretful indecision?
The report also found that a State official brought up a question about whether Marines should wear civilian clothing instead of their uniforms. Under secretary of State for management Patrick Kennedy told investigators he wanted to ensure that security was enhanced, not hurt by flags on the uniforms of any U.S. military presence.
But, one commander told the committee that as they were readying themselves to deploy they kept having to change in and out of their uniforms four times.
No rescue. Four dead Americans. No big deal.