Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
He won't answer that. They are losers.sar·casm
noun
1. the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.
Just to be clear, you do agree it was because of the Youtube video.
The leftist idiots don't give a shit about corruption, incompetence, lies, payoffs, it's all good in their quest for tyranny
You don't give a shit about any of that either. The only thing you care about is having a President who will rubber stamp any atrocity Israel decides to commit.
Israel? Israel killed our people in Benghazi?...Jew haters don't impress me boy.You leftist are too damn stupid to know what we face from the islamofascist scum
Fucking delusional. You need a young doctor, and old doctor, at least three prescriptions, a couch, and possibly a prostitute.
Nobody can blame her after 8 different investigations cleared her ...you are catching onNobody can blame Hillary when we all know it was because of the Youtube video.
Cleared her? ..what you been smoking boy?
Nobody deployed anything you moron..Obama went to bed, then woke up, didn't get his intelligence briefing, and flew off to a fundraiser in Vegas...He's a piece of shit, and you leftist love him anywaysSo in other words you did not read the report.you don't know that anyone overrode anything. you don't know that the president wasn't upset.but you cant answer the question of why he gave the order to deploy (or so he claims), yet some underling over rode it.you're certainly willing to make up your own reality, aren't you...Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
And you cant give an answer as to why he showed no outrage at the fact that some underling over rode his order.
All you seemed to be able to do was make some childish remark about me.
Making you not worth my while.
Cya.
but you are certainly willing to make those things up.
It specifically states that the President claimed to have given the order to deploy and that the president never retracted that order.
So, in other words, you are debating a topic where you have access to the facts, but prefer to go with what you hear.
Go for it.
The "order" wasn't "overridden". The CIS team and the FAST team both deployed to Benghazi. They just didn't get there until the assault was over.
Nobody deployed anything you moron..Obama went to bed, then woke up, didn't get his intelligence briefing, and flew off to a fundraiser in Vegas...He's a piece of shit, and you leftist love him anywaysSo in other words you did not read the report.you don't know that anyone overrode anything. you don't know that the president wasn't upset.but you cant answer the question of why he gave the order to deploy (or so he claims), yet some underling over rode it.you're certainly willing to make up your own reality, aren't you...
And you cant give an answer as to why he showed no outrage at the fact that some underling over rode his order.
All you seemed to be able to do was make some childish remark about me.
Making you not worth my while.
Cya.
but you are certainly willing to make those things up.
It specifically states that the President claimed to have given the order to deploy and that the president never retracted that order.
So, in other words, you are debating a topic where you have access to the facts, but prefer to go with what you hear.
Go for it.
The "order" wasn't "overridden". The CIS team and the FAST team both deployed to Benghazi. They just didn't get there until the assault was over.
Nobody deployed anything you moron..Obama went to bed, then woke up, didn't get his intelligence briefing, and flew off to a fundraiser in Vegas...He's a piece of shit, and you leftist love him anywaysSo in other words you did not read the report.you don't know that anyone overrode anything. you don't know that the president wasn't upset.but you cant answer the question of why he gave the order to deploy (or so he claims), yet some underling over rode it.
And you cant give an answer as to why he showed no outrage at the fact that some underling over rode his order.
All you seemed to be able to do was make some childish remark about me.
Making you not worth my while.
Cya.
but you are certainly willing to make those things up.
It specifically states that the President claimed to have given the order to deploy and that the president never retracted that order.
So, in other words, you are debating a topic where you have access to the facts, but prefer to go with what you hear.
Go for it.
The "order" wasn't "overridden". The CIS team and the FAST team both deployed to Benghazi. They just didn't get there until the assault was over.
The report's available for all to read, clown. Making shit up doesn't work anymore.
Nobody deployed anything you moron..Obama went to bed, then woke up, didn't get his intelligence briefing, and flew off to a fundraiser in Vegas...He's a piece of shit, and you leftist love him anywaysSo in other words you did not read the report.you don't know that anyone overrode anything. you don't know that the president wasn't upset.
but you are certainly willing to make those things up.
It specifically states that the President claimed to have given the order to deploy and that the president never retracted that order.
So, in other words, you are debating a topic where you have access to the facts, but prefer to go with what you hear.
Go for it.
The "order" wasn't "overridden". The CIS team and the FAST team both deployed to Benghazi. They just didn't get there until the assault was over.
The report's available for all to read, clown. Making shit up doesn't work anymore.
No Military Asset Ever Deployed': Gowdy Unveils House Benghazi Report
"Nothing could have reached Benghazi because nothing was ever headed to Benghazi," he said, faulting the White House for holding a two-hour meeting as the attack unfolded.
'No Military Asset Ever Deployed': Gowdy Unveils House Benghazi Report
Just minutes after word of the attack reached the Secretary, he and General Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, departed the Pentagon to attend a previously scheduled 5:00 p.m. meeting at the White House with President Obama and National Security Advisor Thomas E. Donilon. The Secretary recalled two details about the attack on the U.S. facility in Benghazi: a building was on fire and Stevens was missing. As the Secretary and Dempsey briefed the President on the evolving situation in Benghazi, Libya, the Secretary recalls the following guidance: The President made clear that we ought to use all of the resources at our disposal to try to make sure we did everything possible to try to save lives there. Immediately following the meeting with the President, at roughly 6:00 p.m., the Secretary and Dempsey returned to the Pentagon and convened a meeting that included Ham who was in Washington D.C. at the time, and relevant members of the Secretary’s staff and the Joint Staff.
According to the Secretary, within an hour of his return to the Pentagon, he issued an order to deploy the identified assets.
Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
I wonder why Bush-Failure 43 did nothing after the CIA warned him 9 11 was coming...
so in other words you're imagining that someone overrode the president.So in other words you did not read the report.you don't know that anyone overrode anything. you don't know that the president wasn't upset.but you cant answer the question of why he gave the order to deploy (or so he claims), yet some underling over rode it.you're certainly willing to make up your own reality, aren't you...Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
And you cant give an answer as to why he showed no outrage at the fact that some underling over rode his order.
All you seemed to be able to do was make some childish remark about me.
Making you not worth my while.
Cya.
but you are certainly willing to make those things up.
It specifically states that the President claimed to have given the order to deploy and that the president never retracted that order.
So, in other words, you are debating a topic where you have access to the facts, but prefer to go with what you hear.
Go for it.
If Benghazi is such a dead subject why is it the loons are out in full force to protect her highness's bare ass. They know that there is still meat on the bone and are afraid more voters will begin to realize that they are being sold a bill of goods.
so in other words you're imagining that someone overrode the president.So in other words you did not read the report.you don't know that anyone overrode anything. you don't know that the president wasn't upset.but you cant answer the question of why he gave the order to deploy (or so he claims), yet some underling over rode it.you're certainly willing to make up your own reality, aren't you...
And you cant give an answer as to why he showed no outrage at the fact that some underling over rode his order.
All you seemed to be able to do was make some childish remark about me.
Making you not worth my while.
Cya.
but you are certainly willing to make those things up.
It specifically states that the President claimed to have given the order to deploy and that the president never retracted that order.
So, in other words, you are debating a topic where you have access to the facts, but prefer to go with what you hear.
Go for it.
The order was given for the counter attack by Leon Panetta.
Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama SAID he issued three directives. We still do not know what they said.
There was a meeting convened at 7:30 P.M. where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the senior cabinet member present. The rescue force were on planes and on the runway. those fighting men were then ordered to CHANGE CLOTHES FOUR TIMES since the major discussion was about the IMAGE we would portray to the Libyans. THE IMAGE! The flights never took off. WHY and WHO overrode the orders of Leon Panetta and President Obama. Don't you want to know? You know, from the most transparent administration in history?
If Benghazi is such a dead subject why is it the loons are out in full force to protect her highness's bare ass. They know that there is still meat on the bone and are afraid more voters will begin to realize that they are being sold a bill of goods.
The "bill of goods" is the competency of the witch Hillary Clinton
I put up a thread that showed Hillary only called one of the survivors of Bengazi after Huma pestered her too. What a cold bitch!
Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
Where are you getting this information from? You seem to have a lot of information that's unavailable to the rest of us.
What makes you think that Obama didn't "follow up"? What makes you think anyone "overrode" his order to deploy?
Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
Where are you getting this information from? You seem to have a lot of information that's unavailable to the rest of us.
What makes you think that Obama didn't "follow up"? What makes you think anyone "overrode" his order to deploy?
It the report you have chosen to only read talking points from The Nation, Alternet, The HuffingtonPost, the DailyKOS and others.
For its own part, the committee published a list of facts that it said were new insights revealed by the investigation:
- Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]
- With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]
[*]The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]
[*]A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]
[*]None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]
[*]The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]
Part II
Part III
- Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place. The State Department senior officials at the meeting had access to eyewitness accounts to the attack in real time. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was in direct contact with the Diplomatic Security Agents on the ground in Benghazi and sent out multiple updates about the situation, including a “Terrorism Event Notification.” The State Department Watch Center had also notified Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills that it had set up a direct telephone line to Tripoli. There was no mention of the video from the agents on the ground. Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks. [pg. 28]
- The morning after the attacks, the National Security Council’s Deputy Spokesperson sent an email to nearly two dozen people from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and intelligence community, stating: “Both the President and Secretary Clinton released statements this morning. … Please refer to those for any comments for the time being. To ensure we are all in sync on messaging for the rest of the day, Ben Rhodes will host a conference call for USG communicators on this chain at 9:15 ET today.” [pg. 39]
- Minutes before the President delivered his speech in the Rose Garden, Jake Sullivan wrote in an email to Ben Rhodes and others: “There was not really much violence in Egypt. And we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.’” [pg. 44]
- According to Susan Rice, both Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe prepared her for her appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows following the attacks. Nobody from the FBI, Department of Defense, or CIA participated in her prep call. While Rhodes testified Plouffe would “normally” appear on the Sunday show prep calls, Rice testified she did not recall Plouffe being on prior calls and did not understand why he was on the call in this instance. [pg.98]
- On the Sunday shows, Susan Rice stated the FBI had “already begun looking at all sorts of evidence” and “FBI has a lead in this investigation.” But on Monday, the Deputy Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs sent an email stating: “McDonough apparently told the SVTS [Secure Video Teleconference] group today that everyone was required to ‘shut their pieholes’ about the Benghazi attack in light of the FBI investigation, due to start tomorrow.” [pg. 135]
- After Susan Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Jake Sullivan assured the Secretary of the State that Rice “wasn’t asked about whether we had any intel. But she did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” [pg. 128]
- Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows were met with shock and disbelief by State Department employees in Washington. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.” The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!” The Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications, Bureau of Near East Affairs, State Department, wrote: “WH [White House] very worried about the politics. This was all their doing.” [pg. 132]
- The CIA’s September 13, 2012, intelligence assessment was rife with errors. On the first page, there is a single mention of “the early stages of the protest” buried in one of the bullet points. The article cited to support the mention of a protest in this instance was actually from September 4. In other words, the analysts used an article from a full week before the attacks to support the premise that a protest had occurred just prior to the attack on September 11. [pg. 47]
- A headline on the following page of the CIA’s September 13 intelligence assessment stated “Extremists Capitalized on Benghazi Protests,” but nothing in the actual text box supports that title. As it turns out, the title of the text box was supposed to be “Extremists Capitalized on Cairo Protests.” That small but vital difference—from Cairo to Benghazi—had major implications in how people in the administration were able to message the attacks. [pg. 52]
The report also slams the Obama administration for “intentional failure to cooperate with this and other congressional investigations.”
- During deliberations within the State Department about whether and how to intervene in Libya in March 2011, Jake Sullivan listed the first goal as “avoid[ing] a failed state, particularly one in which al-Qaeda and other extremists might take safe haven.” [pg. 9]
- The administration’s policy of no boots on the ground shaped the type of military assistance provided to State Department personnel in Libya. The Executive Secretariats for both the Defense Department and State Department exchanged communications outlining the diplomatic capacity in which the Defense Department SST security team members would serve, which included wearing civilian clothes so as not to offend the Libyans. [pg. 60]
- When the State Department’s presence in Benghazi was extended in December 2012, senior officials from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security were excluded from the discussion. [pg. 74]
- In February 2012, the lead Diplomatic Security Agent at Embassy Tripoli informed his counterpart in Benghazi that more DS agents would not be provided by decision makers, because “substantive reporting” was not Benghazi’s purpose. [pg. 77]
- Emails indicate senior State Department officials, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and Huma Abedin were preparing for a trip by the Secretary of State to Libya in October 2012. According to testimony, Chris Stevens wanted to have a “deliverable” for the Secretary for her trip to Libya, and that “deliverable” would be making the Mission in Benghazi a permanent Consulate. [pg. 96]
- In August 2012—roughly a month before the Benghazi attacks—security on the ground worsened significantly. Ambassador Stevens initially planned to travel to Benghazi in early August, but cancelled the trip “primarily for Ramadan/security reasons.” [pg. 99]
- Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta bluntly told the committee “an intelligence failure” occurred with respect to Benghazi. Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell also acknowledged multiple times an intelligence failure did in fact occur prior to the Benghazi attacks. [pg. 129]
Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
Where are you getting this information from? You seem to have a lot of information that's unavailable to the rest of us.
What makes you think that Obama didn't "follow up"? What makes you think anyone "overrode" his order to deploy?
It the report you have chosen to only read talking points from The Nation, Alternet, The HuffingtonPost, the DailyKOS and others.
For its own part, the committee published a list of facts that it said were new insights revealed by the investigation:
- Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]
- With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]
[*]The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]
[*]A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]
[*]None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]
[*]The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]
Part II
Part III
- Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place. The State Department senior officials at the meeting had access to eyewitness accounts to the attack in real time. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was in direct contact with the Diplomatic Security Agents on the ground in Benghazi and sent out multiple updates about the situation, including a “Terrorism Event Notification.” The State Department Watch Center had also notified Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills that it had set up a direct telephone line to Tripoli. There was no mention of the video from the agents on the ground. Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks. [pg. 28]
- The morning after the attacks, the National Security Council’s Deputy Spokesperson sent an email to nearly two dozen people from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and intelligence community, stating: “Both the President and Secretary Clinton released statements this morning. … Please refer to those for any comments for the time being. To ensure we are all in sync on messaging for the rest of the day, Ben Rhodes will host a conference call for USG communicators on this chain at 9:15 ET today.” [pg. 39]
- Minutes before the President delivered his speech in the Rose Garden, Jake Sullivan wrote in an email to Ben Rhodes and others: “There was not really much violence in Egypt. And we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.’” [pg. 44]
- According to Susan Rice, both Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe prepared her for her appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows following the attacks. Nobody from the FBI, Department of Defense, or CIA participated in her prep call. While Rhodes testified Plouffe would “normally” appear on the Sunday show prep calls, Rice testified she did not recall Plouffe being on prior calls and did not understand why he was on the call in this instance. [pg.98]
- On the Sunday shows, Susan Rice stated the FBI had “already begun looking at all sorts of evidence” and “FBI has a lead in this investigation.” But on Monday, the Deputy Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs sent an email stating: “McDonough apparently told the SVTS [Secure Video Teleconference] group today that everyone was required to ‘shut their pieholes’ about the Benghazi attack in light of the FBI investigation, due to start tomorrow.” [pg. 135]
- After Susan Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Jake Sullivan assured the Secretary of the State that Rice “wasn’t asked about whether we had any intel. But she did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” [pg. 128]
- Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows were met with shock and disbelief by State Department employees in Washington. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.” The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!” The Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications, Bureau of Near East Affairs, State Department, wrote: “WH [White House] very worried about the politics. This was all their doing.” [pg. 132]
- The CIA’s September 13, 2012, intelligence assessment was rife with errors. On the first page, there is a single mention of “the early stages of the protest” buried in one of the bullet points. The article cited to support the mention of a protest in this instance was actually from September 4. In other words, the analysts used an article from a full week before the attacks to support the premise that a protest had occurred just prior to the attack on September 11. [pg. 47]
- A headline on the following page of the CIA’s September 13 intelligence assessment stated “Extremists Capitalized on Benghazi Protests,” but nothing in the actual text box supports that title. As it turns out, the title of the text box was supposed to be “Extremists Capitalized on Cairo Protests.” That small but vital difference—from Cairo to Benghazi—had major implications in how people in the administration were able to message the attacks. [pg. 52]
The report also slams the Obama administration for “intentional failure to cooperate with this and other congressional investigations.”
- During deliberations within the State Department about whether and how to intervene in Libya in March 2011, Jake Sullivan listed the first goal as “avoid[ing] a failed state, particularly one in which al-Qaeda and other extremists might take safe haven.” [pg. 9]
- The administration’s policy of no boots on the ground shaped the type of military assistance provided to State Department personnel in Libya. The Executive Secretariats for both the Defense Department and State Department exchanged communications outlining the diplomatic capacity in which the Defense Department SST security team members would serve, which included wearing civilian clothes so as not to offend the Libyans. [pg. 60]
- When the State Department’s presence in Benghazi was extended in December 2012, senior officials from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security were excluded from the discussion. [pg. 74]
- In February 2012, the lead Diplomatic Security Agent at Embassy Tripoli informed his counterpart in Benghazi that more DS agents would not be provided by decision makers, because “substantive reporting” was not Benghazi’s purpose. [pg. 77]
- Emails indicate senior State Department officials, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and Huma Abedin were preparing for a trip by the Secretary of State to Libya in October 2012. According to testimony, Chris Stevens wanted to have a “deliverable” for the Secretary for her trip to Libya, and that “deliverable” would be making the Mission in Benghazi a permanent Consulate. [pg. 96]
- In August 2012—roughly a month before the Benghazi attacks—security on the ground worsened significantly. Ambassador Stevens initially planned to travel to Benghazi in early August, but cancelled the trip “primarily for Ramadan/security reasons.” [pg. 99]
- Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta bluntly told the committee “an intelligence failure” occurred with respect to Benghazi. Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell also acknowledged multiple times an intelligence failure did in fact occur prior to the Benghazi attacks. [pg. 129]
Why don't you try reading the actual report, rather than the "talking points"?
It'll clear up a lot of your misconceptions.
Apparently, Panetta advised that Obama have the military deploy and Obama gave the order.
Yet he never followed up to see how the mission went nor did he follow up to find out the mission never took place.
I wonder why he did not follow up?
I wonder why he was not outraged that someone overrode his order to deploy?
Makes me wonder if he never gave the order.
Where are you getting this information from? You seem to have a lot of information that's unavailable to the rest of us.
What makes you think that Obama didn't "follow up"? What makes you think anyone "overrode" his order to deploy?
It the report you have chosen to only read talking points from The Nation, Alternet, The HuffingtonPost, the DailyKOS and others.
For its own part, the committee published a list of facts that it said were new insights revealed by the investigation:
- Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]
- With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]
[*]The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]
[*]A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]
[*]None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]
[*]The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]
Part II
Part III
- Five of the 10 action items from the 7:30 PM White House meeting referenced the video, but no direct link or solid evidence existed connecting the attacks in Benghazi and the video at the time the meeting took place. The State Department senior officials at the meeting had access to eyewitness accounts to the attack in real time. The Diplomatic Security Command Center was in direct contact with the Diplomatic Security Agents on the ground in Benghazi and sent out multiple updates about the situation, including a “Terrorism Event Notification.” The State Department Watch Center had also notified Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills that it had set up a direct telephone line to Tripoli. There was no mention of the video from the agents on the ground. Greg Hicks—one of the last people to talk to Chris Stevens before he died—said there was virtually no discussion about the video in Libya leading up to the attacks. [pg. 28]
- The morning after the attacks, the National Security Council’s Deputy Spokesperson sent an email to nearly two dozen people from the White House, Defense Department, State Department, and intelligence community, stating: “Both the President and Secretary Clinton released statements this morning. … Please refer to those for any comments for the time being. To ensure we are all in sync on messaging for the rest of the day, Ben Rhodes will host a conference call for USG communicators on this chain at 9:15 ET today.” [pg. 39]
- Minutes before the President delivered his speech in the Rose Garden, Jake Sullivan wrote in an email to Ben Rhodes and others: “There was not really much violence in Egypt. And we are not saying that the violence in Libya erupted ‘over inflammatory videos.’” [pg. 44]
- According to Susan Rice, both Ben Rhodes and David Plouffe prepared her for her appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows following the attacks. Nobody from the FBI, Department of Defense, or CIA participated in her prep call. While Rhodes testified Plouffe would “normally” appear on the Sunday show prep calls, Rice testified she did not recall Plouffe being on prior calls and did not understand why he was on the call in this instance. [pg.98]
- On the Sunday shows, Susan Rice stated the FBI had “already begun looking at all sorts of evidence” and “FBI has a lead in this investigation.” But on Monday, the Deputy Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs sent an email stating: “McDonough apparently told the SVTS [Secure Video Teleconference] group today that everyone was required to ‘shut their pieholes’ about the Benghazi attack in light of the FBI investigation, due to start tomorrow.” [pg. 135]
- After Susan Rice’s Sunday show appearances, Jake Sullivan assured the Secretary of the State that Rice “wasn’t asked about whether we had any intel. But she did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” [pg. 128]
- Susan Rice’s comments on the Sunday talk shows were met with shock and disbelief by State Department employees in Washington. The Senior Libya Desk Officer, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, wrote: “I think Rice was off the reservation on this one.” The Deputy Director, Office of Press and Public Diplomacy, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, State Department, responded: “Off the reservation on five networks!” The Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications, Bureau of Near East Affairs, State Department, wrote: “WH [White House] very worried about the politics. This was all their doing.” [pg. 132]
- The CIA’s September 13, 2012, intelligence assessment was rife with errors. On the first page, there is a single mention of “the early stages of the protest” buried in one of the bullet points. The article cited to support the mention of a protest in this instance was actually from September 4. In other words, the analysts used an article from a full week before the attacks to support the premise that a protest had occurred just prior to the attack on September 11. [pg. 47]
- A headline on the following page of the CIA’s September 13 intelligence assessment stated “Extremists Capitalized on Benghazi Protests,” but nothing in the actual text box supports that title. As it turns out, the title of the text box was supposed to be “Extremists Capitalized on Cairo Protests.” That small but vital difference—from Cairo to Benghazi—had major implications in how people in the administration were able to message the attacks. [pg. 52]
The report also slams the Obama administration for “intentional failure to cooperate with this and other congressional investigations.”
- During deliberations within the State Department about whether and how to intervene in Libya in March 2011, Jake Sullivan listed the first goal as “avoid[ing] a failed state, particularly one in which al-Qaeda and other extremists might take safe haven.” [pg. 9]
- The administration’s policy of no boots on the ground shaped the type of military assistance provided to State Department personnel in Libya. The Executive Secretariats for both the Defense Department and State Department exchanged communications outlining the diplomatic capacity in which the Defense Department SST security team members would serve, which included wearing civilian clothes so as not to offend the Libyans. [pg. 60]
- When the State Department’s presence in Benghazi was extended in December 2012, senior officials from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security were excluded from the discussion. [pg. 74]
- In February 2012, the lead Diplomatic Security Agent at Embassy Tripoli informed his counterpart in Benghazi that more DS agents would not be provided by decision makers, because “substantive reporting” was not Benghazi’s purpose. [pg. 77]
- Emails indicate senior State Department officials, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and Huma Abedin were preparing for a trip by the Secretary of State to Libya in October 2012. According to testimony, Chris Stevens wanted to have a “deliverable” for the Secretary for her trip to Libya, and that “deliverable” would be making the Mission in Benghazi a permanent Consulate. [pg. 96]
- In August 2012—roughly a month before the Benghazi attacks—security on the ground worsened significantly. Ambassador Stevens initially planned to travel to Benghazi in early August, but cancelled the trip “primarily for Ramadan/security reasons.” [pg. 99]
- Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta bluntly told the committee “an intelligence failure” occurred with respect to Benghazi. Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell also acknowledged multiple times an intelligence failure did in fact occur prior to the Benghazi attacks. [pg. 129]
Why don't you try reading the actual report, rather than the "talking points"?
It'll clear up a lot of your misconceptions.
What in those 22 items are not factual and not taken from the report. Would you like a link to the 800 page report?
