HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Democrats' Benghazi repor...

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 01:58 PM

Democrats' Benghazi report calls compound security 'woefully inadequate'

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/27/benghazi-report-clinton-security-inadequate

Democrats on the House Benghazi panel said in a report on Monday that security at the Libya facility the night of 11 September 2012 was “woefully inadequate”, but former secretary of state Hillary Clinton never personally denied any requests from diplomats for additional protection.

The panel’s five Democrats said after a two-year investigation that the military could not have done anything differently on the night of the attacks to save the lives of four Americans killed in Libya. US ambassador Chris Stevens died in one of the two assaults that night at the US outpost and CIA annex.

Democrats’ release of their own report heightened the partisanship of the inquiry, which has been marked by accusations of Obama administration stonewalling and finger-pointing. Republicans on the panel missed a self-imposed deadline to issue a report “before summer”, but the Democrats’ move in issuing their report could spur the GOP’s final product.
...
The Democrats said they regretted that their 344-page report was not bipartisan, but said Republicans left them little choice after conducting “one of the longest and most partisan congressional investigations in history”.

5 replies, 883 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Democrats' Benghazi report calls compound security 'woefully inadequate' (Original post)
BlueMTexpat Jun 2016 OP
PJMcK Jun 2016 #1
BlueMTexpat Jun 2016 #2
former9thward Jun 2016 #3
Recursion Jun 2016 #4
former9thward Jun 2016 #5

Response to BlueMTexpat (Original post)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 03:33 PM

1. Who cut the budget for embassy protection?

Oh, I remember. It was the Republican-led Congress that slashed funding for adequate security at the US embassies and consulates around the world. A part of the problem at the Benghazi compound was that there weren't enough security staff. Now, perhaps that wouldn't have made a whit of difference. But the onus for the under-staffing lies squarely at the feet of the GOP.

Why doesn't our media inform us about all of the parameters of these complex issues? (sarcastic wink)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #1)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 01:54 AM

2. Exactly.

It's just so much more fun to bash Hillary for everything and to create another "scandal" involving her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #1)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 03:16 AM

3. Who signed that budget bill?

It was President Obama. He could have vetoed it if he thought the security money was not enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #3)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 03:46 AM

4. Which would have left the embassies with zero security

Great idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 28, 2016, 12:07 PM

5. Not how it works.

And you know it. Obama has vetoed other budget bills, including Defense, and people were not left with zero. There were comprises made and a new budget signed. Pretty simple. But nice try to deflect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread