2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRepublicans tone down Benghazi talk as elections near
Just four months ago, the future chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi delighted core elements of the Republican base when he declared that the panel would be probing what appears to be a White House cover-up.
Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina said he had secret evidence proving that President Obamas administration had deliberately withheld key documents from lawmakers looking into the Sept. 11, 2012 attack in the eastern Libyan city.
"I have evidence that not only are they hiding it, theres an intent to hide it, he told Fox News in May. I cant disclose that evidence yet, but I have evidence that there was a systematic intentional decision to withhold certain documents from Congress and were just sick of it.
Now, with the 2014 mid-term elections fast approaching and the panels first hearing slated for September, the former prosecutor from Spartanburg, S.C., is taking a more tempered, bipartisan tone. He has declared that he wants to avoid a media circus. Other House Republicans are sending out similar signals, denying that their creation of the special panel ever was political in nature.
http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-tone-down-benghazi-talk-as-elections-near-042821732.html
Zambero
(8,964 posts)So secret that it was still in the process of being fabricated, yet again. Reminds me of that old Herman's Hermits song with the line "Second verse, same as the first!".
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)They're pretty damned incompetent to not have found evidence for even ONE of their Benghazi! conspiracy theories. And nobody can say that John Boehner or any of the Republicans running the house have been beholden to President Obama and/or covering up for him.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)Did I not see an article somewhere that the probe could last into 2016?
kairos12
(12,858 posts)man can invent something that measures infinity.
quadrature
(2,049 posts)right now,
for Benghazi to get the proper attention.
come back in six months
Justice
(7,186 posts)There is a new book out about Benghazi. The book is written by a professor at Boston University and co-authored by the "private contractors" hired by the CIA who were working at the CIA annex; two of them died fighting the attackers later that night. All of the private contractors were former members of American Special Forces teams.
According to the book, the CIA station chief, referred to in the book only as Bob, was the person who told the private contractors to not immediately go and try to rescue Stevens and Sullivan and others. Bob didn't want to blow the cover of the CIA Annex and so was trying to enlist support from Libyan militia allies to complete the rescue. The Libyans apparently never arrived to help.
These men say that if they were allowed to immediately go to the rescue of Stevens and Sullivan - the two would be alive. I don't know how they can say that because 2 of their own were killed that night. But I would also not be surprised if what they say about Bob is true - that the mission to keep the CIA's presence quiet was so important that they wanted to have the Libyans perform the rescue and avoid blowing their cover.
The book says Bob made the decision on his own - no one told him to do so.
Many aspects of what they say make sense. I am surprised that they don't have a duty of confidentiality to the CIA about this. Also members of the Intelligence Committee and Trey Gowdy surely must know this story and thus it reveals just how sick Republicans are to pervert what happened into something completely different.
People want war and conflict to be neat and tidy - sometimes it ain't. It is tragic but it is conflict. I don't know that what Bob did was wrong or right - or whether the delay would have made a difference.
Book review and other details in NYT at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/world/africa/new-book-says-cia-official-in-benghazi-held-up-rescue.html?ref=todayspaper