A report authored by five GOP congressmen says that Hillary Clinton personally rejected a direct request for more security at the Benghazi, Libya, facility before the September 11 attack that left four Americans dead.
That directly contradicts Clinton’s testimony before a congressional committee that requests for more security did not come to her.
The authors of the report released Tuesday had access to Obama Administration memos and emails that the report said shows that reductions in security levels at the Benghazi facility were approved “at the highest levels of the State Department,” including in at least one instance by Clinton herself.
In January, Clinton was questioned at a congressional hearing about events in Benghazi and was specifically asked about removal of some Marines from the facility over the objection of State Department officials in Libya. She testified that such decisions were handled far below her authority level.
White House National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden denied that there was anything new in the report, saying all the questions about Benghazi had been asked and answered already.
Also, the State Department has continually claimed that more Marines wouldn’t have made a difference in Libya because they were stationed far from the Benghazi facility. Hayden pointed out that the State Department’s Accountability Review Board found the response to Benghazi was “appropriate.”
The report also says the Obama Administration deliberately reworded talking points relied on by Susan Rice to downplay attackers’ connections to al-Qaida and to cover for the State Department.
The authors claim that there was ample evidence ahead of the attack that stricter security was needed. “This progress report reveals a fundamental lack of understanding at the highest levels of the State Department as to the dangers presented in Benghazi, Libya, as well as a concerted attempt to insulate the Department of State from blame following the terrorist attacks,” the report reads.
“… The administration’s talking points were developed in an interagency process that focused more on protecting the reputation and credibility of the State Department than on explaining to the American people the facts surrounding the fatal attacks.”
It’s been obvious from the start that the administration has been hiding a colossal, possibly criminal, scandal in the Benghazi attack. From the first blaming of a YouTube video to Clinton screaming “What difference at this point does it make?” the Administration has been in deep coverup mode.
Everyone who was in a position to know what happened, including Clinton, has resigned, retired suddenly or been transferred to parts unknown. Somewhere on planet Earth, there are allegedly more than 30 direct witnesses we have yet to hear a peep from.
There’s a disturbing undercurrent to Benghazi and more recent events, and that is the powerful suggestion by what scant evidence is available that the Obama Administration is working with al-Qaida, funneling arms and personnel through Benghazi to Syria to fight the “civil” war over there. More recently comes the Boston Marathon bombings and emerging evidence that the FBI knew about and released one of the suspects two years ago. And then there’s the “person of interest” Saudi national who is apparently not being deported due to “somebody” in the Administration intervening, despite mounting evidence that he, too, has terror ties.
If the Obama Administration is deliberately coddling terror suspects and working with al-Qaida, it’s a deep betrayal of the American people and highly dangerous to boot. Just like Benghazi, if al-Qaida or other terror groups are involved, the tables can be turned on us at the drop of a hat.
The House Republicans need to keep pushing this issue and work to uncover the secrets the Obama Administration is trying to hide. Americans’ safety may be at stake.