October 12, 2021

BREAKING: Amazing! Benghazi Coverup Allegations Rejected in Bipartisan House Probe

Benghazi Coverup Allegations Rejected in Bipartisan House Probe A two-year investigation by the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House intelligence panel rejects allegations that the Obama administration intentionally misled the public about the deadly attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.

Spurning “the swirl of rumors and unsupported allegations” over the Benghazi assault, the lawmakers said in a redacted version of their report released today that there was never a “stand-down” order blocking rescue efforts and that White House officials weren’t to blame for an inaccurate initial account of the events on Sept. 11, 2012.

Benghazi Report (3808 KB)

The report by Republican Chairman Mike Rogers and the committee’s top Democrat, Charles “Dutch” Ruppersberger of Maryland, was devoted mostly to defending the performance of the Central Intelligence Agency. Along the way, though, it implicitly rebuffed allegations that were lodged by Republican Representative Darrell Issa and embraced by party leaders including former presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

The attacks on a U.S. diplomatic post and a CIA annex killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, and became a flash point in President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign that year.

Much of the criticism turned on the administration’s initial account that the attacks grew out of a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islamic video, a version presented by Susan Rice, who at the time was the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, on Sunday television talk shows.

‘Contradictory’ Intelligence

The report said the CIA made that incorrect assessment based on “a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence that came in after the attacks.” It said the agency corrected it “two days after Ambassador Rice spoke,” once it obtained closed-captioned television footage and FBI interviews. Rice is now Obama’s national security adviser.

The report nonetheless documented that White House officials were eager to embrace the initial, inaccurate account. It cites an e-mail from Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, who urged Rice “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

The report said there was no intelligence failure before the attacks and that the CIA’s chief of the Tripoli station had warned Ambassador Stevens of the “serious and credible” threats to Americans in Libya, and particularly in Benghazi, days before the attack.

The report was one of the last acts in Congress by Rogers of Michigan, who is retiring to become a radio talk-show host.

Issa of California couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

CIA acted properly in Benghazi but slow to spot terrorism: Bipartisan report

The House intelligence committee cleared the CIA of wrongdoing in the run-up to the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack and its actions during the assault, but said in a newly declassified report Friday that the way the agency wrote the controversial talking points afterwards was “flawed.”

The bipartisan report says the CIA’s initial talking points saying the attack was a protest against a video, while eventually proved to be incorrect, were based on intelligence the agency had at the time. The CIA only came to the correct conclusion two weeks later, which was days after then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used the erroneous talking points.

Benghazi

But the agency should have moved more quickly to change its conclusions as on-the-ground evidence mounted, the investigators said.

Investigators also said no CIA employees were prevented from speaking with Congress, as some lawmakers had claimed — though the agency was slow to respond to some inquiries.

The report dents many of the claims some Republicans have advanced, including rejecting the claim that CIA security officers were told to “stand down” and not try to rescue State Department personnel at the diplomatic compound under assault, and that the White House forced the CIA to alter talking points to delete references to a terrorist attack.

Investigators said the CIA had received 21 reports that the attack involved a protest. It wasn’t until a few days after the attack that the first CIA analysis began to challenge that version — even though President Obama, in a White House Rose Garden statement on Sept. 12, had referred to “acts of terror.”

It wasn’t until FBI reports from the ground on Sept. 22 that the CIA began to rethink, changing its judgement on Sept. 24.

“In fact, intelligence assessments continue to evolve to this day, and the investigations into the motivations of the individual attackers are still ongoing,” the investigators said.

They said part of the problem is there were two attacks — the initial one against the State Department compound and a follow-up attack against a nearby CIA annex.

But the investigators concluded that the CIA did make numerous edits to the talking points which ended up obscuring or changing what turned out to be correct conclusions.

The 2012 attacks and the political aftermath have been a major sticking point between the Obama administration and congressional Republicans. Earlier this year, the House GOP won creation of a special investigative committee to look into the events.

But the top Democrat on that committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, said Friday’s report should close the books on the CIA talking-points part of their inquiry.

“After an exhaustive bipartisan investigation that spanned nearly two years, the House intelligence committee now unanimously agrees that the CIA talking points reflected conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the attacks and that there is no evidence that the intelligence community shipped arms to Syria,” Mr. Cummings said in a statement.

“Based on these unanimous, bipartisan findings, there is no reason for the Benghazi Select Committee to reinvestigate these facts, repeat the work already done by our Republican and Democratic colleagues, and squander millions of additional taxpayer dollars in the process,” he said.

Related Story:

by Mike Masnic

So it seems rather interesting to note that Rogers’ wife, Kristi Clemens Rogers, was, until recently, the president and CEO of Aegis LLC a “security” defense contractor company, whom she helped to secure a $10 billion (with a b) contract with the State Department. The company describes itself as “a leading private security company, provides government and corporate clients with a full spectrum of intelligence-led, culturally-sensitive security solutions to operational and development challenges around the world.” Read more>

Share
Source: