Benghazi on the Record: Asked and Answered

Database Search Results:




Questions and Statements (207)

  • Sen. Rand PaulApril 12, 2015

    "[Hillary Clinton] didn’t provide the security—not just that day, for 9 months, dozens and dozens of requests for more security all completely ignored by Hillary Clinton."

    Source: CNN
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Sen. Rand PaulSept. 15, 2014

    "I asked her [Secretary Clinton] point blank when she came the last time: ‘what were they doing in the CIA annex and did that have anything to do with the attacks?’ And she acted as if she knew nothing about it. But it's funny, now reports have been coming out for about a year saying that she was the biggest and most eager to get arms out of Libya to send them into Syria."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzSept. 10, 2014

    "The president of the United States said they did everything they could possibly do to save the people in Benghazi. I still highly doubt that statement. ... You cannot name a single military asset that was ordered to go into Benghazi during those hours."

    Source: The Hill
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzSept. 10, 2014

    "Somebody in that food chain said ‘stand down.' ... It’s one of the myriad questions that continues to perpetuate the problem. If we can’t figure out that, then how will we make sure it never happens again?"

    Source: The Hill
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Louie GohmertSept. 5, 2014

    "They let those people die at Benghazi. They could have gotten planes there sooner. They could have gotten people there sooner. "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike PompeoSept. 5, 2014

    "Greta, I am confident that we will do precisely that kind of work. We will talk not only to all the folks who were on the ground that night but all of the leaders all of the conversations that were had. There might have been a good reason to delay it, it might have been safety of those very men that were standing there. It might have been a bad reason, there might have been something political. What we need to do is piece all of that together listen to all of the various versions of events. You know how that goes, Greta, in stressful times different people see and feel different things. We need to piece that mosaic together and then communicate that story to the American people. Thoroughly, completely and straight forward. … One of the things I think we will have to solve for, to get the facts about, is what was the reason for that, there might have been a good one. … All of those facts need to be asked of every single witness who was on the ground."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Ted YohoAug. 2, 2014

    "The attack on our diplomatic post in Libya was not sparked by a video. Though individuals attempted to dupe the American people into believing the mob was retaliating in response to the video, it was a terrorist attack, plain and simple. "

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. Rand PaulJuly 14, 2014

    "I'm concerned about the veracity of how she responded. For example, the New York Times about two weeks ago reported that the CIA has been involved with facilitating weapons to Syria for over a year. And it's also been reported I think in the New York Times as well that Hillary Clinton was the big cheerleader for arming Syria when there was two factions within the Obama Administration arguing this. Hillary Clinton was the one, you know, cheering them on to get weapons. She was the hard-liner that wanted to get involved in the war in Syria. And yet, in the hearing she says oh, she's never heard of this? I find that hard to believe. And after Clapper's coming to Congress and lying because he said it was classified, my question to Hillary Clinton is, did you lie to Congress simply because it was a classified program, or were you telling the truth? And I really kind of doubt the Secretary of State has no knowledge that the CIA is facilitating weapons to Syria."

    Source: Aaron Klein Radio
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaJune 10, 2014

    "She [Secretary Clinton] was the one that told the families what she knew by then to be a longstanding lie that it was a video. They were whispering in that ear as the bodies came back, still pushing a political inaccuracy that now clearly she had a hand in saying ‘I won’t say it, but you go get Ambassador Rice to say it. A woman who works for me.’"

    Source: Fox News Radio
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaJune 10, 2014

    "Our records show that Hillary Clinton was planning on making a permanent mission, in spite of the fact that every other Western country had pulled out of Benghazi— and the real proof of why this facility should not have been there. Whether Ambassador Stevens wanted it there or not."

    Source: Fox News Radio
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 30, 2014

    "That's just not acceptable when you got four people that were killed and they had two terrorist attacks before every other western flag had left, including the British who had an assassination attempt. How is it, Madam Secretary, that you allowed this to continue?"

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Lynn WestmorelandMay 24, 2014

    "All the international people had pulled out but us. … We wanted to make it look like we could maintain a normal relationship with that country. … We knew from all the intelligence that it wouldn't work. "

    Source: The Newnan Times-Herald
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Susan BrooksMay 23, 2014

    "We need to know if security at our embassy was adequate and why requests for additional security to protect more than 30 Americans at a key diplomatic post were denied."

    Source: The Indianapolis Star
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 12, 2014

    "Why was the State Department unwilling to provide the requested level of security to Benghazi in the summer of 2012?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 12, 2014

    "Did President Obama sleep the night of September 11, 2012? Did Secretary Clinton? When was President Obama told about the murder of our ambassador?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 12, 2014

    "Why was the State Department unwilling to provide the requested level of security to Benghazi in the summer of 2012?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 12, 2014

    "If the secretary of defense thought there was ‘no question’ this was a coordinated terrorist attack, why did Ambassador Susan Rice, Secretary Clinton, and President Obama all tell the American people that the cause was a “spontaneous demonstration” about an internet video?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 12, 2014

    "If the secretary of defense thought there was ‘no question’ this was a coordinated terrorist attack, why did Ambassador Susan Rice, Secretary Clinton, and President Obama all tell the American people that the cause was a “spontaneous demonstration” about an internet video? "

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 11, 2014

    "Why were we still in Benghazi? The British Ambassador was almost assassinated. Our facility was attacked twice. There were multiple episodes of violence. We were the last flag flying in Benghazi, and I would like to know why."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Michele BachmannMay 11, 2014

    "And then when the event occurred, there was no military rescue that was ordered. There's questions about that."

    Source: CNN
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Michele BachmannMay 11, 2014

    "And the big question in many people's minds is where did this false narrative come from to blame a video rather than the terrorist actions of Ansar al-Sharia, which were evident on the ground. "

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 11, 2014

    "[After] the episodes of violence in Libya … why we were the last flag flying? The British had already pulled out, the British ambassador had almost been assassinated, the International Red Cross was targeted. … I think it’s eminently fair to ask, why we were still in Benghazi?"

    Source: Politico
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerMay 11, 2014

    "You know, I think that there are probably three areas that the Committee will look at—the events leading up to 9/11, 2012, the requests—the number of requests for more security and why it was not provided…"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jim JordanMay 11, 2014

    "Rep. Jim Jordan—an Ohio Republican who will sit on the select committee and has previously had access to troves of Benghazi documents as well as private briefings from witnesses from his post on Oversight—said he still wants answers on why ‘repeated requests for additional security prior to Sept. 11, 2012’ went unanswered."

    Source: Politico
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerMay 11, 2014

    "The events of the night of September 11, 2012, what happened, why there was no response."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerMay 11, 2014

    "[W]hy did the White House describe this in a way I believe they knew was false? "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Tim HuelskampMay 9, 2014

    "[The American people] deserve to know . . . where the President and Secretary Clinton were at that time."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jim JordanMay 8, 2014

    "I would say there are three questions that need to be answered. The before: there were over 200 security incidences in Libya leading up to the attacks of September 11, 2012. There were repeated requests for additional security, those were denied. Why was that decision made"

    Source: The Daily Signal
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Ron DeSantisMay 8, 2014

    "She [Secretary Clinton] should tell us why he was in Benghazi, given the situation. Why were we, we had an American presence in Benghazi. We were the last flag flying."

    Source: The Hugh Hewitt Show
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 7, 2014

    "With respect to Mr. Morell, every change he made to the talking points, in my judgment, sanitized them, to go from the word terrorist to the word extremist, to go from the word attack to the word demonstration. And most significantly, take out any reference of the prior episodes of violence in Libya because -- and his own testimony was -- he didn't want to embarrass the State Department."

    Source: PBS
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 7, 2014

    "Every single change that Mike Morell made was calculated to cast the administration in a more favorable light. ... In a word, yes. I'm saying I don't believe him."

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 7, 2014

    "Why our administration missed episode of violence after episode of violence in Libya leading up to September 11, 2012, an attack on the British ambassador, an attack on the International Red Cross, an attack on our own facility, we’re the last flag flying in Benghazi on the night our four fellow citizens were murdered, I think it is eminently fair to ask why was that the case."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 7, 2014

    "And I would just ask Secretary Clinton, with all due respect, can you explain why we were still in Benghazi after everyone else had pulled out and after the British ambassador was almost assassinated and our compound was attacked twice?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 7, 2014

    "Why was security for our facility in Libya inadequate, and why were repeated calls for additional security unheeded and, indeed, explicitly rejected?"

    Source: USA Today
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jim JordanMay 6, 2014

    "There are lots of important questions like why was the security, additional security not provided when there were repeated requests for it before the attacks? 200 security incidences before the attacks on September 11, and yet when they asked for additional help they were denied it."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 6, 2014

    "Why was our security profile so low in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11? Why were our assets not positioned across the globe in such a way that we could respond to northern Africa in time?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 6, 2014

    "Where was the president? We know what he did minute by minute in the bin laden raid. When did he go to bed? We know now he never called anyone in Libya to get help for our people on the ground. To me he was virtually AWOL as commander-in-chief."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 6, 2014

    "If you ask me personally what’s number one to me, I would like to know why we, number one, were still in Benghazi when everyone else had pulled out."

    Source: PBS
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 6, 2014

    "[W]hy was our security footprint so light despite the repeated requests for more security?"

    Source: PBS
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 5, 2014

    "Well, Greta, your viewers would still have the same unanswered questions that we have, why our security profile was so low in Benghazi on the anniversary 9/11."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 5, 2014

    "Well, Greta, your viewers would still have the same unanswered questions that we have … why we didn't have any assets moving during the siege itself?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 4, 2014

    "It's a lie that the video caused the protest. The CIA said they never associated the video with the demonstration. Who told the White House that the video was the causal event here? Who told Susan Rice that the video caused the protest, when the CIA said they never said that? Where did the White House get this from?"

    Source: CBS News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 4, 2014

    "Numerous requests for security were denied in Washington, to the point that the head of security in Libya said he believed the Taliban were working in Washington."

    Source: CBS
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteMay 4, 2014

    "The CIA testified before the House Intel Committee, Director Morell, that in fact they did not put a causal connection between the attacks and the video. And in fact, when that was said, that's not in the talking points anyway. The video story clearly came from the White House. ... Six weeks before an election pushing a story about a spontaneous reaction to a video, which is what Ambassador Rice said on your show and other shows as a result of the attacks, as opposed to a coordinated terrorist attack is a very different narrative when you're trying to push that this was not a failure of broader -- a broader failure of foreign policy."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Paul GosarMay 2, 2014

    "Several unanswered questions remain, such as ... [w]hy was Susan Rice sent out to lie about the causes of the attack instead of Secretary Clinton?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Paul GosarMay 2, 2014

    "Several unanswered questions remain, such as 'What was the President doing while the consulate was under attack? Why did he not take action or issue any specific orders?'"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteMay 2, 2014

    "Over a year and a half has passed since the terrorist attacks, and the American people still do not have an accounting of your activities during the attack. Mr. President, can you now confirm that Mr. Vietor's account of your absence in the White House Situation Room is accurate?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Ted YohoMay 2, 2014

    "The attack on our diplomatic post in Libya was not sparked by a video. Though individuals attempted to dupe the American people into believing the mob was retaliating in response to the video, it was a terrorist attack, plain and simple."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Peter RoskamMay 2, 2014

    "Nearly two years later, no one has been held accountable for denying repeated requests for additional security at the facility or for the U.S. military's inability to promptly respond and attempt to rescue our personnel."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 2, 2014

    "Over a year and a half has passed since the terrorist attacks, and the American people still do not have an accounting of your activities during the attack. Mr. President, can you now confirm that Mr. Vietor's account of your absence in the White House Situation Room is accurate?"

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainMay 2, 2014

    "Over a year and a half has passed since the terrorist attacks, and the American people still do not have an accounting of your activities during the attack. Mr. President, can you now confirm that Mr. Vietor's account of your absence in the White House Situation Room is accurate?"

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 1, 2014

    "We didn't run to the sound of the guns. They were issuing press releases. We had Americans dying. We had dead people. We had wounded people. And our military didn't try to engage in that fight."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Lynn WestmorelandMay 1, 2014

    "You've got Ms. Rice going on all the Sunday news talk shows and you just had four Americans get killed in an attack on the temporary mission facility in Benghazi, you've had the CIA annex attack, and you think she's going to go in there and be asked a question about what went on in Egypt? ... Give me a break ... Benghazi was going to be the focus and that's the reason to me they gave her those talking points, so she could mislead the American people."

    Source: Newsmax
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Blake FarentholdMay 1, 2014

    "The U.S. intervention in Libya was constrained by White House's strict prohibition of boots on the ground. Do you think that limited boots on the ground and that policy might have been one of the driving forces in the fact that we didn't send a response there to Benghazi?"

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Eric CantorApril 30, 2014

    "It is increasingly clear that this Administration orchestrated an effort to deflect attention away from their failed Libya policy and the resurgence of al Qaeda and other terrorists. The emails provide additional evidence that senior officials knew the attack on our mission in Benghazi was a complex attack and not a spontaneous reaction to a YouTube video."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteApril 9, 2014

    "We do not know why repeated requests for additional security from Embassy Tripoli were ignored in Washington."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteApril 9, 2014

    "Outside of one call to the Israeli Prime Minister, we do not know what the President did or who else he was in contact with during the seven hours of the Benghazi attack."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainApril 9, 2014

    "We do not know why repeated requests for additional security from Embassy Tripoli were ignored in Washington."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainApril 9, 2014

    "Outside of one call to the Israeli Prime Minister, we do not know what the President did or who else he was in contact with during the seven hours of the Benghazi attack."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamApril 9, 2014

    "Outside of one call to the Israeli Prime Minister, we do not know what the President did or who else he was in contact with during the seven hours of the Benghazi attack."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamApril 9, 2014

    "We do not know why repeated requests for additional security from Embassy Tripoli were ignored in Washington."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyApril 3, 2014

    "Well, Mike Morell gave two explanations, both of which are patently absurd. Number one, he said that he didn't want to spawn more violence. You know, if we just apologize enough, particularly to countries that don't let women drive or don't let women vote or still have these oxymoronic things called "honor killings," if we just apologize enough under some version of the Stockholm syndrome they'll forgive us. The other absurd explanation was he said what other kind of extremists are there in Libya? There aren't Mormon extremists. There aren't Episcopalian extremists. The problem with that, Martha, is in their own documents they call it Islamic extremists. So they're willing to say it to each other but they won't tell the American people. Which leads to the third explanation, remember the narrative, Osama bin Laden is dead and al Qaeda is on the run, but we certainly can't admit, six weeks before an election, that al Qaeda is not on the run, they are at the front door of our facility in Benghazi, murdering our ambassador, and setting it on fire. "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Lynn WestmorelandApril 3, 2014

    "We were the only flag left flying in Benghazi. Everybody else had shut up -- shut down shop and left. "

    Source: Fox Business
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Michele BachmannApril 2, 2014

    "Mr. Morell, they didn't have to change [the talking points] because you made the changes for them. That's the point. That's why you're in front of this committee today. You made significant, substantive changes for the White House, whether it was on behalf we don't know, but we know you are the one who made those changes. ... I believe that the totality of the information was obfuscated and that there was an intentional misleading of the public."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike PompeoApril 2, 2014

    "I think there's a legitimate line of inquiry about why political actors were involved in putting out talking points to this committee that were requested not from the State Department, not from the White House, but from the Central Intelligence Agency. "

    Source: Hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Michele BachmannApril 2, 2014

    "The Obama Administration allowed its spokesman for the first time and the first public disclosure, five times on the Sunday morning shows, made a false narrative that a YouTube video was the reason that explained that there were protesters that we now know are apparitions never existed were there. This is a false narrative. That's why this is not a small issue, this is a big issue, Mr. Morell. "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike RogersApril 2, 2014

    "Let's also not forget the state department ignored ample warnings about the deteriorating threat environment in Libya and rejected requests for additional security support from officers on the ground in Benghazi. "

    Source: Hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Joseph HeckApril 2, 2014

    "I would put out that, you know, something like this probably wouldn't have happened and probably won't happen again if all the indicators were given their due attention; the hundreds of reports that were put out prior to the attack that clearly detailed the deteriorating security position within Benghazi, the two prior attacks on the temporary facility, the assassination attempt on the British Ambassador, the fact that the Brits pulled out of Benghazi, that in light of the fact that multiple requests were made to the Department of State for increased material and personnel, to increase their security posture, which were denied. "

    Source: Hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Peter KingApril 2, 2014

    "And yet as the chairman mentioned in his opening statement, you were sitting at the table along with the other intelligence officials when we were trying to find out who changed the talking points, what happened with those talking points. I don't think anyone on the committee had the faintest idea that you had anything to do with those talking points. And to me, and it wasn't until six months later, after all the questions being asked, after this inquiry had gone on as to who changed the talking points, six months later when the White House released the emails that we found out how directly involved you were. And quite frankly, I have to say that that was at best, it's misleading by omission what you did that day and continued to do afterwards, or at worst, lying by omission. "

    Source: Hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike RogersApril 1, 2014

    "Bill O'Reilly: So your opening question then tomorrow to Morell has to be, all of the reports, not some, all of the reports from the CIA, your own agency, Mr.Morell, from the ground in Libya said protests didn't have anything to do with it, however you put forth that they did. Right, opening question?

    Rep. Rogers: Well, it won't be the opening. ... This is that first open hearing with the highest official involved in the Benghazi event, and I think it's important to set the stage, but that question has to be answered. It absolutely has to be answered. "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Devin NunesFeb. 28, 2014

    "Anybody that has half of a brain knows that she just flat out lied. That’s without question."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamFeb. 25, 2014

    "Mike Morell lied about changing the talking points on two different occasions. To me, Senator McCain, and Ayotte -- he blamed the FBI."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyFeb. 24, 2014

    "So she can either tell the truth, or she can blame it on a video for which there is no evidence whatsoever. And she opted to protect her career and parrot the talking points that were provided her by the White House."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainFeb. 21, 2014

    "Morell told us that the FBI had done the talking points, the FBI quickly denied that. We still, still to this day have not been told who made the final changes to the talking points. I am convinced that it came from the White House."

    Source: Fox News Radio
    Related Question: Did CIA Deputy Director Morell alter the talking points for political reasons?
    Already Answered Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell has forcefully denied that he or anyone at the CIA altered the talking points for political reasons. According to the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee’s classified, bipartisan report corroborates this testimony and concludes that “the process used to develop the talking points was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.“ Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaFeb. 17, 2014

    "Why there was not one order given to turn on one Department of Defense asset? I have my suspicions, which is Secretary Clinton told Leon to stand down, and we all heard about the stand down order for two military personnel. That order is undeniable."

    Source: Republican Party of New Hampshire, Concord GOP Committee and Merrimack County GOP Committee
    Related Question: Did Secretary of State Clinton order Secretary of Defense Panetta to "stand down?"
    Already Answered None of the nine congressional and independent investigations identified any evidence to support this assertion. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham and other senior military officials directly refuted it, and the Washington Post Fact Checker gave it “Four Pinocchios”—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Learn more...
  • Rep. Michele BachmannFeb. 11, 2014

    "What happened that night? What did the President of the United States do? Why is it that the media has absolutely no curiosity when it comes to where the President of the United States was that evening when the battle ensued?"

    Source: Congressional Record
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jim JordanJan. 25, 2014

    "Yeah, she's [Secretary Clinton] the boss. ... This is not France, this is not Great Britain, where you can rely on a handful of your security and rely on a host country to provide additional security. It’s Libya for goodness sake, and they’re treating it like an embassy in Canada. They knew if there was an attack on the compound, the hired help were going to drop their weapons and run or worst case fire on the good guys. So they said they needed more help. Hillary Clinton denied that."

    Source: The Lima News
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Sen. Marco RubioJan. 15, 2014

    "I think what's clear is that even after they knew that this was linked to terrorist elements and people linked to terrorists, they still continued to say that it was an attack created by videos, as opposed -- and from the very beginning, that never made any sense. You don't bring shoulder-fired rockets, you don't bring the kind of armaments they had to a spontaneous protest."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. James LankfordJan. 15, 2014

    "Every other international facility in Benghazi closed in the previous year because of security risks. Their facility or personnel was attacked. They made the determination for one or two things: either increase security or pull out. They chose to pull out. We had the same option. But instead, we chose to stay and decrease our security."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. James LankfordJan. 15, 2014

    "The regional security officer and ambassador requested to keep the additional security on the ground. That request was denied in August of 2012, and in September of 2012, there was an attack on our facility. And we did not have the manpower to repel them. What was the reason for the decision to remove the existing security force from Libya and leave only a small security team there?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyJan. 6, 2014

    "I thought we had no business being in Benghazi. We were the last flag flying in Benghazi. So, to the extent that this New York Times article tells us what we already knew, we had no business being in Benghazi. But that begs a bigger question: Why were we there? Why was Chris Stevens in Benghazi that night?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyDec. 30, 2013

    "Early September of 2012 is when that video was translated into Arabic. What in the world explains the violence in Benghazi prior to the video being translated and released? Our consulate was attacked way before the video was released. The British ambassador was almost assassinated way before the video was released. The International Red Cross was attacked twice in Benghazi well before this video was ever released. So if the video is really the impetus for the violence, what in the world explains the violence prior to the release of the video?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaDec. 29, 2013

    "During the attack, eight and a half hours, we didn’t launch so much as one F-16."

    Source: NBC News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Devin NunesDec. 18, 2013

    "There clearly were stand down orders given to people not only in Benghazi but also in Tripoli and the State Department's counter-terrorism team, the FEST team, which is probably the worst of all."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Devin NunesDec. 18, 2013

    "There clearly were stand down orders given to people not only in Benghazi but also in Tripoli and the State Department's counter-terrorism team, the FEST team, which is probably the worst of all."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Frank WolfDec. 12, 2013

    "Have these or other weapons – transferred with alleged covert U.S. support – been used to kill innocent civilians, including Christians? Don’t the American people have a right to know if their tax dollars are being spent to supply Islamic extremists with weapons used to kill Christians and others in Syria? ... [T]he American people still aren’t being told the truth about the U.S. role in arming the Syrians and the role of the CIA base in Benghazi."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Lynn WestmorelandNov. 18, 2013

    "When we interviewed these guys, they said that they were really surprised at the lack of security at the mission facility. And they also testified that the people at the facility had been wanting help, requesting help, requesting additional security."

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzNov. 4, 2013

    " I'm telling you, there is more than one account of people being told that they cannot engage in the fight."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaOct. 31, 2013

    "According to a recent report, there may have been an attempt to delay the deployment of resources to assist our diplomats. If accurate, this is a troubling development meriting a full explanation by this Administration."

    Source: Joint Letter
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Edward RoyceOct. 31, 2013

    "According to a recent report, there may have been an attempt to delay the deployment of resources to assist our diplomats. If accurate, this is a troubling development meriting a full explanation by this Administration. "

    Source: Joint Letter
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyOct. 30, 2013

    "Do you know why no assets were deployed during the siege? And I've heard the explanation – which defies logic, frankly – that we couldn't have gotten there in time."

    Source: Press Conference
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyOct. 30, 2013

    "Do you know why we were the last flag flying in Benghazi, after the British had left and the Red Cross had been bombed?"

    Source: Press Conference
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyOct. 30, 2013

    "Do you know the origin of this mythology that it [the attack] was spawned as a spontaneous reaction to a video? Do you know where that started? Do you know how we got from no evidence of that to that being the official position of the administration?"

    Source: Press Conference
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainOct. 19, 2013

    "As Lieutenant Colonel Woods said, we were the last flag in Benghazi and it was inevitable, in his view, there was going to be an attack."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. John MicaSept. 19, 2013

    "There is no reason that we couldn't launch from at least three locations I visited and been told that we have in place people monitoring the situation, particular and specifically in Africa and North Africa."

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdySept. 19, 2013

    "[T]he President has to give an accounting at some point on whether or not he ever called our allies in the region and said, 'We're under attack, can you help?'"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Adam KinzingerSept. 18, 2013

    "But it is 1,049 miles away from Benghazi direct flight. Those are F–16s, by the way. They can kind of haul. Dallas to Washington, which you mentioned, I think is 1,330 miles away. So actually Aviano is closer. And there is something that we can do called a show of force in which a plane comes in, flies very low, and scatters an enemy. And I have always wondered why in 8 hours we couldn’t have made that happen."

    Source: Hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Christopher SmithSept. 18, 2013

    "Why was the CIA security team repeatedly ordered to stand down after the attack began, and who made that decision? "

    Source: Hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Paul GosarSept. 12, 2013

    "We were the last flag flying."

    Source: Breitbart
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdySept. 11, 2013

    "Even one year after the attacks, important questions remain … What assets, if any, were en route when the siege ended?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Frank WolfSept. 9, 2013

    "Is it possible that the President’s intelligence finding included an authorization for the weapons collected in Libya to be transferred to Syrian rebels? Was the CIA annex in Benghazi being used to facilitate these transfers? I believe there is now enough evidence suggesting this that it demands a clear explanation."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Frank WolfSept. 9, 2013

    "Most importantly, at any point in time were any of these collected weapons transferred to Syria and/or ever obtained by opposition fighters, including jihadist fighters?"

    Source: Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jeff DuncanSept. 4, 2013

    "He [Secretary of State John Kerry] didn't want to answer, and I tried to make the connection between Benghazi and Syria by asking whether weapons were being funneled from the rebels that we supplied them to in Libya to the rebels in Syria. ... He didn't answer that question."

    Source: Newsmax
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Susan CollinsAug. 20, 2013

    "In our bipartisan report, we found that the State Department downplayed the terrorist threat in Benghazi despite numerous attacks on Western targets, ignored repeated requests for additional security, and insufficiently fortified a woefully ill-protected American compound which should have been closed until either security was strengthened or the threat abated."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaAug. 9, 2013

    "[T]here were calls for help that were unheeded by any support from outside, including military personnel that were effectively told to stand down when they tried to be part of a relief mission."

    Source: The Hugh Hewitt Show
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaAug. 7, 2013

    "[Y]ou still have to say why weren’t there aircraft and capability headed toward them at flank speed? And the next time this happens, can we count on this President and the secretary to actually care about people in harm’s way as they’re being attacked by al Qaeda elements?"

    Source: The Hugh Hewitt Show
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Frank WolfJuly 25, 2013

    "A U.S. consulate is under attack. A U.S. Ambassador is missing. A State Department Diplomatic Security Agent is dead. Are the American people to believe the president is briefed only once that entire night, at 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time? Where was the president the rest of the night?"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Frank WolfJuly 22, 2013

    "Why was the CIA's security team repeatedly ordered to 'stand down' for more than 30 minutes after the attack began? Where did the order to stop the team from responding originate? Was it directed by the CIA or someone else in Washington? "

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Ted PoeJuly 10, 2013

    "There are many unanswered questions that remain. Why did the United States not take direct action to protect American interests and American citizens? Three Americans died. I've been told that American forces were within a few miles of the facility, ready to assist in the rescue, but were told to stand down."

    Source: Hearing of the Middle East and North Africa and Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade Subcommittees of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Tim HuelskampJune 19, 2013

    "Exactly where was the president and what was he doing during the Benghazi attack? Where was he? If Obama won't tell us, why don't we just send a subpoena to the telephone company? Thanks to the NSA, they know exactly where he was at on his iPhone that day!"

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteJune 12, 2013

    "On February 7th, you testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee. And you were asked a question by Senator Graham. And he asked you whether General Ham had issued a stand-down order to the military personnel in Tripoli or elsewhere who were preparing to go to assist those in Benghazi. Then we heard before the House Oversight Committee that Mr. Hicks, who was the former deputy chief of mission, said that Colonel Gibson, who was on the ground in Tripoli, did receive a stand-down order. And so, General Dempsey, I've not had an opportunity to follow-up with you based on the February 7th testimony. Mr. Hicks testified that he believed the stand-down order came from AFRICOM or Special Operations Command in Africa. General Dempsey, can you help me understand who issued the stand-down order and what happened there, why the special forces that wanted to go with, I understand it -- under Colonel Gibson in Tripoli -- were told not to go and who gave them that order from there? They wanted to go and help in Benghazi on that night. "

    Source: Hearing of the Senate Budget Committee
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Sen. Rand PaulJune 5, 2013

    "I can't imagine, one, that we would be keeping Ambassador Rice in any significant position, much less promoting her to an important position. How are they going to have the authority for people to believe what they're saying, when he's promoting someone who directly and deliberately misled the public over Benghazi?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Doug LambornJune 5, 2013

    "Ambassador Rice deliberately misled the public during a series of appearances on Sunday talk shows after the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya and continues to withhold critical information from Congress and the American people."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 28, 2013

    "We want to know how the story of Benghazi got so distorted. How Susan Rice came up with such a bizarre story disconnected with the facts? Why doesn’t the White House give us the September 12th memo from Beth Thomas [sic] [Jones] where she told everybody in the White House, in the State Department I just told the president of Libya this was an al Qaeda inspired affiliated group attack."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerMay 27, 2013

    "And what’s irritating to me to no end is that, for eight months, the administration refuses to tell the truth of ... why the rescuers weren't allowed to go in to help. ... I talked to a retired general. ... We had soldiers in Somalia fighting on the ground for 16 hours to try to recover two dead bodies, and yet we send no one to go in and help, and there are so many unanswered questions that the American people are demanding the truth, and so am I."

    Source: Politico
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerMay 27, 2013

    "According to Politico, “Boehner will even press to know the president’s location on the night of the attacks ... ‘I do think it matters,’ he said.”"

    Source: Politico
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 23, 2013

    "We do not know what the President did or who he was in contact with during the seven hours of the attack, and we do not know why the President did not reach out to Libyan President Magariaf during that period of time."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainMay 22, 2013

    "We do not know what the President did or who he was in contact with during the seven hours of the attack, and we do not know why the President did not reach out to Libyan President Magariaf during that period of time."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamMay 21, 2013

    "She not only regurgitated talking points that were completely false in terms of what the true facts were, she said the consulate was significantly and strongly secured. No one has suggested that. … She also suggested that al Qaeda leadership had been decimated. … I think both of those statements show a willingness on her part, seven weeks before the election, to sell a political narrative rather than the facts."

    Source: Huffington Post
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 21, 2013

    "And it is embarrassing that you can’t get a plane over there and do a low flyover and drop a sonic boom. It is embarrassing."

    Source: Hearing of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Lynn WestmorelandMay 20, 2013

    "First it was revealed that the White House lied to the American people about who was behind the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi and then lied about their lie – claiming they had nothing to do with the inaccurate talking points used by then-UN Ambassador Susan Rice on Sunday morning talk shows when they did."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Michael TurnerMay 13, 2013

    "Well, what we know is that Susan Rice created this fiction. And Susan Rice went on national television and made statements that had no basis in truth."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainMay 12, 2013

    "And over a seven and a half hour period, with all the assets we have in the region, we couldn’t have an F-16 at low altitude fly over those people who were attacking our consulate?"

    Source: ABC News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Adam KinzingerMay 12, 2013

    "And the administration says, well, we had seven hours, we couldn’t have made it in time. And, to me, that’s irrelevant. What matters is you didn’t know when the second attack was coming. Why did you not pull out all the stops to get some assets in place to save these four men or any future attack that could be happening?"

    Source: NBC News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike PompeoMay 11, 2013

    "The talking points are important. … The changes that were made to those emails weren’t aesthetic, they weren’t cursory, they removed any reference to Ansar al-Sharia and extremism, and began to help shape the narrative about this video, which the Administration knew, the Intelligence Collection community knew immediately, that there this wasn’t about a video, this was radical extremism that took down this facility in Benghazi. … We know that the political actors in the process removed the information that the intelligence collection people on the ground knew."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. James InhofeMay 10, 2013

    "They knew that it was a cover-up at that time, the time that it happened. … To send Susan Rice out to lie to the American people is one thing that's going to go down in history, that's never going to be forgotten."

    Source: Politico
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Marco RubioMay 10, 2013

    "In essence, there are now witnesses saying that they were ready to go in and help at least prevent the second wave of attacks, but they were told to stand down. So either they didn’t have the people available, which is a dereliction of duty, or, and an irresponsible thing to do, or they did have the people, but they decided not to send them."

    Source: The Hugh Hewitt Show
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Steve StockmanMay 10, 2013

    "President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Susan Rice blatantly lied to the American people repeatedly in order to protect the Democrat Party in the midst of campaign season."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jim JordanMay 10, 2013

    "Charlene Lamb testified at the October 12th hearing, the hearing the Oversight Committee had last -- last year. She testified this was not about resources, this was -- the fact that Eric Nordstrom repeatedly asked for additional security personnel to be in Libya was not only denied additional help, but they had -- what they had was -- was reduced, had nothing to do with resources, according to Charlene Lamb's testimony in front of the committee last October."

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 9, 2013

    "And then, you know, we were also told that the military did everything they could. Yet, we heard testimony -- firsthand testimony -- that we had four Special Forces ready to go in Tripoli to go to Benghazi and they were told to stand down."

    Source: PBS
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainMay 8, 2013

    "[T]here are a number of questions still unanswered, like, why couldn't we get a – at least an F-16 to fly over at low altitude while this attack was going on? Believe me, that scares people."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Adam KinzingerMay 8, 2013

    "If you look at Italy, one thousand – I think – forty-six miles away is Aviano Air Base from Benghazi. All you had to do was send F-16s from Aviano to Benghazi and they can do something called a show of force, it's basically a low fly over, and it's done all the time in Iraq and Afghanistan to stop attacks from happening. We could have done that and for some reason we didn't."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 8, 2013

    "Mr. Chairman, I think one of the unanswered questions here is, if it’s a possibility, if there’s any chance that we could get military overflight, if we could get a military flight there, then we would ask permission in advance. My concern is there was never an intention, there was never an attempt to actually get these military aircraft over there. ... It is stunning that our government, the power of the United States of America, couldn’t get a tanker in the air."

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jim JordanMay 8, 2013

    "I think it was established without any doubt that Ambassador Rice misled the American people on the Sunday shows. Without a doubt she went out and told a different story than the facts show."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteMay 8, 2013

    "Even more troubling is the fact that they asked for permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops to Benghazi the next morning, and they were told to stand down."

    Source: The Hugh Hewitt Show
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Ron DeSantisMay 8, 2013

    "Even though you thought air support was needed, there was no air support sent? … So no AC-130 gun ships, no fighter planes, right?"

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Michael McCaulMay 8, 2013

    "As you showed that clip, the administration was notified in March and May, requests for additional security; on August 16th a classified cable after an emergency meeting for additional security. Those requests were denied. ... And so it creates a picture of either gross negligence or something very odd to me in terms of why was security denied at so many points when the warnings, a cry for help from the ambassador was put out there and yet nothing was done."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 8, 2013

    "So the military is told to stand down, not engage in the fight. These are the kind of people willing to engage. What did — where did that message come down, where did the stand-down order come from?"

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Michael TurnerMay 8, 2013

    "Mr. Hicks, I'm a member of the House Armed Services Committee, and I'm very fascinated with the stand-down order to Colonel Gibson. As we pursue that, we want to know who gave Colonel Gibson the order and why. And so we want -- I would like to review that stand-down order with you and what your experienced that night since you were with him as he was receiving that stand-down order."

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Michael McCaulMay 8, 2013

    "I think my biggest concern -- that I've heard recently -- are the revelations that the Special Forces may have been told to stand down at the time of the attack and even beforehand, which could have prevented the death of the ambassador and the other individuals."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Ron DeSantisMay 8, 2013

    "Even though you believed help was needed, there was a SOF unit, Special Operations unit ordered to stand down, correct?"

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainMay 8, 2013

    "It's pretty clear what we knew from the beginning, that this was not a spontaneous attack sparked by hateful video. And I was on one of the Sunday morning shows following Susan Rice. And they said, what do you think? I said, you don't bring mortars and rocket-propelled grenades to spontaneous demonstrations."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 8, 2013

    "Most notably, Ambassador Stevens sent a cable to the State Department on August 15, 2012, expressly requesting additional security because the Benghazi consulate could not withstand a coordinated attack. The requests were denied, but Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, observed in congressional testimony that Defense could have provided all the needed security if State had requested it."

    Source: National Review Online
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 8, 2013

    "[W]hy in the world would Susan Rice go on five Sunday talk shows and perpetuate a demonstrably false narrative?"

    Source: Hearing of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Ted CruzMay 8, 2013

    "While the president was missing in action, there was confusion among the relevant cabinet officers as to who was in charge of coordinating the response from Washington."

    Source: National Review Online
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 7, 2013

    "Early on in this fight these people made a critical bad decision in that they did not activate these people simply because they were afraid it would be labeled as terrorism. It was pure politics."

    Source: USA Today
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 7, 2013

    "[M]ilitary personnel were ready willing and able, and within proximity, but the Pentagon told them they had no authority and to stand down."

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyMay 7, 2013

    "And we know we were lied to. I think I can prove tomorrow that it was an intentional misrepresentation by Susan Rice and others."

    Source: The Hugh Hewitt Show
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 6, 2013

    "[T]hat's as sickening and depressing and disgusting as anything I have seen. That is not the American way. We had people that were getting killed, we had people who are willing to risk their lives to go save them and somebody told them to stand down."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 6, 2013

    "And I think what we're going to find is there were military assets; there was military personnel. They were told to stand down."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzMay 5, 2013

    "I think you’re actually going to hear some testimony that says we did have some military options. We could have gotten some people there, and they were told to stand down."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaMay 5, 2013

    "[The Accountability Review Board] left us with more questions than answers and certainly it doesn't give the most key answer that I think we all want is, if we knew it was terrorism, if the President said, at least in his debates, that in the Rose Garden, he called it an act of terrorism, then why is it they denied terrorism essentially rebuking the President of Libya on your show a few days later."

    Source: CBS News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Lynn WestmorelandApril 29, 2013

    "[A]n April 19, 2012 cable acknowledged requests for additional security, but instead ordered the withdrawal of security assets. This cable was signed by then-Secretary of State Hilary [sic] Clinton. … [I]t was then-Secretary of State Hilary Clinton who denied the requested and much-needed additional security to our representatives in Libya."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyApril 29, 2013

    "[T]here were repeated requests from the ambassador himself for additional security."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyApril 29, 2013

    "The decision, I can tell you this, the decision to not augment security went to the highest levels of the State Department. Now, whether or not Secretary Clinton had actual or constructive knowledge of it, I can’t prove yet. I can prove this to you though: she should have. She's the head of the State Department. "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyApril 29, 2013

    "[W]e all now know now that what Susan Rice said was demonstrably false. There’s not a person left in the Western Hemisphere that believes what she said was accurate. The question is whether she was just grossly negligent, or whether it was an intentional misleading, and secondarily, there remains the prospect that this administration’s decision to blame it on a video may have actually impacted negatively our ability to get answers in the aftermath."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaApril 24, 2013

    "The Secretary of State was just wrong. She said she did not participate in this, and yet only a few months before the attack she outright denied security in her signature in a cable April 2012."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike RogersApril 24, 2013

    "The report highlights that the Administration continuously denied requests for additional security prior to the attacks, then attempted to hide responsibility for those decisions."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerApril 24, 2013

    "According to the progress report released yesterday, this cable shows that Secretary Clinton acknowledged a request for additional security but still 'ordered the withdrawal of security elements to proceed' from Benghazi."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Bob GoodlatteApril 24, 2013

    "Many questions remain surrounding the failure to respond to repeated requests for additional security in Libya."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Howard McKeonApril 23, 2013

    "Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. … [I]n a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi. … In addition, the April 2012 cable from Secretary Clinton recommended that the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the U.S. Mission in Libya conduct a 'joint reassessment of the number of DS agents requested for Benghazi.' … Despite the Ambassador’s March request, the April cable from Clinton stipulates that the plan to drawdown security assets will proceed as planned."

    Source: “Five Chairmen” Staff Report to House Republican Conference
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike RogersApril 23, 2013

    "Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. … [I]n a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi. … In addition, the April 2012 cable from Secretary Clinton recommended that the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the U.S. Mission in Libya conduct a 'joint reassessment of the number of DS agents requested for Benghazi.' … Despite the Ambassador’s March request, the April cable from Clinton stipulates that the plan to drawdown security assets will proceed as planned."

    Source: “Five Chairmen” Staff Report to House Republican Conference
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Edward RoyceApril 23, 2013

    "Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. … [I]n a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi. … In addition, the April 2012 cable from Secretary Clinton recommended that the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the U.S. Mission in Libya conduct a 'joint reassessment of the number of DS agents requested for Benghazi.' … Despite the Ambassador’s March request, the April cable from Clinton stipulates that the plan to drawdown security assets will proceed as planned."

    Source: “Five Chairmen” Staff Report to House Republican Conference
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Bob GoodlatteApril 23, 2013

    "Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. … [I]n a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi. … In addition, the April 2012 cable from Secretary Clinton recommended that the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the U.S. Mission in Libya conduct a 'joint reassessment of the number of DS agents requested for Benghazi.' … Despite the Ambassador’s March request, the April cable from Clinton stipulates that the plan to drawdown security assets will proceed as planned."

    Source: “Five Chairmen” Staff Report to House Republican Conference
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaApril 23, 2013

    "Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. … [I]n a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi. … In addition, the April 2012 cable from Secretary Clinton recommended that the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the U.S. Mission in Libya conduct a 'joint reassessment of the number of DS agents requested for Benghazi.' … Despite the Ambassador’s March request, the April cable from Clinton stipulates that the plan to drawdown security assets will proceed as planned."

    Source: “Five Chairmen” Staff Report to House Republican Conference
    Related Question: Did Secretary Clinton personally authorize cables that reduced State Department security?
    Already Answered The suggestion that Secretary Clinton personally signed a State Department cable denying security requests prior to the attacks was awarded “Four Pinocchios” by the Washington Post Fact Checker—its highest rating for inaccurate statements—on two separate occasions. Instead, the cable at issue included a pro forma stamp with the Secretary of State’s name, similar to millions of other Department cables. Learn more...
  • Rep. Bob GoodlatteApril 23, 2013

    "Key issues in this investigation are ... who denied requests for additional security to U.S. personnel on the ground in Benghazi."

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike RogersApril 23, 2013

    "Key issues in this investigation are ... who denied requests for additional security to U.S. personnel on the ground in Benghazi."

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Howard McKeonApril 23, 2013

    "Key issues in this investigation are ... who denied requests for additional security to U.S. personnel on the ground in Benghazi."

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Edward RoyceApril 23, 2013

    "Key issues in this investigation are ... who denied requests for additional security to U.S. personnel on the ground in Benghazi."

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaApril 23, 2013

    "Key issues in this investigation are ... who denied requests for additional security to U.S. personnel on the ground in Benghazi."

    Source: Joint Letter to President Obama
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mo BrooksApril 21, 2013

    "You mentioned earlier in your testimony that the Administration has testified 8 times, given 20 briefings, and provided 25,000 pages of documents about Benghazi, yet the American people still do not know why Ambassador Susan Rice, during a heated presidential race, made so many false statements to the American people about what happened in Benghazi."

    Source: Hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Rand PaulApril 21, 2013

    "With regard to Benghazi, I think it’s important because it may have something to do with why the compound was attacked if we were involved with shipping guns to Turkey. There was a report that a ship left from Libya towards Turkey and that there were arms on it in the week preceding this. There were reports that our Ambassador was meeting with the Turkish Attaché. So, I think with regards to figuring out what happened at Benghazi, it’s very important to know whether or not the CIA annex had anything to do with facilitating guns being sent to Turkey and ultimately to Syria."

    Source: Aaron Klein Radio
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Michele BachmannMarch 16, 2013

    "War was raging in Benghazi for hours, and all we know is that our president went AWOL. While cries from American diplomats and soldiers went unanswered, no one knows yet today where the president was."

    Source: CPAC Speech
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteFeb. 7, 2013

    "I guess it’s not clear to me why would—you said in your testimony that we were on heightened alert on September 11—why it would take over 20 hours. We know that flight time for an F–16 is not, certainly not 20 hours, even if we were to refuel from Aviano. Given the deteriorating security situation that you’ve described, it really is—I don’t understand why we didn’t have armed assets somewhere in the area that could have responded in time at least for the second attack on the annex. That’s not clear to me, and I think that is insufficient as we look at what happened here."

    Source: Hearing of the Senate Committee on Armed Services
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamFeb. 7, 2013

    "Did General Ham on that night every order -- every -- ever suggest that a military asset -- did he order a military asset in motion and someone told him to stand down?"

    Source: Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon order four military personnel in Tripoli to “stand down?”
    Already Answered Multiple bipartisan investigations have determined that no “stand down” order was issued to military personnel in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. U.S. military officials throughout the chain of command report that an order was issued “to remain in place” in Tripoli to provide security and medical assistance, which saved the lives of wounded evacuees. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamFeb. 7, 2013

    "We didn't deploy any forces."

    Source: Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Sen. Mike LeeFeb. 7, 2013

    "Secretary Panetta, a few minutes ago you indicated that we didn't have boots on the ground. We didn't deploy forces because the attack came to an end. But as Senator Graham pointed out, this is an attack that lasted nearly eight hours from start to finish. So at some point there had to have been a decision made not to deploy them. At what point in that time frame was it made? Or was it not made until after the attack had ended nearly eight hours after it began? ... So the immediate attack was perhaps not visibly underway, but you weren't certain that there wouldn't be more fighting? ... So was that decision revisited hours later when in the early hours in the morning, Benghazi time, another pretty considerable attack came about? ... Did they get to Tripoli? ... And why didn't they move forward to Benghazi?"

    Source: Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy military assets that could have saved lives on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered Interviews with nine military officials in the chain of command, numerous congressional reports, and the independent Accountability Review Board have all examined the military response. Each investigation has concluded that although the military allocated and mobilized various assets to address the crisis, their response was limited by the availability of resources and the status of forces on the night of the attacks. Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaJan. 28, 2013

    "The [Accountability Review Board] report also did not address the reasons why Under Secretary Patrick F. Kennedy apparently withdrew the Security Support Team from Libya, despite multiple warnings from Ambassador Christopher Stevens of a deteriorating security situation. This was a key decision that detrimentally affected the security posture of U.S. diplomats in Libya prior to the attack."

    Source: Joint Letter to Secretary of State Clinton
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzJan. 28, 2013

    "The [Accountability Review Board] report also did not address the reasons why Under Secretary Patrick F. Kennedy apparently withdrew the Security Support Team from Libya, despite multiple warnings from Ambassador Christopher Stevens of a deteriorating security situation. This was a key decision that detrimentally affected the security posture of U.S. diplomats in Libya prior to the attack."

    Source: Joint Letter to Secretary of State Clinton
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Edward RoyceJan. 28, 2013

    "The [Accountability Review Board] report also did not address the reasons why Under Secretary Patrick F. Kennedy apparently withdrew the Security Support Team from Libya, despite multiple warnings from Ambassador Christopher Stevens of a deteriorating security situation. This was a key decision that detrimentally affected the security posture of U.S. diplomats in Libya prior to the attack."

    Source: Joint Letter to Secretary of State Clinton
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteJan. 24, 2013

    "It seems like there needs to be a tripwire, that making sure that requests for security, particularly where we just come out of a war zone in Libya, go up the chain of command, that did not happen here. And I think that’s very important. To be clear, I would think that you would want to be more focused on the actual security requests."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jeff DuncanJan. 24, 2013

    "If you [Secretary Clinton] were clear eyed, why did your department reject the request on 7 June for 16 additional security agents? The site security team that would have been funded by the DOD not Department of State expenditure."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Rep. Adam KinzingerJan. 23, 2013

    "Aviano Air Base is 1,044 miles from Benghazi. Aviano Air Base is an F-16 base. Airplanes could have been put in the air after being fueled, even if they didn’t have missiles on them, and there can be nonviolent things that F-16s can do to disperse crowds that I know of well. "

    Source: Hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
    Related Question: Did the Pentagon fail to deploy F-16s that would have saved lives?
    Already Answered The House Armed Services Committee, the independent Accountability Review Board, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that no F-16s or other strike aircraft could have responded in time to save lives. AFRICOM Commander General Carter Ham, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and other military experts all explained that F-16s were not the appropriate military response given the posture of the forces and the risks involved. Learn more...
  • Sen. Rand PaulJan. 23, 2013

    "It's been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons. And what I would like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries? Any countries, Turkey included?"

    Source: Hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
    Related Question: Did the U.S. engage in illegal gunrunning from Libya to arm rebels in Syria?
    Already Answered Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence determined that the United States did not use the mission in Benghazi to facilitate illegal arms transfers to Syria. The Committee’s bipartisan report "found no evidence that the CIA conducted unauthorized activities in Benghazi and no evidence that the IC shipped arms to Syria.” Learn more...
  • Rep. John BoehnerJan. 23, 2013

    "And the fact that they denied these legitimate requests for additional security in Libya."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was security in Benghazi inadequate despite repeated requests?
    Already Answered The Independent Accountability Review Board concluded that the Special Mission in Benghazi had inadequate security because of “[s]ystemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department.” The Board found several factors that led to support gaps, including a misplaced reliance on local security forces, short-term staffing challenges, and the temporary nature of the facility. Multiple Congressional investigations have confirmed these findings. Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteDec. 12, 2012

    "And in fact, you know, the description from Eric Nordstrom of the United States being the last flag standing. That's just mostly the public piece we know about all this. That the indicators were all there. And when you think about what led up to this, the fact that the British had left, the fact that the Red Cross had left, the fact that we had had prior attacks on our consulate, these are very important questions."

    Source: American Enterprise Institute
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Sen. John BarrassoNov. 28, 2012

    "I think that she misled the American people five days after a terrorist attack. It happened, killed four brave Americans, and really either didn't know, which she should have known, failed to ask the questions that she should have been asking or it was intentional to mislead the American people."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainNov. 27, 2012

    "It is clear that the information that she gave the American people was incorrect when she said that it was a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video. It was not, and there was compelling evidence at the time that that was certainly not the case, including statements by Libyans as well as other Americans who are fully aware that people don't bring mortars and rocket-propelled grenades to spontaneous demonstrations."

    Source: C-SPAN
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamNov. 27, 2012

    "I'm very disappointed in our intelligence community. I think they failed in many ways. But with a little bit of inquiry and curiosity, I think it would be pretty clear that to explain this episode as related to a video that created a mob that turned into a riot was far afield."

    Source: C-SPAN
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Jeff DuncanNov. 26, 2012

    "I think Susan Rice is tainted. She rolled out on five Sunday talk shows with the message of the Administration that this was a response to a violent, a violent response to a video and nothing was further from the truth. We know it was an act of terror."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyNov. 19, 2012

    "[The White House] knew before anyone else knew that it was terrorism. Why would the Department of State, why would the CIA, why would Department of Defense lie to the chief executive; lie to the Commander in Chief? They knew exactly what it was, Governor, but it doesn’t fit the narrative. … Of course they knew, and of course they scrubbed out that information, so Susan Rice either didn't have it or didn't use it when she went on the television talk shows on Sunday."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Dana RohrabacherNov. 15, 2012

    "That was a lie. They knew it was a lie when they said it. When they sent out Ambassador Rice to all the talk shows, they knew that was not the truth. When you tell something that's not the truth to the American people, especially in the middle of a crisis, they shouldn't expect to get away with it and be forgiven."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...
  • Rep. Dana RohrabacherNov. 15, 2012

    "Yet for six days after that, they were telling the American people that this was movie rage, this was a crowd getting out of control in order -- and then they murdered our ambassador, rather than al Qaeda. ...

    The president himself was at the United Nations talking about movie rage. People throughout the administration were talking about movie rage when they knew damn well, or at least the White House and the CIA knew damn well, that this was an al Qaeda attack."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. Mike KellyNov. 15, 2012

    "Everybody saw it coming. When the International Red Cross is targeted and attacked, when the Brits pull out and we are the last flag flying and we are saying we are surprised this happened because we had really normalized relations there; we even took their airplane away from them because it was so safe."

    Source: Hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Trey GowdyNov. 2, 2012

    "The President is in charge, he’s the Commander-in-Chief, he’s not the meteorologist-in-chief, he’s the Commander-in-Chief, and he said ‘the minute I learned of this attack,’ which presumes to me that it was while it was on going cause it lasted for six hours, ‘the minute I learned of it, I issued a directive to secure our personnel.’ What assets did he put in the air? What troops did he send into Benghazi to secure our personnel? What did he do?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Where was the President and what did he do on the night of the attacks?
    Already Answered The President was in the White House in Washington D.C. on the night of the attacks. Senior officials, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have testified that they personally informed the President about the attacks, and the President immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets to protect American lives. Military leaders report that the President was “well informed” and his staff was “in constant touch” with the Pentagon, which “is the way it would normally work.” Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainOct. 31, 2012

    "[T]here's information that the CIA people were ordered to stand down three times and then afterwards, of course. "

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Rep. Tim HuelskampOct. 28, 2012

    " We learned from an exclusive news story that the CIA chain of command denied military back-up to the CIA annex during the attack and that CIA operators were instructed to stand down instead of helping the personnel at our facility."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Was the CIA security team improperly prevented from departing for the Benghazi diplomatic compound?
    Already Answered The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed not only the CIA security team members on the ground that night, but also their supervisors. Republicans and Democrats agreed that although "some security officers voiced a greater urgency to depart for the TMF," "the Annex team left in a timely and appropriate manner" after "Annex leadership deliberated thoughtfully, reasonably, and quickly about whether further security could be provided to the team." Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamOct. 19, 2012

    "Lieutenant Colonel Woods’ testimony comes back and it kind of haunts my soul. He said Benghazi; it was inevitable we would get attacked. Almost inevitable. We were the last flag flying. Everybody left there. And we're trying to normalize relationships with the government that has no capacity."

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzOct. 19, 2012

    "I look at what the Vice President said, what the President has said, what the Ambassador Rice has said, what Secretary Clinton said, they have not been honest with the American people. The intelligence community was foreshadowing for months that terrorism was abound, terrorism was happening. They attacked our compound twice. The Brits had to get up and leave. There were hundreds of terrorist incidents. Al Qaeda was flying flags above buildings, government buildings there in Eastern Libya. And then they come out after this attack and say, 'we think it was a video'?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. John McCainOct. 18, 2012

    "And as Lieutenant Colonel Wood said, we were going to be the last flag standing in Benghazi, and he said the attack was, quote, 'inevitable.'"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Paul RyanOct. 17, 2012

    "What's troubling about this Benghazi attack is that it took two weeks for the administration to get their story straight, is that what we now know is that there wasn't even a mob present. This wasn't a reaction to a YouTube video. It took two weeks for the president to acknowledge this. He still went to the U.N. and mentioned the YouTube video six times. The administration sent their U.N. Ambassador to the Sunday talk shows to suggest that this was the result of a spontaneous mob."

    Source: ABC News
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Sen. Lindsey GrahamOct. 17, 2012

    "And I want to know, Mr. President, were you doing your job? Were you following the deteriorating situation in Benghazi? Did you know that the Libyan consulate in Benghazi, the last flag standing, was a death trap for Americans? And if you didn't, why?"

    Source: Fox News
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Sen. Kelly AyotteOct. 16, 2012

    "Let's look at all the changing stories here of what the American people have been told about this event. It was certainly the Administration that sent Susan Rice on every Sunday talk show -- every major station -- to say this was a spontaneous reaction to a video. Seven days after this event, the president himself went on "David Letterman" and still stuck to that saying it was a reaction to the video."

    Source: MSNBC
    Related Question: What is the origin of the idea that a video motivated the attacks?
    Already Answered The attacks in Benghazi occurred in the context of dozens of protests against U.S. facilities around the world in response to an inflammatory film. There was significant uncertainty about the motivation for the Benghazi attacks, but press reports, public statements by the purported attackers, and intelligence reports indicated that some attackers in Benghazi may have been inspired by the video or by violent protests elsewhere earlier that day. Learn more...
  • Rep. James LankfordOct. 10, 2012

    "The American Red Cross had already pulled out because of multiple terrorist attacks in Benghazi. The United Kingdom had already pulled out their facility from Benghazi. But we still sat there with this smaller force that was well below what was requested by the security personnel on the ground."

    Source: Congressional Website
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Darrell IssaOct. 2, 2012

    "Once the ICRC pulled out, the US Consulate was the last Western flag flying in Benghazi, making it an ideal target for militants."

    Source: Joint Letter
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Jason ChaffetzOct. 2, 2012

    "Once the ICRC pulled out, the US Consulate was the last Western flag flying in Benghazi, making it an ideal target for militants."

    Source: Joint Letter
    Related Question: Why was the U.S. the “last flag flying” in Benghazi?
    Already Answered The bipartisan report adopted by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that the U.S. was not the “last flag flying” in Benghazi. The U.S. presence—alongside the United Nations and the European Union—reflected Ambassador Stevens’ view that Benghazi was “critically important,” and he received significant deference as “one of, if not the premier expert” on Libyan matters, according to his colleagues. PolitiFact rated this claim as “False.” Learn more...
  • Rep. Peter KingSept. 28, 2012

    "I believe that this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership. Such a misstatement of the facts as were known at the time. And for her to go on all of those shows, and to in effect be our spokesman for the world, and be misinforming the American people and our allies and countries around the world, to me, somebody has to pay the price for this. … whether it was intentionally or unintentionally, to show the significance of that, I believe she should resign."

    Source: CNN News
    Related Question: Did Ambassador Rice intentionally misrepresent the facts on Sunday talk shows after the attacks?
    Already Answered Bipartisan investigations have identified conflicting intelligence, in the hours and days after the attacks including questions about whether there was a demonstration, who carried out the attacks, and what motivated the attackers. Because of this lack of clarity, the Intelligence Community provided an inaccurate intelligence assessment to Ambassador Rice and to Congress. Ambassador Rice repeatedly cautioned that her information was preliminary. Learn more...