House Committee: No Benghazi Scandal

No Benghazi ScandalThe House Select Committee on Intelligence, following almost a two-year intense investigation, unanimously determined there is no basis for what has become known as the Benghazi Scandal.

The Committee consists of 12 Republicans and 9 Democrats.

The pretend-scandal began September 11, 2012, when terrorists raided the U.S. consulate, and killed the ambassador and three others.

Although there was confusion, and the Obama administration didn’t have all the facts when it began to inform the American people about the events and the causes, there was no evidence of anything even remotely linked to a scandal. However, as expected, the blathering mouths of the Extreme Right Wing media pundits and politicians, and those who blindly parrot their “talking points” in bars, on front porches, and hunting lodges, kept caterwauling about scandal.

Among the findings of the House Committee, all of which conflict with the manufactured propaganda by the Extreme Right Wing:

  • There was no stand-down order given to any personnel–military or civilian–who tried to assist. This information is consistent with testimony provided to the House Armed Services Committee. In contrast, immediate response by the United States prevented additional injuries and deaths.
  • Although Intelligence agencies were warned about a possible threat, there was no advance knowledge of what was planned.
  • The Extreme Right Wing attacked Ambassador Susan Rice for her initial reports, possibly worried that President Obama would nominate her to replace Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was planning to leave the Administration after more than four years.
  • Although there was a lack of coordination between the intelligence community, the Department of Defense, and the White House, the Obama Administration did not deliberately mislead the American people. Committee Member Adam Schiff said evidence suggests, “The initial talking points provided by the Intelligence Community were flawed because of conflicting assessments, not an intention to deceive.” As new information became available, the Administration informed the people.
  • All activities by the CIA were legal and authorized.
  • There was no illegal activity or illegal arms trading that allowed any weapons provided by the U.S. to get into the hands of the terrorists.

Now, here is also what is known.

  • In contrast to Extreme Right Wing allegations that the Obama Administration has done nothing to find those who killed the four Americans, the person believed to have been the leader of the attacks, Ahmed Abu Khattalah, is in federal custody, awaiting trial. The United States has identified and is conducting operations to bring other terrorists to trial.
  • Ambassador Christopher Stevens five months before the attack had requested additional military security. However, his request was denied. The reason? The Republican-led obstructionist Congress had earlier refused to fund additional personnel and budget for embassy and consulate security.
  • walter braschDuring the George W. Bush administration, terrorists killed 60 personnel in 10 separate attacks at U.S. consulates and embassies. There were no outraged Republicans.
  • Within a week of the seventh anniversary of 9/11, terrorists killed 16 at the U.S. embassy in Yemen. Americans grieved but did not launch a barrage of lies and half-truths, nor try to politicize the deaths of the 60 Americans.
  • The Extreme Right Wing, apparently worried that Hillary Clinton would become the leading candidate for president, has willfully and maliciously attacked her leadership during this crisis, hoping to tarnish her reputation and reduce the possibility she will become the nation’s first female president.

Given the reality that a thorough investigation by a Republican-led House committee shows there is no scandal, you’d expect the rest of the House to drop its $3.3 million investigation that they increased for political purposes months before the November mid-term elections.

walter braschYou’d also expect Fox News empty heads who have been screeching “scandal!” almost 24/7 for two years to either admit they were wrong or to just shut up.

You’d expect that. But, you won’t get it in an atmosphere fueled by hate and prejudice.

Walter Brasch


  1. JoeWeinstein says

    Brasch is being evasive and selective here. For many folks, including me, the ‘Benghazi scandal’ was simply the apparent White House attempt at coverup – an attempt which failed, thanks to the disconnect between what various news media eventually learned as versus what Susan Rice kept telling with evidently with White House approval, for day after day. Her representations to the UN (hence technically not to ‘the American people’) were to the effect that Benghazi events were primarily and simply unplanned spontaneous reactions in outrage to a year-old amateur anti-Moslem video.

    Brasch takes pains to claim that, thanks to alleged motives by an alleged (but unidentified) ‘Extreme Right’, Rice’s statements were attacked. The attacks, and the alleged attackers and their alleged motives are all beside the point.

    The real Benghazi scandal was that the White House could readily have stopped or corrected the misleading message of Rice’ statements, but did not. Brasch excuses this behavior as owing to intelligence initially having several ‘conflicting assessments’. But one of those assessments (in fact the truth) was that the Benghazi events and deaths owed to deliberate Al Qaeda planning for the anniversary of 9/11, much like the 9/11/2008 disturbances in Cairo and elsewhere. Simply admitting that this assessment was a possibility would have been damaging to the Obama re-election campaign, in which a key claim (tacit or explicit) was that the death of bin Laden meant the end of Al Qaeda. So Rice and the White House delayed as long as possible allowing for the one ‘conflicting assessment’ that in fact was soon revealed by a variety of news media as the truth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *