People close to the case say the investigation has moved significantly in recent months. The initial charges are filed in a complaint in New York, according to the people briefed on the matter.
The Justice Department and the FBI declined to comment on the charges. The agencies prohibit commenting on matters that are under seal. It couldn’t be learned when the U.S. plans to announce the charges and whether there are any plans to try to detain Khattalah.
None of the sources would discuss the precise charges against Khattalah in the sealed complaint.
The probe is led by agents from the FBI in New York, and has included some members from the agency’s Washington field office who have traveled to Libya to interview hundreds of witnesses, those briefed on the investigation said. Source: CNN
Benghazi Attack: Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Kelly Ayotte Refute Obama’s ‘Act of Terror’ Claim
BENGHAZI ATTACK: The Benghazi attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, lives on another day. The Republicans, lead by Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte released a press release claiming President Obama didn’t actually call the attack an ‘act of terror.’ You say potato, I say po-tat-o. Here’s an excerpt for the three senators:
“During a press conference this afternoon, President Obama claimed that, ‘The day after [Benghazi] happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism.’ This statement contradicts his comments over the course of two weeks after the attack in which the President repeatedly and specifically refused, in the heat of his re-election campaign, to label Benghazi a terrorist attack, despite the fact that there was compelling evidence that it was an al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist attack.
“To be clear, on September 12th in the Rose Garden, President Obama made a generic reference to ‘acts of terror.’ But that same day he was specifically asked by Steve Kroft of CBS’ ‘60 Minutes’ if he believed Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and the President refused to say so, stating, ‘it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved.’ Six days later on ‘The Late Show with David Letterman,’ the President was asked what happened in Benghazi and responded by blaming the attack on an ‘extremely offensive video.’ Two days after that on Univision, the President said ‘we’re still doing an investigation,’ and blamed it in part on ‘the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video.’ Four days later on ‘The View,’ Joy Behar asked specifically if it was an act of terrorism, and the President again said ‘we’re still doing an investigation.’ The next day, in remarks to the United Nations in New York a full two weeks after the attack, President Obama still made no reference to Benghazi as an act of terrorism but blamed recent violence on ‘a crude and disgusting video [that] sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.’
It’s also interesting that Rep. Darrell Issa, House Oversight Chairman, suggested that President Obama sought to downplay the severity of the Benghazi attack by describing the murders of the four Americans as an “act of terror” rather than a “terrorist attack.” Um, I’m sorry, isn’t that the same thing? The Republicans are playing pin the tail on the donkey, only they can’t find the donkey. Unbelievable.
Watch Darrell Issa reason like a toddler:
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) told outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at a Senate hearing that if he were the president at the time of the Benghazi consulate attack, he would have fired her, adding that “I think it’s inexcusable.” He also said her stepping down indicates that she accepts “the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11.” Um, I am guessing the Newtown school massacre doesn’t count. How come he was so quiet when on Condoleezza Rice’s role in the mess in Iraq?
Hillary Clinton leaves behind an impressive 20-year history in Washington D.C. and I scarcely believe what happened in Benghazi, as unfortunate as it was, will derail any presidential aspirations she may have for 2016.
NBC News Reporter Robert Bazell Raises Questions Hillary Clinton Blood Clot May Not Be Related to Concussion
Despite an aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton releasing a statement saying she is hospitalized due to a blood clot stemming from a concussion, the questions continue to swirl. Why hasn’t a statement been released by the New York Presbyterian Hospital?
The top science reporter for NBC News raised questions Monday about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s hospitalization, raising the possibility the blood clot causing isn’t linked to an earlier concussion.“It’s not exactly clear what is happening with Secretary Clinton’s health,” NBC News chief science and health correspondent Robert Bazell said.
“All we have is a statement from her office. The hospital isn’t saying anything and the statement from her [office] says that she had this blood clot that stemmed from the concussion and she’s being treated with blood-thinning drugs,” Bazell continued. “The problem is that usually when blood clots come from concussions, they can’t be treated with blood [thinners.] So either it’s not really related to the concussion and she’s got a blood clot in her leg or something, or there’s something else going on that we’re not being told. And right now, we’re just sort of seeking that clarification and hoping for the best as she’s being observed.” Source: Politico
Independent Review Blames “Systemic Failures” & “Leadership Deficiencies” at State Dept for Benghazi Consulate Attack
BREAKING NEWS: So much for any presidential aspirations Hillary Clinton may be entertaining for 2016. An independent review of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that claimed the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, cites “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies” at high levels of the State Department.
New York Times: The investigation into the attacks on the diplomatic mission and the C.I.A. annex in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three others also faulted State Department officials in Washington for ignoring requests from officials at the American Embassy in Tripoli for more guards and safety upgrades to the mission.
The panel also blamed American intelligence officials for relying too much on specific warnings of imminent attacks, which they did not have in the case of Benghazi, rather than basing assessments more broadly on a deteriorating security environment. By this spring, Benghazi, a hotbed of militant activity in eastern Libya, had experienced a string of assassinations, an attack on a British envoy’s motorcade and the explosion of a bomb outside the American Mission.
Finally, the report also blamed two major State Department bureaus — Diplomatic Security and Near Eastern Affairs — for failing to coordinate and plan adequate security at the mission. The panel also determined that a number of officials had shown poor leadership.
“Systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus,” the report said, “resulted in special mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.”
Sen. John McCain, who attacked UN ambassador Susan Rice over her talking points in the aftermath of the U.S. consulate attack in Benghazi, now says she could win him over during confirmation hearings, if she is nominated to replace Hillary Clinton, by President Obama. Um, really? During an appearance on “Fox News Sunday” with Chris Wallace, he backtracked after his attacks on Rice were proven to be unfounded.
Host Chris Wallace then circled back, asking McCain if he was saying “she could conceivably get your vote for Secretary of State.”
“I think she deserves the ability and the opportunity to explain herself and her position,” McCain responded. “Just as she said. But, she’s not the problem. The problem is the president of the United States.” Source
The reality is that John McCain is losing credibility fast and it seems that he’s chewing on sour grapes over his loss to then-candidate Barack Obama in 2008. It’s amazing that he was quick to throw Susan Rice under a bus, but when there was clear evidence that the Bush Administration bungled the intelligence leading up to the September 11, 2001, terror attacks that claimed thousands of lives, we didn’t hear peep out of him on throwing Donald Rumsfeld or Condoleezza Rice under a bus.
Watch John McCain on Fox News Sunday:
The swift boating of Preisdent Obama has failed and Sen. John McCain, who seems to be leading the charge, is ending up with egg all over his face. The attempt to derail President Obama’s chances at reelection because of Benghazi has not succeeded:
Why would any agency or anybody in the administration do such a thing? It didn’t matter. Wingnuts can always find motives. There are still people who say Bill Clinton murdered Vince Foster. Whole books have been written about that one…
Benghazi has proven to be not dynamite, but a firecracker. The October surprise has not turned into a bombshell. Instead, it has bombed.
Sen. John McCain: Hillary Clinton Accepting “Responsibility” for Consulate Attack “Laudable Gesture”
Here’s a press release from the Republicans on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepting “responsibility” for the Benghazi attack. It is quite clear, from the tone of the press release that they have no intention whatsoever of going after Hillary Clinton. In fact, the senators lay the blame squarely at the feet of President Obama.
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) today released the following statement on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s comments this evening regarding the terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012:
“We have just learned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has claimed full responsibility for any failure to secure our people and our Consulate in Benghazi prior to the attack of September 11, 2012. This is a laudable gesture, especially when the White House is trying to avoid any responsibility whatsoever.
“However, we must remember that the events of September 11 were preceded by an escalating pattern of attacks this year in Benghazi, including a bomb that was thrown into our Consulate in April, another explosive device that was detonated outside of our Consulate in June, and an assassination attempt on the British Ambassador. If the President was truly not aware of this rising threat level in Benghazi, then we have lost confidence in his national security team, whose responsibility it is to keep the President informed. But if the President was aware of these earlier attacks in Benghazi prior to the events of September 11, 2012, then he bears full responsibility for any security failures that occurred. The security of Americans serving our nation everywhere in the world is ultimately the job of the Commander-in-Chief. The buck stops there.
“Furthermore, there is the separate issue of the insistence by members of the Administration, including the President himself, that the attack in Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video, long after it had become clear that the real cause was a terrorist attack. The President also bears responsibility for this portrayal of the attack, and we continue to believe that the American people deserve to know why the Administration acted as it did.”
At first I thought the US Benghazi consulate attack would be an incredibly huge black mark for the Obama administration until I realized the brazenness of the Republicans in rushing to make this a partisan issue, even though many who are pointing fingers, including Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) voted to cut funding to two State Department accounts, one of which dealt with security. The Republicans have never liked the State Department because they would prefer to engage in countless wars and not have diplomats intervene in trying to keep relations smooth across the globe, especially in trouble spots. You can see that quite clearly in Mitt Romney’s stance on Syria and Iran — war, war, war.
You know that “bold” vice presidential pick by Mitt Romney? Paul Ryan? Well, he factors into this equation as well. His budget proposal would “cut foreign affairs spending by 10 percent in 2013 and even more in 2016.” But that’s okay in their eyes because Mitt Romney has a plan to fix what ails this country on all fronts. Of course, I am being sarcastic.
New York Times: It doesn’t take a partisan to draw that conclusion. The ugly truth is that the same people who are accusing the administration of not providing sufficient security for the American consulate in Benghazi have voted to cut the State Department budget, which includes financing for diplomatic security. The most self-righteous critics don’t seem to get the hypocrisy, or maybe they do and figure that if they hurl enough doubts and complaints at the administration, they will deflect attention from their own poor judgments on the State Department’s needs.
At a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform last Wednesday, Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California and the committee’s chairman, talked of “examining security failures that led to the Benghazi tragedy.” He said lawmakers had an obligation to protect federal workers overseas. On Sunday, he said more should be spent on diplomatic security.
But as part of the Republican majority that has controlled the House the last two years, Mr. Issa joined in cutting nearly a half-billion dollars from the State Department’s two main security accounts. One covers things like security staffing, including local guards, armored vehicles and security technology; the other, embassy construction and upgrades. In 2011 and 2012, President Obama sought a total of $5 billion, and the House approved $4.5 billion. In 2009, Mr. Issa voted for an amendment that would have cut nearly 300 diplomatic security positions. And the draconian budgets proposed by Mitt Romney’s running mate, Representative Paul Ryan, would cut foreign affairs spending by 10 percent in 2013 and even more in 2016.
The hypocrisy of the GOP is nothing short of mind-boggling. They are on a mission to spin this to the Obama White House, who in turn, is trying to point fingers at the State Department. Well, seems to me that Hillary Clinton is right in saying that the investigation will uncover what really happened. Something tells me that this will come full circle back to the Republicans, the Tea Party darlings, who led the charge of slashing and slashing and slashing…..