House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested last week that Congress’ current investigation into the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, is a political move against Hillary Clinton, and she was quick to jump on the Republican’s gaffe.
“There have been seven investigations led mostly by Republicans in the Congress,” Clinton said. “And they were nonpartisan, and they reached conclusions that, first of all, I and nobody did anything wrong, but there were changes we could make. This committee was set up, as they have admitted, for the purpose of making a partisan political issue out of the deaths of four Americans.”
The House Oversight Committee on Sept. 16, 2013, questioned Clinton following the Benghazi attack. The Republican-led committee released an interim report on the Accountability Review Board appointed by Clinton. The report raised questions about the independence and integrity of the Accountability Review Board and criticized the conclusions in the board’s final report.
The bipartisan Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs reported in December 2012 detailing the “high risk” of a terrorist attack at the U.S. facilities in Libya, criticizing the State Department for not addressing the security concerns leading up to the attack. The report attributed the State Department’s security failures to intelligence problems.
The Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan report in January 2014 calling the Benghazi attacks “preventable.” The committee concluded the State Department had received ample warning about deteriorating security in Libya and failed to adequately increase security in the weeks leading up to the attack.
The House Committee on Foreign Affairs later released a report criticizing Clinton and other high-ranking officials who they said were “provided extensive warning of the deteriorating security environment in east-ern Libya.” The report also criticized the State Department’s Accountability Review Board, which “was seriously deficient in several respects,” especially in its failure to comment on the actions of the department’s highest ranking officials, including Clinton.
The focus of the Committee on the Judiciary’s probe was the FBI investigation that followed the terrorist attack. The FBI did not investigate the scene until three weeks after the attack and spent less than one day collecting evidence in Benghazi. The committee also faulted Clinton for reducing security at the Benghazi consulate, despite her testimony that she “had no knowledge” of security requests from the compound.
The Armed Services Committee began its investigation “immediately after the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya … to evaluate the response of the Department of Defense” to the attack. The Republican-led committee bashed the Obama administration’s failure to address security threats in Benghazi, asserting that the military was unprepared for possible violence in Libya.
The House Intelligence Committee concluded its two-year Benghazi investigation releasing a report exonerating the Obama administration of wrongdoing in its response to the attack. The report found evidence of contradicting intelligence among government officials and concluded officials did not intentionally mislead the public with information in the days following the attack.
The Republican-led House created the House Select Committee on Benghazi in May 2014 after a conservative watchdog group discovered new State Department emails about the attacks. Clinton, who has faced more scrutiny over Benghazi after it was discovered she used a private email server while serving as Secretary of State, will testify before the Benghazi panel on Oct. 22.
Clinton’s number is correct: there were seven previous congressional probes into the Benghazi attack. As for her comment that there was no overt wrongdoing, just room for improvement, that’s a rosy assessment. But it is largely accurate. Politifact ’s rating “Mostly True.”
Chip Tuthill lives in Mancos. Website used: www.politifact.com
