We’ve known for some time that former United Nations Ambassador and recently promoted national security advisor Susan Rice lied to the American people after the attack on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi, Libya that left four Americans dead. We’ve also known that Hillary Clinton knew at 2am that the attacks in Benghazi were the result of jihadist attacks and not due to a protest. Though much has come to light about many things surrounding Benghazi, there has still been a lot of stonewalling. House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa wants to know who made the call to change the ‘talking points’ that were trotted out to the American people as truth, when in reality, they were known lies.
Congressman Issa sent a letter on Thursday to former State Department Spokesman Victoria Nuland, specifically asking her why emails seem to indicate using misleading information that would make the State Department look bad after they had ignored numerous security warnings prior to September 11, 2012.
Issa’s letter references Rice’s lies on September 16, when she went on various television networks and said:
“What happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of – of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video.”
Issa then said that it become apparent that the attacks were not spontaneous escalations of a protest, but “rather a premeditated act of terror.”
This arose questions from House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce and Congressman Issa to write to Secretary John Kerry on May 15, 2013 requesting all versions of the talking points. The State Department responded with 100 pages of emails and other documents. However, these documents did not state who made the changes to the talking points.
Trending:
“The documents the White House released on May 15, 2013, did not clarify who at the State Department expressed reservations about certain aspects of the talking points, including language that made clear the State Department had received prior warnings of threats in the region and was aware of previous attacks on foreign interests in eastern Libya, and that extremists linked to al Qaida may have participated in the attacks. One of your e-mails made clear that some of your colleagues at the State Department headquarters shared these concerns. You wrote that changes to the talking points did not ‘resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,’” Issa wrote in the letter to Nuland.
Issa wants Nuland to clarify which parts of the talking points that she and her superiors were concerned about. He then requested all of Nuland’s government and personal emails involving State Department business from September 11, 2012 through September 16, 2012.
“Your e-mail makes clear that Department leadership shared concerns with you about the draft talking points. It is my hope and expectation that the documents I am requesting will identify those concerns, and whose concerns they were,” Issa wrote.
Issa gave Nuland until August 15, 2013 to comply with his request.
Tim Brown is the Editor of Freedom Outpost and a regular contributor to The D.C. Clothesline.
