GOP Report Concludes Military Could Not Have Changed Outcome in Benghazi

Mediaite ^ | 2/12/14 | Tommy Christopher

[Nachum]

The attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya that left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, continues to be a line of political attack against the Obama administration, but a new report from the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee belies at least one aspect of the popular conservative criticism, that U.S. forces were ordered to “stand down” when they could have saved lives in Benghazi.

The Republican-authored report’s findings are, by no means, a love letter to President Obama or then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. For example, the report concludes that U.S. personnel in Benghazi were woefully vulnerable in September 2012 because a) the administration did not direct a change in military force posture; b) there was no intelligence of a specific “imminent” threat in Libya; and c) the Department of State, which has primary responsibility for diplomatic security, favored a reduction of Department of Defense security personnel in Libya before the attack.”

The balance of the report contains many such harsh judgments of the Obama administration, the State Department, and the intelligence community.

However, as ThinkProgress notes, the report does undermine a key spoke in conservative talking points about Benghazi:

As Media Matters reports, Fox News cited reports of a stand-down order no fewer than 85 times during prime-time segments as of June 2013. As the new report — which the Republican majority of the committee authored –makes very clear in its findings, however, no such order ever existed. “There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi,” the report says, noting that the military was not positioned to respond to the attack.

[Nachum]

And now Benghazi is neatly buried.

What's for lunch?

[Nachum]

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/

[Viennacon]

The GOPe and the Democrats = the same

[clamper1797]

What a load of crap from our fearless (ball less) GOP

[FlingWingFlyer]

Anybody ask the military what they think of this “GOP report”?

[VRWC For Truth]

Issa is a DemocRat.

[dhs12345]

Ya. Seems like the idiot GOP are shooting themselves in the foot.

This could be an issue for Hillary in 2016.

[Diogenesis]

How would they know?

Answer: The GOP, authors of RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE
is also behind transfer of MANPADs to al Qaeda
as they kept the borders open.

[Jane Long]

I’d like to ask the ones who’ve resigned or have been *retired* what they think of this GOPE *report*.

[Norm Lenhart]

It’s only more lesser evil. We must vote GOP no matter what.

See the many psuedocons haunting FR for further details.

[TADSLOS]

What Difference Does It Make, after all? Thanks again, GOP. Why are we engaged in funding a War On Terror, again? Oh, that’s right. It makes us all “safer”. Puke.

[jsanders2001]

That’s like having an bookkeeper that embezzles from do your audit. “I found no shortages”. Well DUH!

[albie]

This is complete BS! Benghazi was pleading for help days before hell broke loose. “Stand Down” was the order.

[dead]

The Republican-authored report’s findings are, by no means, a love letter to President Obama or then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. For example, the report concludes that U.S. personnel in Benghazi were woefully vulnerable in September 2012 because a) the administration did not direct a change in military force posture; b) there was no intelligence of a specific “imminent” threat in Libya; and c) the Department of State, which has primary responsibility for diplomatic security, favored a reduction of Department of Defense security personnel in Libya before the attack.” The balance of the report contains many such harsh judgments of the Obama administration, the State Department, and the intelligence community. However, as ThinkProgress notes, the report does undermine

It sounds like ThinkProgress scanned the report looking for any sliver of good news, and people around here are helping them trumpet that over the whole of the report.

I think I'll read the report myself before I let ThinkProgress and Mediaite make me their Pavlovian dog.

[cripplecreek]

OK then lets remove the military presence from all of our embassies. /s

[Manic_Episode]

All show, no go.

[crosslink]

The key in all of these findings is they never say what NATO could have done. They had teams available. They always say the US did not have anyone available. This is BS NATO planes were 500 miles away in Italy along with a strike team. What a disservice to our great men by this committee that was suppose to investigate their deaths.

MAKES ME SICK

[Bryan24]

So, what do we do with Gregory Hicks? The senior state department official in Libya told the committee that the military guys standing beside him were told to stand down.

Do we just erase that?

[Count of Monte Fisto]

The attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi

It was not a U.S. diplomatic post. It was a secret CIA base that was transferring Libyan weapons to Christian killing Al-CIA-duh jihad mercenaries in Syria. The GOP leadership is all for the take-down of Syria. This is the reason for the cover up.

[Tenacious 1]

They concluded as much without talking to the key witnesses. That’s interesting. This was “our team” right?

Boehner sucks!