House members on Wednesday grilled a former CIA official over allegations of a cover-up in the administration’s messaging after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.
Michael Morell, the deputy director of the agency at the time, stressed that politics or an alleged attempt to mislead Congress and the public didn’t influence his editing of talking points or his view of the CIA’s analysis.
“Let me emphasize again: There is no truth to the allegations that the CIA or I ‘cooked the books’ with regard to what happened in Benghazi and then tried to cover this up after the fact,” he said in written testimony, adding in a House Intelligence Committee hearing that “I never allowed politics to influence what I said.”
Lawmakers dug into why administration officials said publicly — and in unclassified talking points given to congressional committees — in the days after the attack that it sprang from a spontaneous protest. CIA analysts later concluded that it was a deliberate, coordinated terrorist attack.
Members pointed to emails from the CIA’s station chief in Benghazi that showed he believed as early as Sept. 15 that there had not been a protest. Lawmakers on Wednesday criticized Morell for not including the station chief’s concerns in the classified interagency documents.
Morell said the CIA’s analysts, who were collecting information from intelligence and press reports, disagreed with the station chief’s assessment. Morell did not believe at the time that the station chief’s reasons for disagreeing with the analyst’s findings were substantive enough. Analysts revised their findings on Sept. 22 to say that they now believed based on new information that there wasn’t a protest.
Morell also deleted references to Islamic extremism in the unclassified talking points, which were also used by then-U.N. Representative Susan Rice on the Sunday shows. Morell said that while Rice had access to the body of intelligence work done up to that point, the station chief’s concerns would not have been included, because that document wasn’t shared outside of the CIA.
But he added that he did give a “heads up” at a Deputies Committee meeting — which included participants from a handful of agencies — that the station chief disagreed with the assessment that there was a protest.
The CIA also removed references to al-Qaida from the talking points. Morell said that he also removed language that the agency had previously warned about security threats in Libya to avoid having the CIA appear as if it were trying to exonerate itself in the attack.
“What I’m puzzled by as you look at those edits that you made, you take out most of the words that are in the talking points,” Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas said. “”¦ To me it seems like you’re more interested in protecting the State Department than the State Department is. You are more interested in protecting the FBI than the FBI is.”¦ That doesn’t make sense to me.”
Morell admitted that his edits were not the CIA’s best work, adding that “there are things we should have done differently, there are areas where the CIA’s performance, and my own performance, could have been better.”
But Republican members cast doubt on his testimony, suggesting that he made edits to protect the White House. GOP Rep. Devin Nunes of California, who is running to be the next committee chairman, said, “The problem is you’ve got all these conflicting stories.”
And Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican who is also interested in the committee chairmanhip, added: “We have to believe an awful lot of circumstances to believe your version with totality.”
But committee Democrats tried to steer the hearing toward focusing on the need to capture the militants behind the attacks.
“We have only found evidence that the talking points were edited to ensure accuracy, to check classification, and to safeguard the investigation and eventual prosecution — which has to be our ultimate goal: finding and holding accountable those who committed this terrible act,” said Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md.
Multiple committee reports, including one by the House Intelligence Committee, have largely blamed the White House and the State Department for failing to respond to increasing security risks within Libya leading up to the 2012 attack which left four Americans dead.
What We're Following See More »
President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”
It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”
It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.
Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.