FBI probe in Benghazi as close as 400 miles away

posted at 2:01 pm on September 28, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

How is that FBI probe in Benghazi going?  It’s not, according to the New York Times, going at all.  Due to concerns over security in eastern Libya, the FBI can’t get to Benghazi — so they’re investigating the terrorist attack, er, “complicated crime,” from 400 miles away:

Sixteen days after the death of four Americans in an attack on a United States diplomatic mission here, fears about the near-total lack of security have kept F.B.I. agents from visiting the scene of the killings and forced them to try to piece together the complicated crime from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away.

Let’s muse on the irony of this situation.  Seventeen days ago, the Obama administration was so concerned with security in Benghazi that they didn’t lift a finger to bolster protection for a US Ambassador who knew that he’d been targeted by al-Qaeda.  Seventeen days later, they won’t even let the FBI get within 400 miles of Benghazi, not even with security escorts, to probe the “complicated crime” of the assassination of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.  Those security concerns are real — and the FBI is wise to take them into account — but they were just as real three weeks ago, too.

So what can the FBI do in Tripoli to solve this “crime”?  Conduct drive-by interrogations:

Investigators are so worried about the tenuous security, people involved in the investigation say, that they have been unwilling to risk taking some potential Libyan witnesses into the American Embassy in Tripoli. Instead, the investigators have resorted to the awkward solution of questioning some witnesses in cars outside the embassy, which is operating under emergency staffing and was evacuated of even more diplomats on Thursday because of a heightened security alert.

“It’s a cavalcade of obstacles right now,” said a senior American law enforcement official who is receiving regular updates on the Benghazi investigation and who described the crime scene, which has been trampled on, looted and burned, as so badly “degraded” that even once F.B.I. agents do eventually gain access “it’ll be very difficult to see what evidence can be attributed to the bad guys.”

Want fries with that interrogation?  As far as the actual “crime scene,” perhaps the FBI can check with the CNN producer who managed to find a crucial piece of evidence — Stevens’ journal, in which he expressed his fears about a terrorist attack, poor security, and his own assassination.  That will almost certainly be the last useful piece of information from the still-unsecured “crime scene” in Benghazi.

The FBI has a tough job in a dangerous part of the world, without a doubt, and there’s good reason to fear for their safety in Benghazi.  At least the administration seems concerned about those security risks now.  But an investigation from 400 miles away seems all but useless, except as an excuse for the White House to keep from answering questions about its failure to secure the Benghazi consulate and its dishonest spin attempts for the last sixteen days following the terrorist attack.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

kingsjester‏@kingsjester1

So,…I guess treating Terrorism as a “crime”, instead of an act of War, isn’t turning out so well, huh, FBI? #Benghazigate

kingsjester on September 28, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Maybe the FBI can just Skype with CNN who is on scene…

hillsoftx on September 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM

But an investigation from 400 miles away seems all but useless, except as an excuse for the White House to keep from answering questions about its failure

Bingo.

BacaDog on September 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Limbaugh was talking about this earlier.

The Regime knows that the FBI can’t cover up the Regime’s utter failures in protecting our people in Benghazi, so they’re not going to let them investigate in the first place.

Del Dolemonte on September 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM

I’m sure the late Chris Stevens appreciates this new found commitment by this administration to security in Benghazi.

Doughboy on September 28, 2012 at 2:06 PM

The Regime knows that the FBI can’t cover up the Regime’s utter failures in protecting our people in Benghazi, so they’re not going to let them investigate in the first place.

Del Dolemonte on September 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Bingo.

petefrt on September 28, 2012 at 2:07 PM

When you can’t use the word “Jihad” what is the use.

Oil Can on September 28, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Who’s writing the book on all this? It’s going to be a best seller.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Are the families of the deceased being muzzled?

JPeterman on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Good thing I didn’t fall asleep for the past 3.5 years or I would have missed all the fun of watching the U.S. turn into a banana republic.

dirtseller on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

I hope Mark Steyn is on the case.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

It won’t be a driveby investigation, it’ll have to be a flyover investigation. Using drones.

slickwillie2001 on September 28, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Good thing I didn’t fall asleep for the past 3.5 years or I would have missed all the fun of watching the U.S. turn into a banana republic.

dirtseller on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Banana republic? I blame global warming.

the_nile on September 28, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Who’s writing the book on all this? It’s going to be a best seller.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Are you in compliance with all your local building codes? Tax returns in order? All the brake and tail lights work on your car?

slickwillie2001 on September 28, 2012 at 2:12 PM

The Regime knows that the FBI can’t cover up the Regime’s utter failures in protecting our people in Benghazi, so they’re not going to let them investigate in the first place.

Del Dolemonte on September 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM

True, the the Obamanation Administration also knows that as long as the FBI is “Investigating” it they can truthfully assert that they are not legally allowed to discuss any ongoing investigation.

Put the murder of ambassador Stevens and the violent attack of the US Embassy under FBI investigation then make it impossible for the FBI to actually investigate and… Presto change o the event in question disappears into a massive bureaucratic black hole never to see the light of day again or be spoken of in public by any Obamabation Administration official.

SWalker on September 28, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Benghazi is enemy territory, we would need to air-assault the airport, take it, and drive to the scene of the crime in an armored column.

No way the 0bama regime is going to do that.

Rebar on September 28, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Administration officials have underlined that there is an FBI investigation into the attack, and said they will not offer definitive conclusions into what happened in Benghazi until that probe wraps up.

The above from Ed’s previous article.

So they can’t talk about this because:

Sixteen days after the death of four Americans in an attack on a United States diplomatic mission here, fears about the near-total lack of security have kept F.B.I. agents from visiting the scene of the killings and forced them to try to piece together the complicated crime from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away.

Well, gee, isn’t it too bad that we can’t give you any answers. How can the probe wrap up if they can’t even get get to the site to fully investigate it.

Sounds like a wonderful Catch-22 to me.

CBP on September 28, 2012 at 2:13 PM

The American legacy media are putting their candidate above the security of the American people…this is how far they will go.

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Well these fbi better have their own security, bho/team sure won’t help them out?

IMO, this whole mess is just stalling stalling stalling doing a cya(cyo) till elections are over? All those in dc demanding to get to the bottom of this will be as sol as with bho/big sis/holder’s F&F!

ZERO will happen?
L

letget on September 28, 2012 at 2:14 PM

It won’t be a driveby investigation, it’ll have to be a flyover investigation. Using drones.

slickwillie2001 on September 28, 2012 at 2:11 PM

It’s a time critical investigation , it wont start until the election is over.

the_nile on September 28, 2012 at 2:14 PM

According to Reuters there were up to 37 people evacuated to the Benghazi airport and flown to Tripoli…maybe they are the people that the FBI is interviewing..?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Do we have a catchy name yet?

Second 9-11?

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:18 PM

According to Reuters there were up to 37 people evacuated to the Benghazi airport and flown to Tripoli…maybe they are the people that the FBI is interviewing..?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM

More likely they are investigating the health benefits of Gay Unicorn flatulence.

SWalker on September 28, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Sixteen days after the death of four Americans in an attack on a United States diplomatic mission here, fears about the near-total lack of security have kept F.B.I. agents from visiting the scene of the killings and forced them to try to piece together the complicated crime from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away.

This isn’t fiction where a Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Peroit can solve a crime only using the gray cells. This is a SNAFU built upon a FUBAR.

chemman on September 28, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Do we have a catchy name yet?

Second 9-11?

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Funny you should ask that… Obama’s Operation Eagle Claw.

SWalker on September 28, 2012 at 2:19 PM

“Richard Nixon was forced out of office because he lied and because he covered some stuff up, I’m going to be blunt and tell you this — nobody died in Watergate.

We have some people who are dead because of this, and there are some questions to be answered, and Americans ought to demand answers.”

Schadenfreude on September 28, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Reuters’ reporters had no problem getting to Benghazi immediately following the attack…

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:11 PM

The difference being the Reuters reporters wanted to be there.

bigmacdaddy on September 28, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Holder should send some stand-up, pipe-wielding, Black Panthers to get some confessions.

After all, they already have the DOJ stamp-of-approval – and I’m sure that they could fit right in and identify with the flea-bitten, ferals.

OhEssYouCowboys on September 28, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Do we have a catchy name yet?

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Leaving from Behind™

Schadenfreude on September 28, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Do we have a catchy name yet?

Second 9-11?

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:18 PM

How about “The Neverending Story”.

Bitter Clinger on September 28, 2012 at 2:22 PM

According to Reuters there were up to 37 people evacuated to the Benghazi airport and flown to Tripoli…maybe they are the people that the FBI is interviewing..?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Those 37 (actually 35, at least 2 were killed during the evacuation and a Libyan official estimated a dozen or so wounded) likely are well out of the Middle East by now. No way the State Department could keep their families quiet if they weren’t. Although maybe some of the families aren’t being quiet, but like everything else that derails The Narrative, the media will never let us know.

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Libya, Home of the Whopper

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:22 PM

9/11² works for me…

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:23 PM

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Who were those 35-37 people? Were they at the Benghazi consulate, Marines, or who?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

BTW, thanks, Ed, for piling up these Benghazi/Libya stories today.

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

I’m sorry, but this is ludicrous. I know the FBI has (probably) the greatest expertise in the world when it comes to explosions and such matters. But, I’ll share a clue: the explosions came from RPG’s and maybe a rocket or two. The fire came from diesel fuel. The bullet holes came from bullets. Fine. We know people attacked the villa and blew things up. It that’s what the FBI is headed there to figure out, they can stay in Tripoli, or go home and log onto Hot Air.

Other than that, what is the big whupps about airlifting the FBI into Bengazhi? Doesn’t the CIA have assets? What about NCIS, AFOSI, ACIC, CFA, DSS and other groups without official acronyms? Are you telling me that the U.S. has no evidence collection capability outside of the FBI? Capabilities far more accustomed to working in the Middle East than do the folks from up the road at Quantico?

This is the Administration’s excuse for not investigating the killings of U.S. Diplomatic personnel? We can’t get there?

What’s the next emotion past disgusted, because that’s where I’m headed.

IndieDogg on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

FBlie

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:28 PM

What’s the next emotion past disgusted, because that’s where I’m headed.

IndieDogg on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

I don’t know, but I’m at least two past that myself…

SWalker on September 28, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Are the families of the deceased being muzzled?

JPeterman on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

And, what’s become of the wounded (37, wasn’t it?) that were evacuated? How are they? More to the point, where are they, and why aren’t they talking?

bofh on September 28, 2012 at 2:30 PM

The Regime knows that the FBI can’t cover up the Regime’s utter failures in protecting our people in Benghazi, so they’re not going to let them investigate in the first place.

Del Dolemonte on September 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Yes! Plus, from Dr K:

So why did they deceive? It’s obvious. Because the attack took place five days after the Democrats had spent a week in Charlotte touting, spiking the football on Osama.

And essentially, since it’s the only foreign policy achievement of the four years they repeated it over and over again, the great triumph over al-Qaeda. Well, within a week, al-Qaeda sacks a U.S. embassy, kills an ambassador and the administration did not want to admit it so it spent a week deceiving Americans to think it’s about demonstration, its about a film, thinking, I think correctly that if it strung it out long enough the media would let it slide and now that it becomes it’s obvious and true, nobody will care, I guarantee you. This is not a headline in the mainstream media.

This is a coverup of failures to secure a consulate that lead to the deaths of four Americans.

This is a coverup of the failure of the Obama foreign policy.

Which is worse? Take your pick.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 2:30 PM

For some geographical perspective (since some of us are not intimately familiar with how far things are separated from eachother in Libya)…

This is like trying to investigate a murder scene in Boston, while physically staying in Baltimore. Yeah, good luck with that. You don’t convince anybody you are serious when doing this. You are more likely to find bigfoot than crack a case if this is how the investigation is going.

The coverup, however, is proceeding pretty well.

DrUrchin on September 28, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Looks like we’ll have a looooooooong wait before State Dept releases any info. Because they have to, you know, wait until the FBI completes their criminal investigation.

How convenient.

GarandFan on September 28, 2012 at 2:31 PM

I wish Bill Clinton would weigh in on this. He has a lot at stake.

a capella on September 28, 2012 at 2:31 PM

FBI: Few Bumps Investigators

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:32 PM

And, what’s become of the wounded (37, wasn’t it?) that were evacuated? How are they? More to the point, where are they, and why aren’t they talking?

bofh on September 28, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Being held hostage by our own Government?

JPeterman on September 28, 2012 at 2:32 PM

If a crime is committed in Cleveland, should the FBI investigate it in New York?

If we can’t even get FBI agents into Benghazi to investigate who killed our Ambassador, what did our military support of anti-Gaddafi rebels really buy us in Libya?

And since this took place in Libya, why not send in the CIA? They’re used to working in dangerous foreign countries…

Let’s start by sending in Valerie Plame!

Steve Z on September 28, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Latest obstacle: the diplomatic staff did not read the “criminals” their Miranda rights before they fired back at them !

PattyJ on September 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Benghazi has been lost.

Our special ops guys were attacked at the airport. We cant go back.

Obama will have to admit that AQ has taken over Eastern Libya.

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:36 PM

…JugEars promised justice…so Eric Holder will be in charge!

KOOLAID2 on September 28, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Press Relations » Daily Press Briefings » 2012 » September » Daily Press Briefing – September 14, 2012

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 14, 2012
********************

QUESTION: One, do you now know how it was that Ambassador Stevens was taken from the consulate grounds to the hospital?

MS. NULAND: Thank you for that opening, Arshad. I am going to frustrate all of you infinitely by telling you that now that we have an

open FBI investigation on the death of these four Americans,
*************************************************************

we are not going to be in a position to talk at all about what the U.S. Government may or may not be learning about how any of this happened – not who they were, not how they happened, not what happened to Ambassador Stevens, not any of it – until the Justice Department is ready to talk about the investigation that it’s got. So I’m going to send you to the FBI on any of those kinds of questions, and they’re probably not going to talk to you about them while the investigation is open.

QUESTION: One question here, though: Can you say how it was that these four men died, whether it was gunfire or smoke inhalation or anything else about how they perished?

MS. NULAND: Well, we talked a little bit about our sense of this in the backgrounding call that very first day, that –

QUESTION: Wednesday.

MS. NULAND: — or the day after, on Wednesday. Frankly, we’re now at the stage where – there’s the autopsy stage, there’s the investigative stage, and all of that is part and parcel of what the FBI has to look at. So I really am not going to speculate here, and I’m not going to –

QUESTION: I’m not asking you –

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: — to speculate. And in that background conversation, as I recall, a [Senior Administration Official] was asked how it was that Ambassador Stevens died, and the questioner referred to reports of smoke inhalation. And [Senior Administration Official] said, look, we haven’t done autopsies; we’re not in a position to talk about that.

MS. NULAND: Right.

QUESTION: And what I don’t understand is why how they died would interfere with – how disclosing how they died would interfere with the investigation.

MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, there are privacy matters here that the families can make a decision about when the cause of death becomes clear to them. That’s not my place to be saying here.

QUESTION: No, but that’s not the justification [Senior Administration Official] gave.

MS. NULAND: We did talk about the fact that the compound that they were in, the building that they were in, was overcome by fire and heavy black smoke, and it was under those circumstances that they lost each other; that, clearly, Sean Smith died because his body was later pulled from the building. But I’m just not in a position to speculate on Chris.

QUESTION: Toria, more broadly, on that call, the officials on that call, or one senior official in particular on that call, whom I think you’re familiar with, said that the information that they were giving was preliminary –

MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: — and it could be wrong.

MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: Are you saying now that if there is something wrong with what was given out as correct information, it’s not going to be corrected because of the investigation, so that – is that what you’re saying?

MS. NULAND: No.

QUESTION: The U.S. Government is going to be happy to allow incorrect information to stand?

MS. NULAND: If I – I will make a personal pledge to you that if I become aware that information we gave that first night is radically wrong in a way that you deserve to know, I will do my best –

QUESTION: Well –

MS. NULAND: — to get the information to you. But I have to respect the fact that this is now a crime scene. This is now subject to an FBI investigation.

QUESTION: Well, that’s fine, but if all of the sudden you discover that things did not happen exactly as they were described in that timeline that was given to us –

MS. NULAND: Right.

QUESTION: — like 8 o’clock this, 8:30 that –

MS. NULAND: Right.

QUESTION: — and in fact that was off, I think you have an obligation to correct that for the record.

MS. NULAND: Noted. And I will do what I can. Okay?

QUESTION: Can I ask maybe two –

MS. NULAND: Josh, and then Jo.

QUESTION: So just to be clear, so that when you say you can’t – won’t be talking at all about –

MS. NULAND: Right.

QUESTION: — the circumstances of the death, that includes the attack –

MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: — or what led up to the attack –

MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: — who might be responsible for the attack?

MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: Every detail about the Benghazi attack is now totally off limits for questions?

MS. NULAND: It is now something that you need to talk to the FBI about, not to us about, because it’s their investigation. Okay?

QUESTION: But I –

MS. NULAND: Okay?

QUESTION: Going back to this point over here, the timeline – there are major differences.

MS. NULAND: Can you identify yourself? I don’t think I’ve seen you before.

QUESTION: I’m sorry. Matt Schofield, McClatchy Newspapers.

MS. NULAND: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: Is – have you – do you have a change in the timeline? Is the timeline significantly different from what [Senior Administration Officials] described in the background briefing?

MS. NULAND: I personally don’t have any information that’s different from that preliminary information we gave the first night. But again, we’re not the investigating agency. It’s now the FBI, working with the Libyans. The Libyans are the lead on the investigation. So I’m not even confident that we’re going to be privy to all these details until the FBI is prepared to disclose.

QUESTION: Can you confirm that arrests have been made by the Libyan authorities?

MS. NULAND: I’m not in a position to do that either. I’m going to send you to the FBI.

QUESTION: Can I ask about the geography of the compound?

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: On the background briefing –

MS. NULAND: Yes.

QUESTION: — from my understanding, but possibly I misunderstood, the building in which the two former Navy SEALs were killed was a separate building to the one that initially came under fire, in which Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith were. My understanding from the background briefing was that building was within the compound, but there have been some reports that suggested it was actually outside of the compound and it was a – and that it was a safe house.

MS. NULAND: There – what I haven’t looked at myself – and I will just say this; I can go back and look. There were, in my understanding, two separate compounds. There was the compound where the main mission staff were and then there was an annex. And they were at – some removed from each other, half mile or so. They each had separate perimeter walls. So we had the first set of incidents where Sean Smith died, and the building caught on fire, and where we lost track of Ambassador Stevens. And then some two – and that was suppressed, as we discussed. And then some two hours later, fighting began at the annex compound, and that’s where we lost our other two.

QUESTION: The reason I ask is because this annex compound, so I have misunderstood – but the – was that the annex compound was supposed to a be secret, and somehow its existence was revealed. I wondered if you could talk to that. How did it manage to come under fire? Because that’s where the staff had been evacuated to, so they were supposed to be safe.

MS. NULAND: I’m not confident that that information is correct. And obviously, I’m not going to talk about anything having to do with intelligence. What you may be confusing here is that in any mission or compound, there is a safe area. There were safe areas in both the primary compound and in compound two, so maybe that’s what you’re –

(More…)
============

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/197784.htm

canopfor on September 28, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Are the families of the deceased being muzzled?

JPeterman on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

They s/b in front of cameras all day.

Schadenfreude on September 28, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Obama will have to admit that AQ has taken over Eastern Libya.

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Not even in his Memoirs…

SWalker on September 28, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Obama yesterday: “You’ve got a new tower across the New York skyline. Al Qaeda is on the path to defeat. Bin Laden is dead”

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:39 PM

“Complicated crime?”

Really? That’s about as inane as “man-caused disaster”, a phrase that I suspect was borrowed by Jugears and Co. from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Western “settlement” playbook.

hillbillyjim on September 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Benghazi has been lost.

Our special ops guys were attacked at the airport. We cant go back.

Obama will have to admit that AQ has taken over Eastern Libya.

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:36 PM

And yet admitting this will be an impossibility for this administration.

Because the attack took place five days after the Democrats had spent a week in Charlotte touting, spiking the football on Osama.

And essentially, since it’s the only foreign policy achievement of the four years they repeated it over and over again, the great triumph over al-Qaeda. Well, within a week, al-Qaeda sacks a U.S. embassy, kills an ambassador and the administration did not want to admit it so it spent a week deceiving Americans to think it’s about demonstration, its about a film, thinking, I think correctly that if it strung it out long enough the media would let it slide and now that it becomes it’s obvious and true, nobody will care, I guarantee you. This is not a headline in the mainstream media.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 2:46 PM

The simple fact is, 0bama spend a Billion dollars to hand Libya over to al qaeda, our declared enemy. Sending FBI agents to Benghazi would only get them killed – likely beheaded on video.

The real crime, is the utter MSM blackout on this utter fiasco. If the American people knew the full extent of this, there would be protests in the streets.

Rebar on September 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

And since this took place in Libya, why not send in the CIA? They’re used to working in dangerous foreign countries…

Steve Z on September 28, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Because the “crime” happened on United States soil? Then again there is this from wiki:

Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.

The CIA already knows what happened…

equanimous on September 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

The BengaziGate cover up is a disgrace.

Obama lied people died
Hillary lied people died

What did they know and when did they know it?

The Canadians got out and saved lives.

BengaziGate is a dereliction of duty.

Willing suspension of disbelief.

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

They will leave No Stone Unturned.

And there are a lot of stones between Tripoli and Bengazi, so it will be after the Election before they can make it all the way to Bengazi.

jaydee_007 on September 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM

FDR on 12/7/41: “We have discovered some holes in our ships at Oahu, and we are sending union investigators to determine the cause”

faraway on September 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Al Queda runs Libya.

Lib-ya lib-tards

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM

The BengaziGate cover up is a disgrace.

Obama lied people died
Hillary lied people died

What did they know and when did they know it?

The Canadians got out and saved lives.

BengaziGate is a dereliction of duty.

Willing suspension of disbelief.

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

I would only make one correction;

People died so Obama lied
People died then Hillary lied

jaydee_007 on September 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 21, 2012
*******************

QUESTION: Does the State Department feel that we’re maybe facing something

like a 9/11 chapter two,
**************************

and that what happened in Benghazi was the beginning of another

offensive against the United States?
**************************************

MS. NULAND: I’m not going to get into characterizing this until we see what these investigations lead to. I think you have seen that – this week, we have seen peaceful protests in a lot of countries. We’ve seen a few of those turn violent. But we’ve also seen very good reaction around the world from government security forces to ensure that even in those places where they’ve become violent, they haven’t gotten out of hand in terms of destroying diplomatic facilities or diplomatic property. We are very appreciative of that, including, as you know, in Pakistan today, where there were relatively large demonstrations around the country – Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad, Peshawar – that have now been dispersed.

So we are obviously going to wait for the

results of the investigations – the FBI investigation,
********************************************************

the result of the Accountability Review Board. This is the appropriate and normal way to review the situation and to learn whatever lessons there are to be learned. But as the President, as the Secretary, as all of us have said, security of our people, of our facilities around the world is of utmost importance.

QUESTION:

On the ARB,
************

I just want to make one thing – the – they are – are they going to incorporate the FBI report into their report?
*********************************************

They’re not going to do a separate report on the actual incident, are they? As I understand, the ARB is – will look at and make recommendations for how something like this could be – might be able to be prevented in the future. And that is – that’s their mandate, in addition to investigating the actual – what happened. But I’m curious; I mean, are they really going to waste their time doing a – their own report, their own – sorry, their own investigation, interviewing witnesses, et cetera, after the FBI has already talked to these people and reached their own conclusions?

MS. NULAND: Well, I can’t speak to how the ARB will decide to proceed with its mandate, whether it will decide it needs to call people in, who, how extensive. I would guess, obviously, they’ll want to talk to people. But you are right in the sense that the mandate of the FBI investigation is to respond to the fact that we have Americans killed overseas. They have to investigate all of the circumstances under which that happened. They have to then determine whether there are judicial follow-on steps that need to be taken in the United States or in collaboration with our partners.

With regard to the mandate of the Accountability Review Board, we put a little information out last night, but let me just repeat it here on the record. The ARB, under statute, is responsible for making written findings determining the extent to which the incident was security-related; whether security systems and security procedures at the mission were adequate; whether the security systems and security procedures were properly implemented; the impact of intelligence and available information; and any other facts or circumstances which can be relevant to the appropriate security management of U.S. missions abroad.

So further to the question you asked, all of those things will be looked at in the ARB context. The FBI will look at many of the same things, but in the context of a criminal case.

QUESTION: All right. Is it still the Administration’s position, at least publicly, that the information you have suggests

that this was a protest,
*************************

or a somewhat peaceful protest,
********************************

that got hijacked by militants? Was that –
******************************************
(More…)

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/198026.htm
================================================================
================================================================

VIDEO (23:30) OF:

State Department Press Briefing

Washington, DC
Friday, September 21, 2012

State Department Spokesman, Victoria Nuland conducts a daily briefing at the State Department.

Updated: Friday, September 21, 2012 at 1:22pm (ET)
**************************************************

http://www.c-span.org/Events/State-Department-Press-Briefing/10737434337/

canopfor on September 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

The Obengazi cover up must stop.

I want a full investigation

ObengaziGate is a cover up.

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

911 two happened Obamas watch while he campaigned in Las Vegas.

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Seriously, what’s to investigate? Aside from the fact that this is not a crime, it’s an act of war, we already know what happened. There’s videotape and eye witnesses who told us what happened. The Libyan government is screaming out to us that they know what happened but we won’t listen to them. A seventeen-day old “crime scene” is useless from an investigative standpoint and any “evidence” found has no value whatsoever. And to top it off, we already know who did it. The “suspects” themselves told us they did it and are dancing in the streets about it. But we ned to conduct a criminal investigation? Gimme a break!

Trafalgar on September 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM

The end result, as we could all guess, is that the administration will never get a proper investigation and therefore will never be able to make a formal comment on the matter.
Somehow, they are under the impression that this will all go down the rabbit hole.
They are wrong, of course. Again.

Jabberwock on September 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM

The Obengazi cover up must stop.

I want a full investigation

ObengaziGate is a cover up.

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

If this story ever reaches critical mass as it should, the Fifth Column Treasonous Media will claim they were deceived by the Obamanation Administration.

SWalker on September 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Who were those 35-37 people? Were they at the Benghazi consulate, Marines, or who?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

The 37 rescued at the consulate annex, the back-up location or safe house. In addition to the 8 Marines. In the Reuters report filed by Shalchi.

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/320283/disgrace-benghazi-mark-steyn

On Benghazi…

So, on a highly symbolic date, mobs storm American diplomatic facilities and drag the corpse of a U.S. ambassador through the streets. Then the president flies to Vegas for a fundraiser. No, no, a novelist would say; that’s too pat, too neat in its symbolic contrast. Make it Cleveland, or Des Moines.

The president is surrounded by delirious fanbois and fangurls screaming “We love you,” too drunk on his celebrity to understand this is the first photo-op in the aftermath of a national humiliation. No, no, a filmmaker would say; too crass, too blunt. Make them sober, middle-aged midwesterners, shocked at first, but then quiet and respectful.

The president is too lazy and cocksure to have learned any prepared remarks or mastered the appropriate tone, notwithstanding that a government that spends more money than any government in the history of the planet has ever spent can surely provide him with both a speechwriting team and a quiet corner on his private wide-bodied jet to consider what might be fitting for the occasion. So instead he sloughs off the words, bloodless and unfelt: “And obviously our hearts are broken . . . ” Yeah, it’s totally obvious.

And he’s even more drunk on his celebrity than the fanbois, so in his slapdashery he winds up comparing the sacrifice of a diplomat lynched by a pack of savages with the enthusiasm of his own campaign bobbysoxers. No, no, says the Broadway director; that’s too crude, too ham-fisted. How about the crowd is cheering and distracted, but he’s the president, he understands the gravity of the hour, and he’s the greatest orator of his generation, so he’s thought about what he’s going to say, and it takes a few moments but his words are so moving that they still the cheers of the fanbois, and at the end there’s complete silence and a few muffled sobs, and even in party-town they understand the sacrifice and loss of their compatriots on the other side of the world.

But no, that would be an utterly fantastical America. In the real America, the president is too busy to attend the security briefing on the morning after a national debacle, but he does have time to do Letterman and appear on a hip-hop radio show hosted by “The Pimp with a Limp.” In the real State Department, the U.S. embassy in Cairo is guarded by Marines with no ammunition, but they do enjoy the soft-power muscle of a Foreign Service officer, one Lloyd Schwartz, tweeting frenziedly into cyberspace (including a whole chain directed at my own Twitter handle, for some reason) about how America deplores insensitive people who are so insensitively insensitive that they don’t respectfully respect all religions equally respectfully and sensitively, even as the raging mob is pouring through the gates.

When it comes to a flailing, blundering superpower, I am generally wary of ascribing to malevolence what is more often sheer stupidity and incompetence. For example, we’re told that, because the consulate in Benghazi was designated as an “interim facility,” it did not warrant the level of security and protection that, say, an embassy in Scandinavia would have. This seems all too plausible — that security decisions are made not by individual human judgment but according to whichever rule-book sub-clause at the Federal Agency of Bureaucratic Facilities Regulation it happens to fall under. However, the very next day the embassy in Yemen, which is a permanent facility, was also overrun, as was the embassy in Tunisia the day after. Look, these are tough crowds, as the president might say at Caesar’s Palace. But we spend more money on these joints than anybody else, and they’re as easy to overrun as the Belgian consulate.

As I say, I’m inclined to be generous, and put some of this down to the natural torpor and ineptitude of government. But Hillary Clinton and General Martin Dempsey are guilty of something worse, in the secretary of state’s weirdly obsessive remarks about an obscure film supposedly disrespectful of Mohammed and the chairman of the joint chiefs’ telephone call to a private citizen asking him if he could please ease up on the old Islamophobia.

Forget the free-speech arguments. In this case, as Secretary Clinton and General Dempsey well know, the film has even less to do with anything than did the Danish cartoons or the schoolteacher’s teddy bear or any of the other innumerable grievances of Islam. The 400-strong assault force in Benghazi showed up with RPGs and mortars: That’s not a spontaneous movie protest; that’s an act of war, and better planned and executed than the dying superpower’s response to it. Secretary Clinton and General Dempsey are, to put it mildly, misleading the American people when they suggest otherwise.

One can understand why they might do this, given the fiasco in Libya. The men who organized this attack knew the ambassador would be at the consulate in Benghazi rather than at the embassy in Tripoli. How did that happen? They knew when he had been moved from the consulate to a “safe house,” and switched their attentions accordingly. How did that happen? The United States government lost track of its ambassador for ten hours. How did that happen? Perhaps, when they’ve investigated Mitt Romney’s press release for another three or four weeks, the court eunuchs of the American media might like to look into some of these fascinating questions, instead of leaving the only interesting reporting on an American story to the foreign press.

Click the link for more…

Loves me some Mark!! :-)

Scrumpy on September 28, 2012 at 3:01 PM

I have it under good authority that an FBI team of unknown size and personnel under the astute direction of no one quite knows…. are not just sitting by idly…… No, no… why these brave and daring prevaricators of truth and don’t expect justice are….. well, they are currently reviewing the “CRIME” Scene on-line with Google-Maps StreetView and they will get back to us…. AFTER the election of the most incompetent buffoon ever to hold the position of President of the United States EVER!

ActinUpinTexas on September 28, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Everybody might as well forget about this because Obama and his gang will just ignore the whole thing, knowing that nothing can be done to them. Where are all the great defenders of the Constitution and their emotional patriotic speeches. McCain is mute as are all the others. What a bunch of two-bit phonies.

rplat on September 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Unusal,for a Ambassdor to be killed,did the Democrat Convention…
..Spiking the ball,push the goons,over the edge.
And,as if they need an excuse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Diplomatic Security in Light of Benghazi
September 27, 2012 | 0902 GMT
******************************

It has been more than two weeks since the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, that resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans,

yet the attack remains front-page news. One reason is that it has become unusual for a U.S. ambassador to be killed.
**************************************************

After the 1968 assassination of John Mein in Guatemala — the first ever U.S. ambassador to be assassinated — several others were killed in the 1970s: Cleo Noel Jr. in Sudan in 1973, Rodger Davies in Cyprus in 1974, Francis Meloy Jr. in Lebanon in 1976 and Adolph Dubs in Afghanistan in 1979. However, following improvements in diplomatic security during the 1980s, no U.S. ambassador has died as a result of a hostile action since Ambassador Arnold Raphel, who was killed in the plane crash used to assassinate Pakistani President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in August 1988.

Another reason for the continued publicity is that it is an election year.
***************

Since foreign policy is an area where Republicans believe President Barack Obama is vulnerable, Stevens’ death has become highly politicized. In any event, the Benghazi attack remains in the headlines. Unfortunately, as one goes beyond those headlines, there are many misunderstandings that have persisted in both the media coverage and the public discussions of the incident. There simply are not many people who understand how diplomatic facilities work and how they are protected.

With that in mind, and because other U.S. diplomatic facilities remain in harm’s way due to the protests occurring throughout the Muslim world, it is an opportune time to again discuss diplomatic security.(More…….)
======================

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/diplomatic-security-light-benghazi

canopfor on September 28, 2012 at 3:12 PM

The Triple Bogey President has blood on his hands

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 3:13 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/320283/disgrace-benghazi-mark-steyn

Read This.

HatTip Scrumpy.

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Are the families of the deceased being muzzled?

JPeterman on September 28, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Looks like it. Complete silence. One of the SEALs killed lived a few miles from me here in NV and yet there is absolutely nothing in local media.

riddick on September 28, 2012 at 3:15 PM

I am becoming more and more convinced that NO ONE in Govt from either Party has the Balls to DO ANYTHING!!

This is pathetic, such a HUGE stinking cover-up, and no one is talking but a few media pundits…

I am sick to death of hearing the govts lame *ss excuses…

SOME PEOPLE NEED TO GO DOWN FOR THIS!!!

Start at the TOP and work it’s way down through the rank and file of the Louse in da Houses’ administration… and for once…

DO THE RIGHT DAMN THING!!!!

Scrumpy on September 28, 2012 at 3:16 PM

THIS TOO:

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, the local doctor who fingered bin Laden to the Americans sits in jail. In other words, while America’s clod vice president staggers around pimping limply that only Obama had the guts to take the toughest decision anyone’s ever had to take, the poor schlub who actually did have the guts, who actually took the tough decision in a part of the world where taking tough decisions can get you killed, languishes in a cell because Washington would not lift a finger to help him.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/320283/disgrace-benghazi-mark-steyn

Emphasis is mine…

Scrumpy on September 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Hmmmmmm……….from Anti-War……….and sumpin Le Stinks…

Benghazi Attack a ‘Major Blow’ to CIA
CIA Forced to Evacuate Spies After Consulate Sacked
September 23, 2012
*******************

The attack earlier this month on the Benghazi consulate, which killed four Americans including the US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens was a blow to a lot of people. It cost the State Department its ambassador, it cost the Obama campaign the claim of Libya as a big “win” and it cost the Libyan government the pretense of security

Lost in all the people who suffered from this, however, is the CIA, which officials say suffered a “catastrophic” loss after the destruction of the US Consulate, because it forced them to withdraw about a dozen spies who were staying there.

Not that the CIA was apparently doing a very good job. Even though officials say that they were surveilling a number of targets in Benghazi, and even though Libya was openly warning them about security risks, the US was caught entirely unawares by the attack.

The depth of CIA “cooperation” with the State Department isn’t well documented, though it has been established in previous incidents that the CIA has used the pretense of embassy employees to put spies in countries with the claim of diplomatic immunity, as with Raymond Davis in Pakistan, who the US claimed had “immunity” after he murdered two people in Lahore and after they admitted he was a CIA spy just pretending to be a consular employee.

The Libyan government has not commented on the story, so it is unclear if they were aware of the CIA operations in Benghazi or not.
====

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/23/benghazi-attack-a-major-blow-to-cia/

canopfor on September 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM

The title should be “DRIVE BY INVESTIGATION

Delsa on September 28, 2012 at 3:22 PM

canopfor on September 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM

HA’s most prolific linky contributor!!!

^5 dude…

You give us more news worthy NEWS than anyone.

Bravo!!

Scrumpy on September 28, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Other than that, what is the big whupps about airlifting the FBI into Bengazhi? Doesn’t the CIA have assets? What about NCIS, AFOSI, ACIC, CFA, DSS and other groups without official acronyms? Are you telling me that the U.S. has no evidence collection capability outside of the FBI? Capabilities far more accustomed to working in the Middle East than do the folks from up the road at Quantico?

IndieDogg on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

The FBI is under the Justice Department. The Justice Department is run by Eric Holder.

Any more questions?

Tenwheeler on September 28, 2012 at 3:26 PM

The Triple Bogey President has blood on his hands

SparkPlug on September 28, 2012 at 3:13 PM

YOU can say THAT again!!!

Scrumpy on September 28, 2012 at 3:26 PM

IndieDogg on September 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Tenwheeler on September 28, 2012 at 3:26 PM

The total INCOMPETENCY of this admin is so blatently apparent, they are successfully succeeding at FAILING! It’s on purpose… it’s so obvious, even a blind man can see through all the shenanigans that are taking place DAILY!

I am becoming more and more p*ssed as every day goes by…

Scrumpy on September 28, 2012 at 3:30 PM

I miss Christopher Hitchens and Andrew Brietbart especially in moments like this.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 3:31 PM

DRIVE BY INVESTIGATION
this president lied to the American people deliberately. It has nothing to do with his supposed “narrative” in killing Bin Laden!

It has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH the Fact All our embassy’s in this God forsaken part of the world, were left unprotected over 9-11!

The blood of our dead are on Obama’s hands! He could care less as long as his Islamic spring thing works.

I can’t wait to VOTE!!

Delsa on September 28, 2012 at 3:36 PM

I miss Christopher Hitchens and Andrew Brietbart especially in moments like this.

dont taze me bro on September 28, 2012 at 3:31 PM

HOW RIGHT YOU ARE

Delsa on September 28, 2012 at 3:39 PM

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

I meant do you think they were Consulate employees or what?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Could someone explain why the FBI is on this? I thought they only worked on domestic cases in the 57 states. Or is this an American soil thing that gives them jurisdiction?

olddog58 on September 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

I meant do you think they were Consulate employees or what?

d1carter on September 28, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Yes, that’s the inference I drew from the article. Calls the evacuees “Americans” several times. CIA might have had operatives working under “consulate employee” cover, also. Could also have been some Libyan staff. And possibly a handful of Americans on business in Benghazi (for what, who knows), who fled to the consulate when things began to heat up in Benghazi.

In any event, there are somewhere around 35 “civilian” eye-witnesses– first, to the attack on the consulate; then, to the second attack on the consulate annex/safe house, and to the rescue/evacuation operation– and also 5-7 Marines, whom the press can’t seem to find or interview. And I seriously doubt that any of them are in Tripoli under FBI investigation.

de rigueur on September 28, 2012 at 3:59 PM

olddog58 on September 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

The FBI needs US jurisdiction.

As you know, technically the embassy is US territory as much as well, Chicago is.

That may be the connection. They do crimes and criminal justice.

But the real purpose here is to make this a “crime” instead of an international terrorist attack or an act of war.

And then better, get a half baked report which would indicate that there was extra security, could not have ore security, the security folks were unreliable..blah blah blah

IlikedAUH2O on September 28, 2012 at 4:26 PM

I nominate Debbie Wasserman-Schultz as our next ambassador.

Let O’s buddies show how civilized they are.

IlikedAUH2O on September 28, 2012 at 4:29 PM

I hope Obama shows up at Mary Jo Kopechne’s Ambassador Stevens’ funeral with a neck brace and some crocodile tears, because Obama, just like Teddy Kennedy before him, just swam away, left the Ambassador to die, and crawled into bed for a nightie night…….all for the sake of his narrative.

ted c on September 28, 2012 at 4:42 PM

ted c on September 28, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Cold, but true. So sad.

olddog58 on September 28, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Has any journalist asked WHY the Ambassador was in Benghazi to begin with? Given how dangerous it was, and the lack of glaringly nonexistent security at the consulate, what would he risk being there for?

An intelligence source on the ground in Libya told Fox News on Friday that no threat assessment was conducted before U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team began “taking up residence” at the Benghazi compound — describing the security lapses as a “total failure.”

This whole thing stinks, and no one seems to be following the stench to find out where it’s coming from.

MississippiMom on September 28, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Right now, Obama feels like Teddy Kennedy did, hoping that no one approaches Benghazi Consulate just like the Oldsmobile that Mary Jo was trapped in at the bottom of Chappaquiddick. Obama’s Oldsmobile is the Benghazi Consulate—a crime scene left unprotected and where 4 Americans were left unguarded as Al Qaeda rained mortars and RPGs down upon them, assassinating the Ambassador. Obama, like teddy before him, had a narrative, a political future, an election to concern himself with and just crawled into a nice bed after a toddy and a smoke while the Ambassador was drug through the streets of Benghazi, eventually getting deposited at the hospital just like Mary Jo was after she was disinterred from the bottom of the river—both events occurring to the horror of both Democrats who perpetrated them and where both Democrats lied about the events post haste after perpetrating them.

ted c on September 28, 2012 at 5:25 PM

The FBI is not worried about the delay. There’s yellow tape around the consulate.

Finbar on September 28, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2