• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Clinton Attempts to Dismiss Leaked Benghazi E-Mails

    Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded in an interview with television reporters to the leak of incriminating State Department e-mails from September 11. It was another disgraceful performance by an Obama Administration official, an attempt to flagrantly dismiss mounting, incriminating evidence.

    The e-mails, obtained by Reuters and CBS, informed other government agencies as well as the White House in real time about the terrorist attack taking place on the Benghazi consulate. Their content clearly contradicted the Obama Administration’s argument that the attack was a result of a spontaneous demonstration spurred by an anti-Islam video.

    This discrepancy raises the question as to why no U.S. military assets were deployed to rescue the beleaguered diplomatic personnel. The last of the three leaked e-mails even stated that a terrorist group, Ansar al-Sharia, claimed “responsibility” on Facebook and Twitter for the murders of the four American victims on the day of the attack.

    Clinton’s first line of defense was to imply that the e-mails were taken out of context and that only the State Department’s own review board’s report will—in the fullness of time, when conditions are right, and so on—give us the full picture of what happened on September 11 in Benghazi. To quote Clinton:

    Now finally on Benghazi, look, I’ve said it and I’ll say it one more time. No one wants to find out what happened more than I do. We are holding ourselves accountable to the American people, because not only they, but our brave diplomats and development experts serving in dangerous places around the world, deserve no less. The independent accountability review board is already hard at work looking at everything; not cherry-picking, you know, one story here or one document there, but looking at everything, which I highly recommend as the appropriate approach to something as complex as an attack like this.

    Clinton’s second line was to dismiss social media as a credible medium for a terrorist organization seeking to claim credit for a bloody crime. This dismissal is entirely out of line with the Clinton State Department’s embrace of social media. It has invested countless man hours in social media and has embraced it for counterterrorism communication. Again, to quote Clinton:

    You know, posting something on Facebook is not, in and of itself, evidence, and I think it just underscores how fluid the reporting was at the time and continued for some time to be.

    What I keep in mind is that four brave Americans were killed and we will find out what happened, we will take whatever measures are necessary to fix anything that needs to be fixed, and we will bring those to justice who committed these murders. And I think that is what, that is what we have said, that is what we are doing. I am very confident that we will achieve those goals.

    As it happens, the State Department review board will conveniently report after the presidential election, and expecting the Obama Administration to investigate itself is a non-starter after its initial, inept attempt at obfuscating the events in Benghazi.

    In the days ahead, the drip, drip, drip of leaked documents and e-mails will undoubtedly tell the American people more about what really happened in Benghazi and in Washington. And, shocking as it may be, the four Americans who lost their lives deserve that the truth be known.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    8 Responses to Clinton Attempts to Dismiss Leaked Benghazi E-Mails

    1. Stan Hess says:

      Obama, Clinton are both accountable, and both should be fire. But the truth is they are directly responsible, and should have to face court.

    2. Paul Terry Stone says:

      It's indicative of what kind of government we've got when every last detail has priority over people's lives.

    3. Guest I. Guess says:

      My problem with this is that President Obama knew about the attack but did nothing to send in assistance. He was too worried about himself to be worried about death and tragedy for others. I am sure his first thought was "Will this hurt or help my campaign? Will it help or hurt it more if I address it right away or should I act like I did not know about it and then respond later?" And somewhere in there he had to think about the lives that were immediately lost in the attack and the lives that may have been lost in between the time he pretended not to know about it and when he finally took time away from his campaign to look at it. There is no escaping the truth of the emails, even though they blocked out everyone's names, that is, those other people who also did not respond. It is shameful and embarrassing that this could happen in this Land of the Free. It is not so free anymore with him at the helm.

    4. Fireant says:

      After the elections doesn't cut it. There's enough information out already to understand that the current administration has been sweeping this terrible crisis under as many carpets as they can so not to interfere with there plan to destroy America as we know it. Time to vote these incompetents out of power and bring in experienced professionals like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to rebuild our American way of life. If not for the economy then the handling of Benghazi should be the wake up call.

      • I'm glad someone is finally willing to admit that the attack in Libya is being used as the typical last minute smear campaign that we all have become quite accustomed to before presidential elections. Hey, that's cool…I mean, you have to pick a smear campaign, and the timing of this one was almost perfect. It may have even fooled a couple of morons who didn't know who they were voting for. But in all reality, the implications that our president 1) hears about terrorist attacks before the leaders in the military, and 2) has the responsibility for ordering assistance to embassy members, and 3) actually knew that the attack was coming, and knew when members of the military, CIA and FBI didn't know (which is patently absurd and impossible), AND 4) witnesses the attack in real time and DENIES to provide assistance…no intelligent person would believe any of that, so continuing to push this agenda in this way is only succeeding in dividing the political factions in the US even further. That seems to be what the right wants.

        • Daniel says:

          The politicizing was done when Obama lied. What happened in the press when it was reported that Bush lied? There was nothing but 24/7 questioning of it. The press is very silent about this, why?

          In your questions it appears that you believe he didn't know and if in fact that was the case then the people he put in place to make certain he knows about what is going on, failed. But as Harry Truman stated, the buck stops at the Oval Office.

          The President being the Chief Executive and the State Department being under his purview, he is responsible for the safety and security of the Embassies. It is his job to put folks in place to establish and verify a safe place for US Citizens. Every US Embassy is US soil and he pledged to safeguard this nation. He failed.

          The emails sent were real time requests. They are on the servers and if they were incorrect or manufactured, why is there no proof by the administration to the contrary?

    5. Jeanne Stotler says:

      We see the TRUE Obama, a self centered egomananic and a dangerous man WHO will over run our Congress and Constituton, or at least try. Even as we vote, he is concocting a way to preserve himself as ruler. We ALL need to be alert on Nov.7th, that’s when problems will arise when Obama loses, he WILL NOT concede, Be alert and prepared s this is a VERY DANGEROUS Man

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×