Statistics |
Total online: 1 Guests: 1 Users: 0 |
|
Main » 2013 » June » 4 » House Republicans continue to demand more documents out of the Obama administration on the Benghazi terror attack
1:06 PM House Republicans continue to demand more documents out of the Obama administration on the Benghazi terror attack |
House Republicans continue to demand more documents out of the Obama
administration on the Benghazi terror attack, praising the release of
100 pages of internal deliberations as an encouraging step but claiming
the government should do more to clear up questions. "While these
hundred are good and they shed light on what happened, we have nearly
25,000 that they haven't released," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told
Fox News. He noted the documents released late Wednesday -- a release
long sought by Republicans -- for the most part covered two days of
communications. "What about the ones before and what about all the ones
after? Let's go ahead and release those as well," Chaffetz said. The
administration gave no indication that more documents would be
forthcoming. White House spokesman Eric Schultz said the decision to
make the records public was an "extraordinary step." He said "hopefully"
Washington can now move beyond the controversy. Democratic Sen. Bob
Menendez also said on the Senate floor Thursday that the issue has been
"fully vetted." The information contained in the emails and notes
released Wednesday depicted how several different agencies were deeply
involved in editing and polishing the administration's internal
story-line on Benghazi in the days following the attack. They showed how
RS Gold officials in particular voiced concern that references to prior
attacks and security warnings could be used to criticize the fitflop sale
administration -- those references were later stripped. Further, they
showed how references to Al Qaeda and Islamic extremists were ultimately
removed as well. Some Republicans refrained from calling for more
documents. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., vice chairman of the Senate
intelligence committee, said in a statement he was "glad" to see the
White House publish the talking points. "I have been pushing for the
release of this paper trail for weeks," he said. The office of House
Speaker John Boehner called the release "long overdue," but also
indicated it wanted to see more. Spokesman Brendan Buck said "there are
relevant documents the administration has still refused to produce" and
said they hope the "limited release of documents is a sign of more
cooperation to come." The documents were released under pressure after
whistle-blowers testified on the Hill and some email excerpts leaked to
the media last week. The documents showed the White House, along with
several other departments, played a role in editing the so-called
"talking points," despite claims from the White House that it was barely
involved. And they showed then-CIA Director David Petraeus objected to
the watered-down version that would ultimately be used as the basis for
U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's flawed comments on several TV shows the
Sunday after the attack. "Frankly, I'd just as soon not use this,"
Petraeus told his deputy in discount fitflops
a Sept. 15 email.The 100-page file showed that State Department
officials were even more heavily involved in editing the "talking
points" than was previously known. One email sent the Friday night after
the attack from an unknown official said: "The State Department had
major reservations with much or most of the document." Individual emails
leading up to that assessment show State officials repeatedly objecting
to the intelligence community's early version of events.The early
versions stated that "Islamic extremists with ties to Al Qaeda"
participated in the assault and discussed links to militant group Ansar
al Sharia -- and referenced prior attacks against western targets in
Benghazi, as well as intelligence warnings. State Department spokeswoman
Victoria Nuland complained that she had "serious concerns" about
"arming members of Congress" to make assertions the administration was
not making. "In same vein, why do we want Hill to be fingering Ansar al
Sharia, when we aren't doing that ourselves until we have investigation
results ... and the penultimate point could be abused by Members to beat
the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings so why
do we want to feed that either? Concerned ..." She also wrote that the
line saying the administration knows there were extremists among the
demonstrators "will come back to us at podium," voicing concern that
some would question how the administration knows that. She said she
would "need answers" if that line is used. In response to her concerns,
Assistant Secretary of State David S. Adams voiced agreement. He said
the line about prior incidents "will read to members like we had been
repeatedly warned." The emails show Petraeus' deputy Mike Morell
involved in circulating and revising the talking points. In one email,
he too noted the State Department had "deep concerns" Fitflop Rokkit Sandals
about referencing prior "warnings." As late as 3:04 p.m. on Friday, the
points still included references to extremists tied to Al Qaeda and an
"attack." The terms "Al Qaeda" and "attack" were stripped by 4:42 p.m.
Senior administration officials indicated Wednesday these terms were
dropped after internal CIA deliberations.
|
Views: 430 |
Added by: jsjideng
| Rating: 0.0/0 |
|
|
|