The Benghazi Stonewall at State Department: Senators want Ambassador's Cables

Three days after the Benghazi attacks in which Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed, the State Department attempted to hide behind the, 'we are not going to' talk about the ongoing investigation line. Since then, so much has been learned despite the attempts to stonewall that a couple of Senators on the Foreign Relations Committee are demanding access to Stevens' cables.

Via Foreign Policy:

"While we appreciate the sensitivities associated with this ongoing investigation, we must insist on more timely information regarding the attacks and the events leading up to the attacks," wrote Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Johnny Isaakson (R-GA) in a letter to Clinton Tuesday.

They acknowledged that Clinton is in the process of setting up an Accountability Review Board, although its chairman former Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Pickering said Monday that the panel hasn't started it work yet. But the senators don't want to wait for the board to finish its report, which might not be transmitted to Congress until next spring.

"To that end, we request that you transmit to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee all communications between the U.S. Mission to Libya and the State Department relevant to the security situation in Benghazi in the period leading up to the attacks, including, but not limited to, cables sent from Ambassador Stevens," they wrote.

CNN may have played a significant role in all of this last week, when it reported that it had acquired Stevens' personal diary from the consulate. In it, Stevens wrote that he was concerned about being on an al-Qaeda hit list and a lack of security, which we now know was due to the State Department requesting and receiving a Security Waiver for the consulate.

Here is a short video report from Anderson Cooper talking about the diary last week:



In the days after the diary raised legitimate questions, Buzzfeed reported on a profanity-laden exchange via email from one of Clinton's closest aides - Philippe Reines - to a Buzzfeed reporter who had asked some of those legitimate questions. Some may find such an exchange reminiscent of what CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson encountered last year, when digging for answers in Operation Fast and Furious. As we now know, both the Department of Justice and the White House had something to hide there too. Barack Obama asserted Executive Privilege in refusing to release Congressionally subpoenaed documents, as his Attorney General was being held in contempt for not doing it.

It would seem that based on the contents of Stevens' diary, the State Department's stonewalling, a Clinton aide's profane emails, and now the demands of two Senators that State turn over cables, we may be approaching a situation not all that dissimilar from how the administration handled Fast and Furious - by attempting to cover it up.

We'll know we're there when Obama asserts Executive Privilege over those cables.

CNN: Benghazi Consulate was given 'Security Waiver'

We now know that U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was concerned about al-Qaeda, Islamic extremism and security at his consulate in Benghazi, all because of a diary he kept, that wound up in the hands of CNN. Now, CNN is reporting that the Consulate was issued a 'Security Waiver' because it was a temporary, newly established facility the State Department deemed necessary as stability in the country after Gadhafi's fall was too important.

By leaving the Consulate open for business with a waiver, it essentially meant that no barriers were required, no safe room was needed, and multiple layers of security weren't necessary.

As you'll see in the video report below, it takes a significant amount of time to get a consulate up to snuff when it comes to security requirements. It would seem that while it might take quite a while to construct barriers and safe rooms, having multiple layers of security in the form of armed guards could have been done relatively quickly and might have compensated for the absence of other security measures.

That didn't happen and it's looking increasingly like Stevens was sent into a hornets nest without being protected.

Via Right Newz:

Audio: Newt rallies behind Todd Akin, rails against establishment

Newt Gingrich appeared on the Jamie Allman show in St. Louis on September 24th to make the case for Rep. Todd Akin against Claire McCaskill in a critical Senate race in that state. The former Speaker nailed it when he referred to six seconds of an interview Akin would like to have back compared to six years of 'destructive' votes from McCaskill sensible people wished never took place.

Akin is a conservative, tea party kinda guy. The establishment doesn't like him. Karl Rove joked about his murder at a fundraiser. Gingrich nailed him on it. RNC Chairman Reince Priebus continues to insist Akin will not get a dime of RNC support. Ditto John Cornyn, who heads the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). It would seem that as the Republican nominee for President, Romney should have a bit of influence on the RNC and the NRSC. If he does, it doesn't appear that he's using any of it to help Akin.

But you know what Romney IS doing? As Newt is in Missouri, campaigning for Akin, Romney will be speaking at Bill Clinton's Global Initiative, perhaps the former president's biggest pet project. Some would argue - myself included - that what Akin said is less distasteful that what Romney is doing by lending voice to the CGI, especially when better use of his time might be spent in Missouri, showing support for Akin.

Here is a screenshot taken from the list of CGI Speakers between September 23rd - 25th:

Once again, the establishment shows that it's not willing to do what it insists conservatives should do - hold their nose and support the Republican nominee.

Here's Newt - otherwise known as the man who should have gotten the nomination - with Jamie Allman.



h/t GWP