WASHINGTON — A high-level State Department investigative panel turned over a secret report Monday assessing blame for the deadly terrorist attacks against the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, setting the stage for a clash on the issue this week between the Obama administration and Republican critics.
The five-member Accountability Review Board delivered the report to the State Department two days before congressional panels are to hear testimony from its leading members, former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Michael G. Mullen, in closed session.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee will take public testimony Thursday from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s two deputies, William J. Burns and Thomas Nides, for the administration’s response to the report and its suggestions on how to strengthen security in the region.
Key Republican lawmakers believe that during the presidential campaign, the administration played down security shortcomings that enabled Islamic militants to successfully attack the lightly defended compound. They have vowed to press hard to get a full picture of the events.
The 1968 legislation authorizing such boards directs them to assign specific responsibility for any security shortcomings, and the report could contain criticism for officials all the way to the top of the department, according to former officials who have been involved in such inquiries.
Clinton was expected to testify this week, but asked, over the weekend, to be excused because of a minor concussion she suffered early last week. The secretary, battling a stomach virus, fainted and struck her head, aides disclosed Saturday.
Clinton sent a letter to the committees Monday saying she was willing to “engage them in January” on the issue and will be “open to whatever they consider appropriate in that regard,” said Victoria Nuland, a department spokeswoman.
The board’s report has classified and unclassified sections. The State Department will release the unclassified section, probably on Wednesday. (article)
“Clinton was expected to testify this week, but asked, over the weekend, to be excused because of a minor concussion she suffered early last week. The secretary, battling a stomach virus, fainted and struck her head, aides disclosed Saturday.”
I love how you worded this. She “asked” over the weekend….”aides disclosed.”
Elsewhere in the MSM, we’re told things like, “A concussion has stopped Clinton from testifying.” No he said/she said. No question about it, it happened and the poor dear wants so badly to testify but…shucks…dem’s da breaks. Tsk tsk tsk.
How do we know this happened? We all learned about it after-the-fact, as far as I know. There’s nothing to corroborate it in the slightest. Not even an itty bitty 911 call asking for help.
Who is she, Michael Jackson reincarnate? Let’s see, dehydration caused by a stomach virus, fainting and suffering from a concussion. Ahh, to heck with it, stay home surrounded by personal physicians. There’s nothing hinky about that at all….
Is this a step up from, “I’m sorry–I can’t recall”……what I don’t quite get is that they apparently don’t expect her to ever recover from the flu or the concussion. If they did, they would have requested a postponement of her testimony. Since she is apparently never going to recover, seems to me she should resign from her lofty perch.
Our SOS is not able/willing to submit to questioning by the Constitutionally appointed oversight body. Reality.
Wonder if she broke her nose and had gashes on the back of her head?
I’m curious as to how this happened. I’ve fainted more times than I like to admit.(low blood pressure, nothing serious)
I know everyone is different, especially concerning health matters, but I’ve always been conscious during the fall. First you see stars, you basically go blind (looks like TV static), the body collapses, and you’re gone when you hit the ground.
Your head is falling about 5 feet (for a woman, anyway). You’re not even falling at the rate of gravity – your body crumples, it doesn’t just “floop” head-over-heels. You kind of “squat,” fall to your knees, then your hip, then your side, then your shoulder, and FINALLY your head. But your body has basically absorbed all of the impact. Your head just “rests.”
Just in my experience, I’ve been conscious during the fall so I have at least 2 or 3 seconds to sort of “push” myself in the direction I want to go. I passed out at the supermarket checkout once, standing right beside the belt. When I blinded, I said in the general direction of the cashier, “I need help…..” and while I fell, I leaned backward so my fall would be squat, butt, back, head. I was able to avoid hitting anything.
And it doesn’t even hurt! It’s never hurt! Falls hurt, when you trip and have that extra momentum going. Catching yourself with your hands, arms, elbows, knees…that hurts. Fainting doesn’t hurt. Its that initial “squat” you do that pretty much saves you from any injury.
What exactly was Clinton doing? Was she standing right beside a shelf? Was there a cinderblock coincidentally below her, in the unfortunate area her head landed? Did she fall down the stairs? Did she fall off a cliff? What in the world caused such an impact to her head to cause a concussion?
Had she been standing on a ladder and fell on her head – sure. But standing on her own two feet and crumpling? Fishy fishy.
Maybe she was drunk…so fell hard, out of control, awkwardly? I agree with your analysis. I’ve collapsed two times in my life, and both times I “saw it coming” and “managed” it as well as possible. I have to tell you also that both times, I actually thought it was kind of funny—from my own perspective, blacking out within my head, knowing I was going down, and knowing there wasn’t a bloomin’ thing I could do it about it. (I have a weird sense of humor at times….)
But I do think there’s a very good possibility she was drunk, and thus fell in a more damaging way.
So the 3am phone call Clinton so proudly campaigned on in 2008 remains unanswered.
I’m disgusted by this whole affair. The news is communicating (daily) the funerals by name in CT and even the president spoke there and said all their names. When was Steven’s funeral? Where was the coverage for any of the funerals? Where was the press interviews of the families? Had a Republican been in office when this happened, they would have been tarred and feathered in the press for years. Now the darling of the left is making excuses not to testify and the left can care less about getting to the truth or justice. They are just waiting for it to fade away.
Man before principle….
ABSOLUTELY NAIL HIT ON HEAD.
IMO the most egregious act, that is after the fact, was obama and clinton (names intentionally lowercase) praising those men dragging Stevens body away and intimating they were doing so to obtain medical care, I believe what I have read and the facts show nothing could be farther from the truth. For that alone both clinton and obama should have to face the appropriate consequences, not being held to task and thereby relieved of responsibility seems unconscionable.
Perhaps I shall change my screen name to Angry in Fl, I was aghast but then that was long ago…
You mention the deception in the business of dragging Stevens’ body away and pretending they had high-flying motives..sickening…..and then the silence that has followed. Utter silence. No words of public comfort that are worth a hill of beans for Mr. Stevens’ parents. No statement of outrage regarding how he was treated. No shame for allowing even a dead body to be treated this way and not, at minimum, registering a public rebuke.
Yo, guys and gals, this is just an example of what the snakes are getting away with while they distract the public with the Connecticut shooting. NOTE that the POtuS has nominated Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense. You’d think that when the slimy liberal POtuS nominates a Republican for SecDef he’s practicing inclusiveness and bipartisanship, no? How about the POtuS nominating not so much a Republican but an anti-Israeli who is dead set against sanctions on Iran or attacking Iran over its ‘illegally’ building a nuke? Hagel may be anathema to the POtuS as far as his party membership is concerned BUT he shares the POtuS’s screw Israel feelings and is pro-Iranian nuke. So, the POtuS seems to believe that the Muslims need a caliphate to deal with other power centers around the world, and they also need nukes so that the caliphate will be taken seriously,. The POtuS is looking for Quisling Republicans to make his dream of a multi-polar world come true and to make it look as if he’s willing to be bipartisan – guess what Santa (or Satan – the handwriting on the card wasn’t too clear) left him under his tree?
Liberality the tittle to this say’s it all.
Systematic failure…Maybe some hope that the State Department will be held accountable?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_LIBYA_ATTACKS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-12-18-21-20-30