As the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was unfolding, a high-ranking Pentagon official urgently messaged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s top deputies to offer military help, according to an email obtained by Judicial Watch.
The revelation appears to contradict testimony Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave lawmakers in 2013, when he said there was no time to get forces to the scene in Libya, where four Americans were killed, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens.
“I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton],” reads the email, from Panetta’s chief of staff Jeremy Bash. “After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.”
The email was sent out at 7:19 p.m. ET on Sept. 11, 2012, in the early stages of the eight-hour siege that also claimed the lives of Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith and two former Navy SEALs, Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, private CIA contractors who raced to the aid of embattled State Department workers.
Although the email came after the first wave of the attack at the consulate, it occurred before a mortar strike on the CIA annex killed Woods and Doherty.
Obama lied. Hillary lied. They all lied.
More at Fox News
Obama and Hillary lied to kill time.
Now they can pull the old, ”it’s old news,” canard.
Airplanes flying dump too much CO2 into the environment. Saving the lives not worth the impact on climate.
“While the Committee does not rush to release or comment on every document it uncovers, I can confirm that we obtained the unredacted version of this email last year, in addition to Jake Sullivan’s response,” Wolding said. “This email chain helped inform the Committee’s interview of Sullivan in September and will help inform the Committee’s upcoming interviews with Thomas Nides and others.”
The UNredacted version must have been a hoot but something tells me there will not be a framed print of it at the entrance of the Obama Presidential Library.
407 days to Nobama
From the Washington Times on 10/28/2012 – To paraphrase- Gen Ham was prepared to go. He ignored the stand down order. 30 min later his second in command ( Gen Roodriques) had him apprehended and relieved Ham as commander. This incident was never really investigated. Why?
@minuteman26: According to Greg that was the moment he decided to quietly retire. PFFFT
You cant tell me the US Marines cant be anywhere with special forces on this Planet within 1 hour, the firefight at Bengahzi lasted 7 hours. But the optics during the campaign and perhaps a unacceptable delay to get to Vegas and tell his followers how he beat terrorism, and saved the economy just wouldn’t allow saving the men at the Embassy/outpost/camping trip.
Imagine how bad it would have looked for Obama’s campaign if some soldiers had been killed or wounded? Cmon… you gotta have some perspective here.
@Bill: Perhaps some the attackers were innocent civilians impossible to engage.
Give me one credible reason why a military response would not have been ordered, if military forces could have been put on the scene in sufficient time to do any good. The key word here is credible. By that, I mean something that makes sense to people other than conspiracy theorists. This is the sort of bull crap that the right has been spinning about Benghazi since the day it happened.
The email proves nothing other than that there was a spike of internal communications that coincided with news that the compound in Benghazi was under attack. That’s what any thoughtful person would expect. The reaction in military circles would be to put all potential ready response forces on full alert the moment they have knowledge of a threat. You begin “spinning up” before a developing situation has been analyzed and before command decisions have been made concerning the feasibility of various the response options that are available. You don’t wait to wake the guys up until the orders come down.
@Greg: Give me one credible reason why a military response would not have been ordered, if military forces could have been put on the scene in sufficient time to do any good.
Gun running by the CIA it took 2 weeks, and the consulate was left for looters. for the FBI to be allowed to “investigate” Why allow possible witnesses to their operation. Where are the perps/protestors?
Gosh, Greg. That’s a tough one. In fact, there IS no credible reason why a military response would not have been ordered… by a LEADER. For, ask yourself, why NOT? What if they got there too late; at least we TRIED.
Oh, look, Greg… there’s the PROBLEM!!! They didn’t even bother to TRY, even though there was NO REASON not to. Goddamnit… with Americans under attack and being killed, they didn’t even F**KING TRY!
So, the real question should be WHY didn’t they bother to try? There you cannot avoid a theory, conspiracy or otherwise, because this administration has made it its mission to stonewall and lie about every detail. However, it is not difficult to figure out a credible reason. Since we know they tried the ridiculous excuse of a video causing the attack (knowing full well it DIDN’T, so we know they were knowingly lying for some reason, the obvious conclusion is that the attack was an embarrassing refutation to Obama’s proclamations that he has al Qaeda on the run. With that in mind, as I stated in #6, Obama and Hillary were spending all their energy trying to find a suitable video to blame in order to salvage the election; why would they risk military lives which would only make the matter a greater political liability. Politics was the reason, Greg. Politics. Nothing more. Nothing else. Obama’s election. That’s it.
It took Obama 16 hours to decide to go in and kill bin Laden when he knew his damned address!! By the time he weighed all the political exposure, pros and cons as to whether or not to save the lives of those Americans… they were already dead. After all, it’s HIS legacy he had to worry about.
THAT’S why, Greg. And it is indeed credible.
Obama is a despicable example of a human being. Hillary is no better… possibly worse.
All evidence indicates the right is totally incapable of objectivity regarding Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Benghazi, and democrats in general.
How many investigations of Benghazi have there been now? Why keep holding investigations, if the GOP is only going to reject their findings? That last one is easy, assuming a person is smart enough to figure out the obvious and honest enough to admit it.
@Greg: How can they stop investigating when the evidence isn’t provided, they only have a portion of the emails so far. And the democratic questioning side of the hearings is a joke.
@Greg: I can’t help but notice the total absence of any contrary explanation.
This email just now became available. How can an investigation be concluded when information like this is hidden?
As was pointed out in post #8, the text of the email indicates that the military was preparing to move a response force to Benghazi. That’s exactly what they should have been doing, while information from all available sources was being analyzed and deliberated. That’s what they’d be expected to do, right up until the point they were told either to go or not to go. They should have been doing that whether they thought inserting forces into the situation could be useful, or would be useless or even a very bad decision. The email simply acknowledges that they were preparing as they would be expected to do.
The simplest explanation is that it was realized there would be no way to insert forces into the situation quickly enough to be of use, and that doing so would be at the risk of sustaining a lot of U.S. casualties. It’s been well documented that putting people on the ground would have taken hours. Nearby air support frequently alluded to existed only in the imagination. Even in hindsight, given the locations of available forces, help wouldn’t have arrived in time. How many more Americans might have been dead would be anybody’s guess.
@Greg: But they didn’t. Remember that detail? Did not Hillary and Obama deny there was any stand-down? Perhaps simply ignoring the pleas to give the go ahead could be considered a stand-down.
What pleas to give the go ahead? That’s part of a partially imaginary recounting of events.
People don’t separate the misinformation that flooded the media, deliberate and otherwise, from the reality. The entire right-wing narrative is unsubstantiated and reads like alternate history. Investigation after investigation has failed to establish any of it as factual, and not for want of trying. What we have is a politically motivated smear campaign—one of several, playing simultaneously, or in rotation.
The fact of the matter is that errors were made that are more apparent in retrospect than they were in the moment. People tragically died, in part as a result of such errors. If we could see future events as well as we can events of the past such things would be far less likely happen. Unfortunately no one can. It’s hard enough to clearly see the present.
No one seems to know who was on the other end of the phone, but these guys were there.
8 investigations and still evidence is being gathered WTF obstruction of justice needs to mean something the delays to congress no excuse. Jail those who are holding back the evidence.
If no evidence can be found, it’s because all of the evidence is being hidden?
That theory allows people believe anything they want—or, more accurately, anything somebody else wants you to believe—without ever having to come up with a shred of proof. I’m not quite ready to cut the daily news totally away from reality and surrender my mind to propagandists and conspiracy theorists. I’m not ready for a reality TV host to be president. I can see the accelerating drift in that direction.
@Greg: Oh, we aren’t allowed to believe what we want? Has the left already usurped THAT right? The right to THINK? It would appear they believe they have and are setting the example of compliance for the rest of us.
We found the evidence of the foreknowledge that the Benghazi attack was an organized terror attack… AFTER the hearings. We found the evidence of the collusion to blame the video AFTER the hearings. We found out that Hillary kept all pertinent emails on a secret, unsecured server AFTER the hearings. Now we find definitive proof that a rescue attempt was ready to go almost immediately but no one would answer the phone at 4 am…. AFTER the hearings.
Important evidence all secreted away so we wouldn’t discover the incompetence and lies this administration is infected with.
We don’t have a choice with Obama; all we can do is look forward to his turning the office over to some competent adult. However, KNOWING this, why would anyone but a brainwashed ideologue still defend Hillary and support her for office? Doubt know you are still allowed to THINK?
@Greg: Oh I know you are READY FOR HILLARY.
Committed cause you got that bumper sticker slapped right next to HOPE AND CHANGE. Guess what the terrorists are not swayed by the coexist bumper sticker. I know your belief theory only applies to conservatives. Liberals are already programmed.
My support for Hillary Clinton will be about 50 percent inclination to support her, and 50 percent total rejection of the unacceptable alternative the GOP is increasingly likely to be offering. The GOP won’t derail Trump, out of fear he’ll make a 3rd party move. They’ll get behind him in the end. They’ll probably convince themselves that they can somehow get him under control, if he’s elected. That will be like trying to put the genii back in the bottle.
@Greg: Support of Hillary is unacceptable. She is a liar and most likely a criminal. She has sold not just her influence, but the influence of the US State Department for her own enrichment. Not to mention the fact that her incompetence got 4 Americans killed, and then she lied about every aspect of that episode, including lying in the faces of grieving loved ones of her victims.
I cannot conceive of an American dedicated to their country voting for such a person.