You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to www.journalgazette.net/newsletter and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.

World

Advertisement

CIA defends Rice to panel

Denies she politicized account of assault on Benghazi

– Five days after the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice described what precipitated the deadly incident based on initial intelligence that later proved incorrect, the deputy CIA director told Congress on Thursday.

In a closed-door session with the House Intelligence committee, Mike Morell said Rice was provided with an unclassified version of events at the U.S. mission in Benghazi that left American Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others dead, according to Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a member of the panel.

The assessment concluded that a spontaneous protest over an anti-Muslim video had evolved into an attack on the American consulate, a description that Rice presented in television interviews the Sunday morning after the attack.

Schiff told reporters that he didn’t think the intelligence community had politicized the information.

“They gave us the best initial assessments, and those proved inaccurate, but they warned us those assessments were subject to change as they got more information,” he said.

Rice’s comments on national television have drawn fierce criticism, with some Senate Republicans promising to block her nomination if President Obama taps her to replace Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Obama angrily defended Rice on Wednesday at a White House news conference and called the complaints outrageous attempts to besmirch her reputation.

Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Intelligence panel, said Rice “was given that same information we received from the administration through the intelligence community. And that’s the information she testified to, end of story.”

In one of her TV interviews, Rice said she was providing the “best information and the best assessment we have today.”

“In fact, this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video,” she said. “People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent. Those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are quite common in post-revolutionary Libya, and that then spun out of control.”

That answer has drawn constant criticism from Republicans, who question why Rice failed to call the event a terrorist attack.

Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said they would work to defeat Rice’s selection if she is nominated to be the nation’s top diplomat. Graham said Wednesday that he couldn’t back anyone who is “up to their eyeballs in the Benghazi debacle.”

Ruppersberger said the initial attack on the consulate was chaotic, with “a lot of people running around,” while the second attack, on a CIA annex near the consulate, “seemed a lot more sophisticated,” with the use of mortars, more clearly pointing to terrorist training and tactics.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., the committee’s ranking Republican, said he had heard nothing to change his belief that Rice “was saying exactly what the political shop at the White House told her to say.”

Advertisement