Controversy over Susan Rice's Benghazi comments continues

On Tuesday, U.S. United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice met with Republican senators who have accused her of misleading the public following the attack on the US Embassy in Benghazi. The White House is searching for a replacement for Hillary Clinton, who plans to leave her job as secretary of state in January. 

AP Photo/Craig Ruttle, File
This file photo shows U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice speaking at U.N. headquarters. With congressional opposition softening, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice could find her name in contention as early as this week to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice on Tuesday conceded that an early account she gave about the attack on the U.S. mission in BenghaziLibya, was partly inaccurate, but her admission failed to win over Republican senators who accused her of misleading the public.

Rice met for about an hour behind closed doors at the U.S. Capitol with Republican Senators John McCainLindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte, who have threatened to block her nomination if President Barack Obama chooses her for secretary of state or another top post in his second-term Cabinet.

They have criticized her for initial comments after the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that suggested it was a spontaneous event arising from protests over an anti-Islam film rather than a premeditated attack.

The U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were killed in the attack on the Benghazi mission and a nearby CIA annex. Intelligence officials later said the attack was possibly tied to al Qaeda affiliates.

"We are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got, and some that we didn't get, concerning evidence that was overwhelming leading up to the attack on our consulate," McCain told reporters after the meeting.

"It is clear that the information that she gave the American people was incorrect when she said that it was a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video," he said.

"It was not, and there was compelling evidence at the time that that was certainly not the case, including statements by Libyans as well as other Americans who are fully aware that people don't bring mortars and rocket-propelled grenades to spontaneous demonstrations," McCain said.

Graham said he would move to block the nomination of "anybody" who was linked to the Benghazi events.

Republicans have argued that the Obama administration tried to play down the terrorist angle in its initial comments to avoid undermining the president's claims of success in fighting al Qaeda in the run-up to the Nov. 6 election.

Rice, who was accompanied to the meeting by acting CIA Director Michael Morell, later issued a statement.

"We explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key respect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi," she said in the statement.

"While, we certainly wish that we had had perfect information just days after the terrorist attack, as is often the case, the intelligence assessment has evolved," she said.

"We stressed that neither I nor anyone else in the Administration intended to mislead the American people at any stage in this process." 

Tempest over talking points 

Rice's controversial Benghazi statements were based on a set of unclassified talking points prepared by U.S. intelligence agencies for members of Congress.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Tuesday that the questions about Rice's appearance on the talk shows and the talking points she used had been answered. "The focus on - some might say obsession on - comments made on Sunday shows seems to me and to many to be misplaced," he said.

But Republican senators said the meeting with Rice and Morell left them with more concerns than before. In a statement McCain, Graham and Ayotte said there was now more confusion about who had made changes in the talking points before they were given to Rice.

Morell told the senators during the meeting that the FBI had removed references to al Qaeda from the talking points "and did so to prevent compromising an ongoing criminal investigation" of the attack on the U.S. mission, the statement by McCain, Graham and Ayotte said.

"However, at approximately 4:00 this afternoon, CIA officials contacted us and indicated that Acting Director Morell misspoke in our earlier meeting. The CIA now says that it deleted the al-Qaeda references, not the FBI. They were unable to give a reason as to why," the statement said.

The initial draft of the talking points written by the CIA referred to "attacks" carried out by "extremists with ties to al Qaeda." However by the time Rice received them, "attacks" had changed to "demonstrations" and "with ties to al Qaeda" had been deleted, multiple U.S. sources have said.

A U.S. intelligence official said the CIA changed the reference to al Qaeda for "several valid intelligence and investigatory reasons."

Among the reasons cited were that "the information about individuals linked to al Qaeda was derived from classified sources, and could not be corroborated at the unclassified level; the links were tenuous and therefore it made sense to be cautious before naming perpetrators; finally, no one wanted to prejudice a criminal investigation in its earliest stages."

U.S. intelligence officials have denied that there was any intent to misinform. The White House has denied making the edits in the talking points, and had no further comment on the subject after the meeting.

'Way too early to tell'

Obama has defended Rice and said if senators have a problem with the administration's handling of Benghazi they should "go after me" rather than try to "besmirch her reputation."

Obama has also said if he believed Rice was the right person for a job in his administration, he would not hesitate to nominate her, throwing down the gauntlet to Republicans.

The White House has not given a timeframe for when the president might nominate a replacement for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Clinton's aides have said she plans to step down around the inauguration, which is in late January, and would like to stay until her successor is confirmed.

Rice has some defenders on Capitol Hill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, said Tuesday he was shocked that Republican attacks on Rice were continuing, calling them "outrageous and unmoored from facts and reality."

Rice met in the afternoon with Senator Joseph Lieberman, an Independent who is chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, and she will meet on Wednesday with the panel's top Republican, Senator Susan Collins.

Collins said it was "way too early to tell" if Rice could attract the 60 Senate votes needed to overcome any procedural obstacles if she is nominated, but that Rice had erred in being the administration's voice on Benghazi if she was interested in becoming secretary of state.

"The secretary of state is supposed to be above politics, and she played a very political role by appearing at the height of the political campaign, on those shows," Collins said.

But Lieberman, after meeting Rice, said she had done nothing to disqualify herself for some other position in government.

"I specifically asked her whether at any point prior to going on those Sunday morning television shows she was briefed or urged to say certain things by anybody in the White House related to the campaign or political operations. She said 'no.'"

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Controversy over Susan Rice's Benghazi comments continues
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today