You're watching...
Uncut: House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa reflects on the sometimes frustrating hearing on the terror attacks on the US consulate in Liby...
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- It seem to me today the hearing that you held here has essentially three different.
Issues -- -- gotten all the but the first one is.
The security at this consulate in Ben Ghazi and in hindsight what we could've done or should have done -- what was there that's the first and the second as -- whether -- Qaeda.
Is in Libya and it's -- whether it's growing not that you did cover and then the third is that why in the world.
That the administration.
Was going with a story about there's a protest the YouTube video -- the State Department.
Watch it real time.
Knew that there was no protests so let's over the first one to be learned today.
Anything about the security that concerns him.
But deficit what concerns us is that the career professionals on the ground.
We're saying and this is multiple -- professionals over time that they didn't have the resources.
Where they were losing the resources they needed to protect their diplomatic missions.
And ultimately those warnings were not -- and resources were cut down to the level of Cumberland.
How -- the words of the with a -- is as blunt as this is really serious where unsafe.
And you better sense something fast or is it like things are getting a little bit rugged here we're -- -- little concerned.
With some of the diplomatic correspondence from.
The the ambassador himself.
Described -- deteriorating considered situation described continued problems that describe the volatile nature and these were an actual cables.
But more importantly they were reporting on an -- and almost successful attempt to murder the ambassador the successful looting of the Tunisian.
Consulate nearby and -- Ghazi.
234.
Separate attacks.
And I think oddly enough ambassador Kennedy -- will only 20% of them were in -- -- Now 20% of -- -- in 34 sounds like an awful lot of violent attacks and it was.
Al-Qaeda.
There was a question put to one -- -- yesterday about al-Qaeda itself Qaeda in Libya and what's the status a -- is in Libya.
And our career professionals said they are getting stronger.
And they clearly -- force we didn't have -- any ambiguity in the remarks there.
And that's part of what these cables tell many which have not been released by State Department yet.
Ultimately.
Al-Qaeda is getting a foothold through.
Allied organizations some of whom have the cover of government.
Is -- kind of growing up because I -- look you know I've what phone everything in the campaign right now and even three or four days ago present.
Obama to fund raiser in San Francisco said that al-Qaeda is on its heels meaning that you were were having some -- it.
Good work and putting him back.
The eight evidence and the testimony today spark my interest that -- -- growing.
When you have a organization -- a country like Libya Libyan nationals who were willing to work with and do the -- of al-Qaeda.
That means they're not on their heels in that country.
If ultimately you could eliminate all the if you will global al-Qaeda people great but it's not their kind of organization it -- It's an organization with a real chapters in Egypt in Libya in Afghanistan.
And Iraq and those chapters can operate.
In coordination or independently as they didn't Libya has congress denied any requests from the state department for money to.
Beef up security at our embassies not at all as a matter fact we didn't even get into the general accountability.
Report.
That showed tremendous amount of waste and -- need for comprehensive review particularly -- the security.
And the budget that there were operating on on September 11.
Had a majority of Democrats and 49 Democrats 447.
Republicans bipartisan by any standards.
Voted for that funding that they're living on today.
One of this have.
Startling.
-- -- -- I thought today it and it came actually last night on the phone call that the State Department had with members of the media.
Was that the State Department was -- turning this.
Event in Ben Ghazi in real time the receiving phone calls has happened started about 9:40 PM local time and the state department's monitoring.
There is the state are said there was no information no suggestion that there were protests now protests.
Is what the Obama administration White House has said in the beginning that -- because of a video it's a complete different story a great.
Absolutely that's one of the sad parts about this is you had a real terrorist attack all the signs were clear.
And now with a lot of finger pointing ultimately the administration is still trying to cling to that precious week of implying.
That things -- okay it was just -- incited video from somebody in Los Angeles and nothing could be further from the truth.
I don't get that what do what did they get out of pushing the story that -- from the beginning seemed peculiar not elaborately we've all if they're -- eleventh it's our embassy it's you know it's an attack it seems to me in this all the earmarks of terrorism.
There's the -- there is no -- information even our state are monitoring it.
That there was at a protest about a video why would the White House in the early days including ambassador rice why would they push that story.
Credit -- in this in the early days it was as a whole week that they pushed this wrong story and we were baffled the only explanation we've heard from people.
Is in fact that they were hoping to deflect the fact that conditions are bad conditions were so bad in Libya that they need to date popped.
Be hazardous pay to our foreign service officers all the time they were reducing the appearance of security they were eliminating.
The size of convoys they were doing everything to try to make it look like we were peaceful -- they were paying more because the risk was -- Today pressed White House our second -- -- still suggesting that you know in the early days which is confusing admitted no mean he's obviously my worst.
Ice I don't understand.
Then why why even today that there -- some -- resistance to the whole idea of what what went -- there truly rather than this YouTube video.
Greta I have a maybe a suggestion for the administration in that in the hours after September 11 2001.
President Bush was criticized for not reacting in those first few minutes decisively when we began being attacked.
It was minutes may be an hour before things started yelling.
This was a week in which the administration remained in denial of a terrorist attack occurring on September 11.
We're better than that.
Are mechanisms to check -- or better in that.
But you have to be willing to take what you're getting in common sense -- you have if you want to reach the conclusion that on September 11.
When your ambassador gets murdered in a large scale attack it probably is terrorism.
I used suspicious that it's incompetence in terms of getting an -- or misinformation and confusion forty -- its cover.
-- on concern for both.
If it's a cover up and it's bad policy and bad politics.
Coming right out of the Oval Office.
If on the other hand it's incompetence.
And it's bad leadership over four years or more something that President Bush prided himself on.
Love President Bush or not he focused and Vice President Cheney focused on improving our security footprint -- men and women here and around the world.
That's important we need to maintain that confidence I hope.
We can turn it around that way.
I hope it's not actually politics with American lives.
Which should think more confusion and misinformation.
Or possibly.
I think everyone on the -- including my democratic colleagues.
Found it pretty hard to believe that confusion lasted a week some tried to defend it some stayed away from it.
I believe it couldn't have lasted seven days the way the administration would have you believe.
Content thank you sir thank you -- --
