Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Welcome to another edition of special report online I'm Bret -- thanks for joining us if you haven't been here before welcome aboard as a place where you can -- -- -- panel type -- some questions or comments.
Don't worry if you don't seem right away producers are putting a man especially -- there are thousands of you out there.
And we -- screening process but we try to put -- -- in this weekend.
That's little secret well you can also votes throughout the show on polls that'll be popping up from time to time.
And -- -- hello from Wisconsin -- guest.
And mark from Memphis says Ben -- makes Watergate look like Jay walking.
OC from KD OC Katie why didn't anyone ask where was president of the United States.
-- I would think as a question Steve -- and Charles still here.
Charles that there is like this.
Well it's just frustration about the committee process overall in that you'd have five minutes.
And the first time around do.
Republicans really got hammered this time.
What's the sense.
Compared to the way they made their inquiry.
When Hillary was a lot there was no avail but everybody.
It gave speeches nobody followed -- there was no coherence he was you know let alone coordination.
And she triumph with this you know history on a statement about what difference does it make.
I think this was a focus.
Knew there was real information new information there when they were there were.
There were almost no speeches they were asking questions because Gregory hicks is a powerful witness.
He's been 22 years in the foreign service he clearly acted and he spoke also with a motion cares about it.
He's not a guy he's pretending or -- In the number of lies that we now see.
We're told by the administration.
And or highlighted today is quite staggering and I think that has a cumulative effect.
Smart -- thought today was more like a real hearing where's the Hillary Clinton appearance was and -- kind of political theater.
I thought this is surreal hearing they had a witness say they had to do that and what was also even more powerful as that he wasn't in the first round and he came forward later.
And also that he says that he was discouraged from talking to congress.
I thought this -- get out this was a movement forward in this case that has sometimes seemed to have plateaued in terms of its significance.
-- Yeah I think this was a big day -- -- there were three for me there were three sort of big thick weighs one we discussed on the show.
Was this new information about who knew what when with respect to.
Answer -- and the participation of Islamic extremists in the attack that's clear that was known we have it.
From different sources different places that we we talked about -- now from Jones right John that had not been disclosed that has not been disclosed we we didn't talk about but there was some talking and hearing about.
They -- on the ground that ambassador Stephens was taken to a hospital that was controlled -- In my house or Austria on its grocery.
Terrorists and there had been speculation I don't know that it's anything more than speculation even at this point that.
The real objective here was to kidnap him and not not to kill him and so that -- if if that were true.
It would make sense that they would take him to hospital.
That -- or Austria bronze or has connections to so.
One of the big take ways was the the emails and this confirmation that this the circle widens on the talking points questioned them and who knew what went.
The second one was the intimidation question.
That was some very powerful testimony we heard from Greg -- About exactly what Cheryl Mills.
Did to him and he was -- he was trying to meet with.
On that night and -- the State Department in effects and you do not meet with this Republican congressman unless you have a State Department lawyer present.
And hicks said he'd never seen anything like that in 22 years of diplomatic service.
And when he did meet with chief -- without the lawyer present Cheryl Mills Hillary Clinton is right hand.
Call -- -- and the riot act in effect.
And then you have the -- Jones.
Criticism of him after the fact sits him down and and basically shouts at him after the Susan Rice.
Hearings that significant in the third that was significant take what I think is.
The fact that this is not over and and you you have more questions raised today you had more credible witnesses we got names of people that we never.
Had names from before.
You had Democrats on the committee.
Calling for additional hearings.
You've had John Kerry in the past couple weeks say we need to move on you've had Jay Carney say.
This happened a long time ago and today in the here you had Democrats on the committee saying no I don't know we need more -- we need to hear from Dan Benjamin we need to hear from lieutenant colonel Gibson.
And you -- basically this.
The -- the same Democrats saying we want to see all unclassified documents related to this where I want to.
-- banners calling for Baylor calling for that as well there are hundred pages of email traffic between senior administration officials.
In the days after the attack and the finalizing of the talking points to deal with the talking points -- -- It's a real problem for the administration is that they.
Already gained emails they already have produced emails uses these -- that there reading from right now that Jones he now all these other -- they have produced the administration has produced.
They didn't fight on executive privilege they didn't fight it -- produced.
The problem now is if Democrats on the committee are saying well let's see the rest of the mouse.
Why can't we have those that becomes an issue.
When they produced just just they produce to the emails for a limited time they said to members of the senate passed -- company's.
He's got a couple hours to look at these we're gonna have a person in the room you can going you can take notes but you can't take possession of the emails I think obviously.
For fear that they would be -- so they didn't they don't actually physically have they even announced.
I think what Republicans are calling for is to give them possession of the emails to and -- make them public.
-- and I'm told that Republicans are prepared to subpoena that he knows if the White House doesn't turn them over comments on the exact theory.
But you just said they've already they've already disclose -- authority given access to them why wouldn't they then turn them -- By the way Charles our effort to find the guys are survivors.
Talked to them we've identified a few.
They are not.
Talking to us as of yet.
And so that that continues.
But Lindsey Graham has requested all the names of the State Department employees.
Who were survivors on the ground and then Ghazi.
And he was told they can't have them because -- there's a criminal investigation go.
So there is.
Back and forth here.
Look I mean what television does is undermine.
The contention of Hillary Clinton and Tucker James tomorrow we -- there we can secure over marketing.
And Elena it's down Montreal.
We're freewheeling here.
They have another microphone James Rosen has been doing some great reporting.
On this -- will bring a man.
Just finished his fox report it Steve has been doing great reporting just O Lou Dobbs hit it the Steve yeah.
And as if you.
And and James has produced these incredible it contradictory statements putting them side by side.
In that piece you did for -- that remained show.
Which is really question of the degree to which they have told right it.
And the I would say the degree to which today those lies are becoming -- -- Who dat rights always make room for Rosen and there.
What -- not what did you not getting your piece today.
Well I'm Mike Emanuel of course covered the sort of overview of it and some of the emotional moments.
But we heard a lot for the first time.
Of the names of specific survivors of this attack who are heroes.
Who performed extraordinary feats of bravery.
On the night of 9/11.
And who were named the people openly and publicly for the first time.
That may I -- get to mention that in my piece I think that may penalize an effort to get some of those folks.
Somehow into the public domain -- -- the news media war.
Perhaps through congress.
-- just talk about trying to get so the survivors had to speak and it's been difficult.
11 other thing if I may after the news after the hearing was over.
There is sort of a mini sort of impromptu news conference held by the chairman and ranking member congressman I -- and Cummings respectively and uninteresting thing developed there which -- that congressman Cummings for forgive me if I'm repeating something you forty.
Cummings now agrees for the first time that this panel needs to have sworn testimony from ambassador Pickering beaten and admiral Mullen.
And I think -- development.
-- they had they had declined to appear today the committee sort of on the -- on the right before the hearing started.
The GOP's -- majority staff anyway released it's the letters sent to those two men.
The leaders of the -- -- review board for the State Department did in February inviting them -- testified they declined.
Now to hear congressman Cummings the Democrat who thought at the beginning were saying that this was a grand partisan exercise.
For him to say we need more hearings and we need to hear from.
Pickering Mullen I think Mullen I think is significant I think it it speaks to.
What they all now potentially may recognize as the bad optics they're not having interviewed.
On the individual who had the expo line authority for every other State Department officer and who by her own account and here's her testimony in January of course and talk about secretary of state Clinton.
Says describe how it's centrally involved she was talking with -- -- agencies of the US government on the and one.
And his understanding why they wouldn't interview Hillary Clinton you think just for grown children -- -- it -- it makes absolutely no sense to me and matter in the -- affected opened some up to.
Criticism that might be unnecessary in other words.
Why not just talk to the secretary of study and willingness in.
-- an initiative there would there's reason you wouldn't want to talk to the secretary of state and that would be.
If you don't want to get her in trouble I mean I these I -- these are two highly respected people in Washington.
But they also declined interview Mark Thompson who was at the center of this as it unfolded on the -- terrorism -- He offered his testimony up.
They didn't take him out -- why would you not want to have a senior counterterrorism official involved in all the phone calls on the back and forth.
That night if your aim was to tell the full story.
-- you know it.
It's a shame to see.
Where this goes from here I mean today.
Was it was starting to build the coverage is starting to build today we get the -- areas of verdict obviously the Ohio.
Situation happens and has a news conference late in the day.
There it may affect news coverage.
At 630 across the networks and he's interested to see how it all plays out in the papers tomorrow.
Well I'm I'm sure that for those outlets that have had no interest in -- up until now and who pretend that nothing happening.
Just move along folks.
The fact that those that the Ohio events happen and his trial.
The verdict is given and then probably mandated to be the verdict.
-- -- -- -- trial that will be allowed to sort of overtaken news and to bury this.
But I think the fact that there are some Democrats who -- perhaps.
Over the fact that they really look too bad trying to explain away or pretend all this stuff is just about -- Hillary and her.
Running for the presidency and about.
Partisanship when you have people who are obviously dedicated civil servants deeply upset by what the administration had done.
I think even Democrats made look at this and -- -- I have to do something and once you get a crack.
On the democratic side that undermines the whole storyline by the times.
And other outlets that this is only Republicans again against Democrats I think it does have a -- Ran -- -- ABC and NBC -- and after they covered Cleveland at 630 tonight so thanks for the update there.
Rick in Florida has typed in many times already why didn't fox cover.
The committee hearings -- in Gaza gavel to gavel.
-- Megyn Kelly addressed that may enjoy did address that it is the it's part of cable news we do have to run a business here and have to take commercials.
And that's how we make money and not only -- show now on the online -- you can type away reckoned with the five questions you -- I read one of so.
Well I think it finally yeah I'm a -- There are two individuals who were sort of vaulted onto Centre stage by this hearing for people who are paying close attention.
To the known body of evidence in the evidence that was accruing in this hearing.
And they are Beth Jones -- endlessly discuss in the in the in the proper show panel.
And who she is the acting assistant it's the secretary of state for the Middle East bureau -- near eastern bureau.
And she had sent this email on September 12 with a definitive flat statement that.
Islamic terrorists carried out this attack.
So we really hadn't heard much from about -- -- -- prior to -- this she had sort of skated under the radar the other individual.
Very widely respected in town.
Perhaps even fair to say well liked in town is Victoria -- it.
And she has left the State Department spokesperson rule that she filled through the better part of two years.
To transition to a policy role.
I'm not sure it's been formally -- -- submitted but she was to be named the assistant secretary of state.
For Europe Eurasia to replace Phil Gordon who went the -- I think I'm not counting noses on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee here.
But I think.
Prior to Steve Hayes is reporting in the may thirteen edition edition of the weekly standard and prior to this here and we're her name came up again.
I think -- and was seen as a fairly noncontroversial -- for that.
Position was probably the sail through the very little opposition.
I'm not sure we can say the same thing this week -- Nancy wants to follow up by the way no.
Brett why did you leave the hearings for one half hours to wait for the -- areas verdict.
Nancy -- those decisions are above my pay grade.
At fox and I concentrated really on six to step I think we did pretty well.
More you know it's interesting to me.
You know when you look at Washington scandal and you try to see okay who were -- casualties we get a couple.
We have Susan Rice who you could arguably.
You know make the argument that she's in her current job instead of a bigger one because of this.
-- May be Victorian London as as.
Jeff suggests and will be really interesting to see what else happens from some lower level folks who had to leave yet positions yes -- lower level folks.
And then the big question is.
You know does this hurt the president in some kind of lasting significant way and doesn't tarnish Hillary Clinton.
When when and if she runs for president and certainly when her democratic primary but is this the kind of thing.
That that has things -- Carl Cameron.
Suggested that it would hurt her in the and what Democrat is going to Harry I mean it's not a -- Geithner.
Why why why Democrat who is going to change.
I'm -- -- we never have Biden's office probably very quickly its -- to use I think Biden probably wouldn't -- But I don't I would say any Democrat who's actually paying attention.
Would want to use this against Hillary Clinton politically and I mean listen it's it's at least.
General election it's a general it would be more of a general election issue but look I I think the development -- to pick up on on what James said earlier.
The question here about where this guy I was is.
Whether that the mainstream media will be more protective of President Obama the Democrats on the panel today.
And -- Democrats on the panel I think.
Paying close attention clearly listening to -- testimony given and deciding you know what this means a lot more attention.
So if you have news happened and the networks in the New York Times in the Washington Post still saying this is old news and it's partisan whatever.
Their -- there to the lack.
Of congressional Democrats in that case OK you had ally -- -- and you had to you have Cummings asking for four more emails you had.
Several people on the panel asking for additional hearings more witnesses congressional Democrats at least on the panel the ones paying attention -- -- for me.
I talked to one senator today who said there is a move afoot and he may do it.
-- and so far.
To call Hillary Clinton back to Capitol Hill how would that play.
Truck -- that we're behind news.
She is very good she was able to play.
That committee and make them look ridiculous she looked.
Strong and what I thought was.
A stroke of theater that we are saying what difference.
So it would become I mean it would be an event that would be covered of course -- be heavyweight bout.
Look I don't think you wanna conductors as high -- I think that's a mistake.
I think what's really happened today.
There's just -- taking accumulation of evidence in the overall story is about an administration.
That is deliberately.
Suppressing information and suppressing the gathering of information.
What hicks was really saying yes I was there I knew I was the last person who spoke with a dead ambassador.
And I'm being Mattel that I can can -- it was a vision.
Delegation of congressman I've been in this for twenty years it's never happened before that is the suppression of of evidence -- an administration -- Hillary's -- says it's our job.
To find out what happened they did the opposite.
That's a big story in and of itself and you know you could say well you know in the heat of battle under those circumstances wrong decisions.
-- made honestly and sincerely about whether to send.
Marines are not doing -- lists and special forces are OK I can understand that we we ought to know what happened.
But on the issue of finding -- round of telling the truth.
Gathering information the evidence is slowly accumulating.
I'd rather not see a big piece of theater I'd rather.
See this is developed as a real story about real events and let it hang out there and have another.
Piece by James in a week on the further contradiction.
This this just lines lines of objectives.
China attacks writes James.
Good book on Nixon's John Mitchell how would Mitchell handled and guys who.
I'm not enough -- full well the name of the book is the strong man.
Yet -- you were you able to get a vote on.
I -- makes a great Father's Day gift that official.
State and others say that's right you've got to you've got to do than what -- doesn't want to -- Jonathan Watergate.
Someone who said we have the books and you.
Right well -- ago.
Who told you must sign up on the peninsula -- got a right to -- -- book can call the strong -- From.
I think that it may even fact played Hillary Clinton's interest to have the kind of high noon showdown -- Charles is describing.
Because if she survives it she -- -- forever more say asked and answered and has some liquidity Geraldine Ferraro.
Did that member Geraldine -- big news comes about a -- in 1984 just don't take every last question which -- get it done.
And do it sooner rather than later I think that might be -- here's the here's.
The one I I agree and I agree with Charles like that emphatically agree with Charles the whole way that Republicans have to handle this is -- just the facts.
Manner about tone and everything else I actually thought they did pretty well on that.
In hearing today but the one risk in the difference between when Hillary Clinton Tenet testified.
And you know any future testimony would be.
We know -- much more now about the involvement of not only State Department officials and what they -- but.
Those closest to Hillary Clinton people who were in contact with her constantly during the attack.
In the days after the attack in the preparation of these talking points and Cheryl Mills Cheryl Mills and after the fact later we Cheryl Mills calling.
Calling Greg Hixon and intimidating and yelling yelling.
And him hide what's she doing that at behest of Hillary Clinton that would be a good question I mean it's Hillary Clinton I'm gonna throw Carol mills under the bus and say no no she's doing this on her own.
If that's the only advice and -- the senators -- -- -- there's no way that was done with Iran Contra and then Watergate.
Get a lawyer on the on behalf of the -- council committee.
Council to do the question.
Because and you can get a line of argument she can have somebody.
Who oppose you to the truth if you get a committee she will win.
Because she will be able to rise above it to play one against the other if -- even with some more information.
Remember you can have Democrats in Iraq in the line of argument Republicans.
-- -- you've got to do it in a way that can.
If you want to have a showdown let's have counsel against.
Finish -- -- second James Rosen love fest David from New York City James erosion -- should get his own show he has his own show on line.
Yes it's called foxhole with you people see that when -- was a bit -- I'm glad you.
University student it's.
Every other Tuesday at 1 PM eastern realizes that he -- how I don't foxnews.com how many relatives sign onto the online -- I have to talk -- Hassan al-Qaeda but no question about it and actually he reads and excerpt of this -- yeah.
-- -- -- Our last thoughts about this and where it's headed Steve.
I think it's getting bigger and there's no question that we got -- -- -- the key thing coming out today as did that sort of fire host of new information this is not old information people can't dismiss it as such.
This is new information from credible witnesses that raises far more questions than answers and I think you know -- you -- earlier to John dangers.
Statement today getting involved in the dispute over the talking points that suggests that he's taking this very seriously.
I think that's intensifies and gets bigger before it goes away regardless of what the mainstream media -- special committee or not.
Yeah I think there will be a special committee and I think actually resisted the idea of a special -- I think there should be a special committee.
-- personal married says surprise -- says it's getting bigger.
Marion -- cynic you.
I think that this will be.
Influential if it produces other whistle blowers self described whistle blowers to come forward particularly.
From the intelligence community.
Brett you know from our.
Collaborations over the past week or so that I think there's something like three CIA whistle blowers were rattling the cages out there may -- for.
And one of whom.
Has has sought counsel to my knowledge.
Those could be still still more impressive witnesses from the intelligence community's point of view.
One very -- eighty point if I may for this online show.
We have reported.
The ARB the post.
Ben Ghazi review board that was convened by Secretary Clinton pursuant to an act of congress every time -- that there's this kind of event that a foreign embassy.
One of our embassies overseas there's an -- RB accountability review board that investigates.
The Office of Inspector General of the State Department is reviewing.
Conduct of this they are being.
Alone all the others and it's been suggested to me that you heard Eric Nordstrom testified today for example that.
The RB was fine as it went but it just didn't it didn't go high and often didn't interview the right people that -- have to do with who staffs the -- are being.
And -- it's been suggested to me but the point of this OIG probe is actually to wrest control away from the State Department.
For the -- in the future they are -- a little bit of a turf war.
-- I think that until today.
You can make the argument that Republicans were beating a dead horse -- this wasn't going anywhere I would say this.
Has a lot of life left in it but I do agree with James -- The good big -- -- of whether this goes forward or are there more whistle -- there have to be more people.
Telling stories that we haven't heard before for this really really continue.
-- which means -- -- has to have another log on the fire.
Or digest and sort out of the media works.
I think in the end of the the message of today's.
The oldest of Ramallah to Watergate message it's not a crime rates to cover up after all there wasn't a crime here.
I mean I think there was a lot of human error and mistakes.
In the seven hours I do would like to know when the president was by the isn't isn't anybody.
You know acted in bad faith in those hours I think.
Five and therefore the whole thing is ridiculous why did they have to concoct a story why do they have to.
To suppress the evidence we've -- that they're talking points as suppress the memo that we now learn about what State Department itself.
Thought it was a terror attack.
I mean have the full story go out on the five networks I mean it really is me I would like an explanation obviously demonstration middle of a campaign.
That really wanted to protect itself.
Against the idea that it was sort of slacking on the war on terror or undermining the narrative that in the war on terror was over -- one.
Who was Obama's for Fraser to kind of wars receding in and we have a -- ambassador.
-- I asked to be but it really is its disproportionate.
And it's often what gets you.
Why not have been open about it I think that's a great question I forgot one thing who jumped the shark.
This week and we've been here for jumped the shark.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Post which Cummings at the beginning of the hearings repeated.
By implication he spoke about high officials that this is all about Hillary it's all about attacking her and -- And and bringing her down.
When the story has started in September alarm before any of those considerations and it's only -- -- story it looks ridiculous now.
And it's it becomes almost a part of a cover up if you -- pretend.
That after all there's new information is only about a -- attack.
In fact the only defense.
That Democrats had here was to say -- a partisan attacks on -- would ignore all the testimony.
-- -- -- And maybe maybe the White House and -- trying to.
You know pretended they had nothing to do with re writing the talking points and if they did it was just little tweaking around the edges.
One word yet.
-- -- Well I am sure confidentially by the -- attorneys that and that the shark is not playing.
-- go with Jay Carney.
I think Jay Carney jumped the shark on this by suggesting that it was stylistic changes when -- reporting the weekly standard and may thirteen edition.
Takes you in a -- very granular way.
Through the revisions and shows that was far from merely stylist.
Steve Harris doesn't want to comings and he Carney the White House I was saying I heard -- sure when she.
Washington I think Tom Ricks -- jump the shark but I'll live with that.
On this story.
For this edition special report on line.
If you have been here before we hope to come back and control our own little goodbye.
Filter by section