Credibility, Part II

It seems that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (or at least members of it) doesn’t have much faith in the investigative skills (integrity?) of the State Department in conducting its inquiry into the murders of the US Ambassador and three other Americans in the September 11th attacks on the US the consulate in Benghazi.

“… we request that you transmit to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee all communications between the U.S. Mission to Libya and the State Department relevant to the security situation in Benghazi in the period leading up to the attacks, including, but not limited to, cables sent from Ambassador Stevens.”

“Despite these warnings, the State Department sought and received a waiver from the standard security requirements for the consulate,” the senators wrote.

“We are extremely concerned about conflicting reports over the events leading up to the attacks. Specifically, we are concerned over the apparent lack of security preparations made despite a demonstrable increase in risks to U.S. officials and facilities in Benghazi in the period leading up to the attacks.”

They should be.  We have not gotten a straight answer yet from this Administration, and certainly not from State, regarding  this dreadful attack and the breaches at other embassies that day and in the days following.    For more than a week afterward, White House spokesman Jay Carney still insisted that the attacks were spontaneous, and even when he finally had to admit otherwise, the President contradicted him.   Indeed, President Obama’s remarks before the UN recently were delivered to give the impression that the anti-Islamic video was the cause of the attack, when it was clear that we knew otherwise for quite some time.    Even the Libyan President has said so rather unequivocally.  Hillary Clinton has, aside from condemning the attacks, said little about the security posture in Benghazi or in Cairo.    Either the security threat was known and ignored, or security was subordinated to some other consideration in the face of those threats.

One has to suspect that the Accountability Review Board will produce nothing of consequence for some time, certainly not before a certain date in November of 2012.  And perhaps the Senators who requested the diplomatic cables have an inkling, like I do, that the Accountability Review Board will be all but devoid of accountability.     You know, the State Department version of the Fast and Furious report.    A self-investigation into a series of terrible decisions and poor leadership bordering on, if not centered around, criminal conduct, which will conclude that the BOSS (Hillary) was somehow not at fault, but instead was poorly served by her minions, the selected number of whom will be sacrificed with hopes that the whole sordid affair will be long forgotten by, say, 2016.