PDA

View Full Version : Benghazi chairman ignores statement by GOP lawyer



Cigar
05-16-2016, 08:24 AM
The House Benghazi committee's Republican chairman is ignoring statements by his own former lawyer indicating that the U.S. military acted properly on the night of the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attacks in Libya, the panel's Democrats said.

Reps. Elijah Cummings and Adam Smith said Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., omitted the lawyer's comments when he fired back at the Defense Department for criticizing the GOP-led investigation into the attacks that killed four Americans.

Gowdy's actions, coupled with delays that have pushed the 2-year-old inquiry into the heat of the 2016 presidential race, "have damaged the credibility of the Select Committee beyond repair," Cummings and Smith wrote Sunday in a letter to Gowdy.

. . .

Cummings of Maryland is the senior Democrat on the Benghazi panel; Smith, of Washington state, is the senior Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee. He also serves on the select Benghazi panel.

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/article/Democrats-Benghazi-chairman-ignores-statement-by-7470370.php

Bo-4
05-16-2016, 08:32 AM
Poor ol' Howdy Gowday just can't buy a break. :)

According to the letter, that staffer, former Gen. Dana Chipman (http://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/benghazi-select-committee-dana-chipman), said in interviews with former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and former Defense Department Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash that the department did all it could on that night when Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trey-gowdy-dana-chipman-benghazi-committee_us_5738db52e4b08f96c18373e2?utm_hp_ref=p olitics

http://images.dailykos.com/images/171906/large/Gowdy3flipped-Mort.jpg?1445628942

exotix
05-16-2016, 08:39 AM
The Select Committee on Benghazi has been investigating for 739 Days

http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov/cost/



http://i67.tinypic.com/kahgev.png

Bo-4
05-16-2016, 08:52 AM
The Select Committee on Benghazi has been investigating for 739 Days

http://askedandanswered-democrats.benghazi.house.gov/cost/

Conservatism at work - their entirely unbiased bombshell report is sure to come out a week to ten days before the election.

Not enough time to debunk - just enough to throw shade for The Donald ;-)

Thanks for wasting our time and money there SweatyBoy!

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CR9gp1QWsAAATTR.png

Cigar
05-16-2016, 08:59 AM
:grin: Benghazi chairman ignores statement by GOP lawyer (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/62928-Benghazi-chairman-ignores-statement-by-GOP-lawyer)

Cigar
05-16-2016, 09:05 AM
Top GOP Benghazi Investigator Debunks Conservative Myths: Nothing ‘Could Have Been Done Differently’A former three-star general who served as the Republicans’ chief counsel on the Benghazi Select Committee repeatedly acknowledged as he interviewed witnesses during the committee’s investigation that nothing “could have been done differently to affect the outcome in Benghazi.”

The quotes, which came from multiple interviews conducted by the committee, were revealed publicly for the first time in a letter to Benghazi Select Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., from ranking member Elijah Cummings, D-Md., and House Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith, D-Wash.

Although he is not identified by name in the letter, it has been publicly reported that Gowdy had hired Lt. Gen. Dana K. Chipman “to lead the panel's legal team.” Chipman left the committee earlier this year.

While interviewing former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in January, the then-chief counsel acknowledged, “I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region. And, sir, I don’t disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed.” (Emphasis added)

Later in the interview he told Panetta, “And again, sir, I don’t mean to suggest that anything could have been done differently to affect the outcome in Benghazi, and I think you would agree with that.”

These statements undermine one of the GOP’s most heavily recycled — and completely unfounded — talking points about the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya, which killed four Americans. Republicans have repeatedly and baselessly claimed that President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered the military to "stand down" and not respond to the attacks.

Gowdy praised Chipman when he brought him onto the committee’s legal team, remarking, “If you are serious about conducting a fair, thorough, fact-centric investigation devoid of gratuitous partisanship, it stands to reason you would select someone with those same characteristics to lead the investigation."

In the committee’s “Interim Progress Update,” released in May 2015, Gowdy boasted of the “highly-qualified staff” he had gathered to aid the investigation, specifically mentioning Chipman.

In an interview with Defense Department Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash, the form chief council made similar comments to those he had made to Panetta. “I would posit that from my perspective, having looked at all the materials over the last 18 months, we could not have affected the response to what occurred by 5:15 in the morning on the 12th of September in Benghazi, Libya,” he said. “So let me start with that positing or that stipulation.”

During the same interview, he also noted, “I don’t see any way to influence what occurred there. But what I am worried about is we’re caught by surprise on 9/11, we’ve got nothing postured to respond in a timely manner — and you can debate what’s timely, what’s untimely, but nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi.”

These statements are all in line with the conclusions of previous investigations, including those conducted by the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee. They also match statements by military leaders including Joint Chief of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey.

Yet Gowdy continues to claim that his committee is uncovering ground-breaking new information, saying in a statement last week that “the committee has identified new facts that significantly impact our understanding of what happened before, during, and after Benghazi.”

Gowdy, in an apparently desperate attempt to find damning information about the administration’s response to the attack, has sought to call as witnesses a man who anonymously called in to a right-wing radio show claiming to have previously undisclosed knowledge of the events and a purported whistleblower who recently spoke with Fox News.

Despite Gowdy’s desperate attempts to salvage the image of his committee, Chipman’s statements raise serious questions about what the Benghazi Select Committee has accomplished in the course of its two-year, $6.9 million investigation


http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/top-gop-benghazi-investigator-debunks-conservative-myths-nothing-could-have-been-done-differ

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/ae/c2/8f/aec28f0b31f6f5bbf6c6b4321eed2186.jpg

Bo-4
05-16-2016, 09:07 AM
:grin: Benghazi chairman ignores statement by GOP lawyer (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/62928-Benghazi-chairman-ignores-statement-by-GOP-lawyer)



There's no fixing a partisan hack is there?

Gowdy slams McCarthy on Benghazi comments: He 'screwed up'

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/trey-gowdy-kevin-mccarthy-wrong-benghazi-hillary-clinton-214498#ixzz48pNU5cPU

birddog
05-16-2016, 09:24 AM
How about the four star that was ready to send rescue troops, but was told to stand down? To a four star, that order would only come from the CIC.

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 09:48 AM
The House Benghazi committee's Republican chairman is ignoring statements by his own former lawyer indicating that the U.S. military acted properly on the night of the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attacks in Libya, the panel's Democrats said.

The actions of the military isn't in question. They aren't authorized to act on their own.

The actions of the administration and the Secretary of State is what's in question.

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 09:50 AM
How about the four star that was ready to send rescue troops, but was told to stand down? To a four star, that order would only come from the CIC.

And if he had ordered his units to deploy absence of authorization, he would be in deep kimchee.

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 09:50 AM
Well, so much for this thread.

Cigar
05-16-2016, 09:52 AM
The actions of the military isn't in question. They aren't authorized to act on their own.

The actions of the administration and the Secretary of State is what's in question.


:huh: Are really going to stick with that argument ... ?

Do really think the Military waits for a phone call from the Secretary of State to return fire when under attack? :huh:

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 10:06 AM
:huh: Are really going to stick with that argument ... ?

Do really think the Military waits for a phone call from the Secretary of State to return fire when under attack? :huh:

Its the right argument. A military leader can't take on that respinsibility on his own. His forces were not engaged by anyone. He had no authority to act.

He can not deploy his forces on a foreign nation's soil without authorization.

I guess you're suggesting that an Army General officer takes power away from the POTUS. What do they call that when it happens in some third world shit hole....? Uh... Uh.... Oh yeah.

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 10:08 AM
coup d'état.


look up that word.

Cigar
05-16-2016, 10:11 AM
coup d'état.


look up that word.


44th ... Look that Number Up :grin:

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 10:16 AM
Here's something for you to look up.

Partisan hack.

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 10:22 AM
The military does not have the authority to insert itself into US foreign policy, or deploy forces into a foreign nation we aren't at war with on their own. They need authorization from the commander in chief.

History will reflect that they asked for that authorization to act, but were denied.

The history revisionists on the left are going to try their best to change how this bungled incident is recorded.

birddog
05-16-2016, 10:35 AM
Another idiotic thread started by Cigar where he exposes his ignorance. Sad!:icon_scratch:

Cigar
05-16-2016, 10:37 AM
Another idiotic thread started by Cigar where he exposes his ignorance. Sad!:icon_scratch:


Good idea ... attack me and change the subject ... quick :laugh:

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 10:38 AM
Another idiotic thread started by Cigar where he exposes his ignorance. Sad!:icon_scratch:


This is a tactic employed by all partisan hacks. Shift the blame to the blameless.

Chris
05-16-2016, 10:41 AM
Another idiotic thread started by Cigar where he exposes his ignorance. Sad!:icon_scratch:

Attack message not messenger. Goes for all.

birddog
05-16-2016, 11:48 AM
The "message" was incomplete. Gowdy was hampered by the stonewalling of the administration.

Cigar
05-16-2016, 11:52 AM
duplicate, sorry


http://rs9.pbsrc.com/albums/a92/Kamakeahale1/Graphix/382.gif%7Ec200

hanger4
05-16-2016, 12:13 PM
Good idea ... attack me and change the subject ... quick :laugh:

You already changed the subject.



44th ... Look that Number Up :grin:

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 02:42 PM
This thread has run it's course. The premise was slapped down more quickly than most.

Cigar
05-16-2016, 02:45 PM
This thread has run it's course. The premise was slapped down more quickly than most.


So the Statement was never made, or The Chairman Never ignored it ...

Either way, it's Lies Lies Lies I say, It's All Lies. :laugh:

Cigar
05-16-2016, 02:46 PM
You already changed the subject.


Then leave the Thread if neither concerns you.

Just stop your B!tching and Complaining

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 02:50 PM
Even the usual left wing apologists for Hillary and the Obama administration have stayed away from this one.

Cigar
05-16-2016, 02:51 PM
Even the usual left wing apologists for Hillary and the Obama administration have stayed away from this one.


Dude, the Left moved on back in 2013 :laugh:

hanger4
05-16-2016, 02:51 PM
Then leave the Thread if neither concerns you.

Just stop your B!tching and Complaining


Don't ya just hate it when somebody points out your double standards Cigar. LOL

Tahuyaman
05-16-2016, 02:53 PM
Dude, the Left moved on back in 2013 :laugh:


They always ignore their failures. That's why they fail so consistently.

Cigar
05-16-2016, 03:00 PM
They always ignore their failures. That's why they fail so consistently.


What do you call losing by 9.5 and 5 Millions Votes? :laugh:

Peter1469
05-16-2016, 03:36 PM
Notice: Duplicate threads merged

Cigar
05-17-2016, 02:17 PM
Top GOP Benghazi lawyer: 'Nothing' could have prevented American deaths
New transcripts released by panel Democrats ratchet up the fight over how long the congressional investigation is taking.


The chief counsel of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, before leaving the Republican-led committee earlier this year, said he did not believe the Pentagon could have done more to save American lives during the night of the attack, according to copies of his comments included in a Sunday letter from Democrats to Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.).
Army Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman told former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in a transcribed interview by the panel in January that “nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi” to prevent the deaths of four Americans in the immediate response to the attacks, the letter released by Democrats states.

“I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region,” Chipman said, according to the letter. “And, sir, I don’t disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed.”
He made similar comments in an interview with the Defense Department’s former chief of staff, Jeremy Bash, according to the transcript of that interview: “I would posit that from my perspective, having looked at all the materials over the last 18 months, we could not have affected the response to what occurred by 5:15 in the morning on the 12th of September in Benghazi, Libya,” Chipman said. “So let me start with that positing or that stipulation.”


The release of private transcripts and comments made by a panel staffer represents an unusually aggressive step on the part of panel Democrats. While Benghazi Republicans and Democrats have bickered for months, dismissing each other as partisans, neither side has ever released comments made by staff in private.



http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/house-benghazi-committee-lawyer-american-lives-223207#ixzz48wJn3NOx

http://thesehumansarenuts.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Nothing.jpg

https://seesouthernstars.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/porkey.jpg

Cigar
05-17-2016, 03:14 PM
:grin:

AZ Jim
05-17-2016, 03:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtGxusvUT3k

Mac-7
05-17-2016, 03:49 PM
It appears that chipman is still on active duty and was only losned out to congress.

That means obumer is his boss and tells him what to say

Peter1469
05-17-2016, 04:29 PM
Notice: Duplicate threads merged

maineman
05-17-2016, 05:45 PM
It appears that chipman is still on active duty and was only losned out to congress.

That means obumer is his boss and tells him what to say

you are quite wrong. The general retired in 2013.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ocjcsprotocol/sets/72157635161374125/

Cletus
05-17-2016, 05:56 PM
Chipman is a lawyer. He didn't hold a combat command. He really isn't qualified to speak on the subject.

maineman
05-17-2016, 06:00 PM
lol

Cletus
05-17-2016, 06:01 PM
lol

He is no more qualified to speak of the capabilities of ground forces than you are.

maineman
05-17-2016, 06:10 PM
His comments did not speak of the capabilities of ground forces in any way. They spoke of timing and distance of assets to the conflict.

Peter1469
05-17-2016, 06:11 PM
I know the guy- solid.

He was the TJAG of the Army during Benghazi. Is knowledge of the incident would have come from the official investigation and now as the lawyer for the GOP Bengahzi hearing. He wouldn't have any first hand knowledge.

Cletus
05-17-2016, 06:18 PM
His comments did not speak of the capabilities of ground forces in any way. They spoke of timing and distance of assets to the conflict.

That is not his rice bowl. If someone wants to know about the legal aspects of a rescue attempt, he would be an authority. If someone wanted to know about the capabilities of a aircraft carrier, you would be an authority. I would defer to either of you in matters of your field of expertise. Whether a rescue attempt is viable or not... that is a different story.

maineman
05-17-2016, 06:29 PM
That is not his rice bowl. If someone wants to know about the legal aspects of a rescue attempt, he would be an authority. If someone wanted to know about the capabilities of a aircraft carrier, you would be an authority. I would defer to either of you in matters of your field of expertise. Whether a rescue attempt is viable or not... that is a different story.

do you think that his access to ALL of the testimony and evidence of the event might give him somewhat of a leg up over internet chat room occupants who have seen little to none of it?

Tahuyaman
05-17-2016, 06:45 PM
It seems odd to me that the left thinks that the military's failure to respond to the incident absence of authorization to do so is a valid defense.

Cletus
05-17-2016, 06:52 PM
do you think that his access to ALL of the testimony and evidence of the event might give him somewhat of a leg up over internet chat room occupants who have seen little to none of it?

I think he is entitled to an opinion, but his opinion should not be regarded as an expert opinion. I think the operators in Aviano, for example, have a better idea of what they could or could not have done than the General would if he read ten thousand reports.