On the recordNovember 14, 2012
I will turn this over to the Senator from New Hampshire, but my response would be as follows: There is a news article coming from somewhere within the State Department suggesting the CIA was responsible for consulate security because this mostly was a CIA operation. But there is an article coming out of the CIA corners basically saying: We responded very quickly and efficiently to the attack. Here is my problem. If you do not have a select committee listening to all the stories, it is pretty hard to put the puzzle together. My response would be, why did the people in the State Department assigned to Benghazi ask for support from the State Department if this was, in fact, a CIA responsibility? I want to hear the State Department explain that. In a news article, you are trying to create the impression that ``we are a secondary player.'' That would be news to every State Department official in Libya because they were asking the State Department for security. I wish to challenge the CIA's narrative of what they did and how they did it. But I want to hear the complete story. The Senator from New Hampshire has been an attorney general prosecuting cases, and I wish to get her input into how efficient she thinks it would be for three committees to do their own investigations, never talk to each other in a coordinated fashion, have a stovepipe investigation versus a coordinated, one-body-listening-to-everybody approach?





