Democrats on the House Select Committee on Benghazi released a report Monday that purported to clear former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of personal responsibility for the lax security that contributed to the deadly terror attack in Libya on Sept. 11, 2012.
The minority report said the security measures in Benghazi were “woefully inadequate” but blamed the department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and not Mrs. Clinton, who is the likely 2016 Democratic presidential nominee.
“Secretary Clinton never personally denied any requests for additional security in Benghazi,” said the five Democrats on the committee.
The Benghazi attack that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americas continues to be an issue in the presidential race.
Republicans have criticized Mrs. Clinton for not providing adequate security while she served as secretary of state and for what they describe as the administration’s weak response, including mischaracterizing the raid by heavily armed militants as a spontaneous riot over a YouTube video.
In the report, Democrats said that after a two-year investigation, it was clear that the military could not have done anything differently during the 13-hour firefight to save the Americans killed at the U.S. diplomatic outpost and a nearby CIA annex.
The report underscored the stark partisanship of the inquiry, with Democrats blasting Rep. Trey Gowdy, the South Carolina Republican who chairs the committee.
“Chairman Gowdy has been conducting this investigation like an overzealous prosecutor desperately trying to land a front-page conviction rather than a neutral judge of facts seeking to improve the security of our diplomatic corps,” the Democratic members said.
“We are issuing our own report today because, after spending more than two years and $7 million in taxpayer funds in one of the longest and most-partisan congressional investigations in history, it is long past time for the Select Committee to conclude its work,” they wrote. “Despite our repeated requests over the last several months, Republicans have refused to provide us with a draft of their report — or even a basic outline — making it impossible for us to provide input and obvious that we are being shut out of the process until the last possible moment.”
The committee’s Republicans blasted what they referred to as the Democrats’ “so-called ’report.’”
“Benghazi Committee Democrats’ obsession with the former secretary of state is on full display. For over two years, they refused to participate in the majority’s serious, fact-centered investigation,” said Benghazi committee spokesman Matt Wolking.
“The dishonest Democrats on this committee falsely claimed everything had been ’asked and answered.’ They said the committee had found ’absolutely nothing new.’ If that’s changed, they should come clean and admit it. If not, everyone can ignore their rehashed, partisan talking points defending their endorsed candidate for president,” he said.
“As Chairman Gowdy has said, this is not about one person. This investigation is about the four brave Americans we lost in Libya: Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. That is how the majority has conducted its thorough investigation, and we look forward to revealing the new information we have uncovered to the families and the American people,” Mr. Wolking said.
The Republicans on the committee missed their self-imposed deadline to issue a report by this summer.
Key findings of the committee’s Democrats included:
⦁ U.S. personnel in Benghazi and Tripoli conducted themselves with extraordinary courage and heroism and at grave personal risk to defend and rescue their fellow Americans.
⦁ The Defense Department could not have done anything differently on the night of the attacks that would have saved the lives of the four brave Americans killed in Benghazi, and although the military’s global posture prevented it from responding more quickly that night, improvements were made years ago.
⦁ The intelligence community’s assessments evolved after the attacks as more information became available, but they were not influenced by political considerations.
⦁ Administration officials did not make intentionally misleading statements about the attacks, but instead they relied on information they were provided at the time under fast-moving circumstances.
• S.A. Miller can be reached at smiller@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.