State Dept. Inspector General investigating State Dept. Board that investigated #Benghazi

Posted by: Phineas on May 3, 2013 at 1:01 pm

**Posted by Phineas

US Consulate, Benghazi

They’d like answers, too.

But, don’t worry. According to a State Department spokesman, this is just part of a standard review of “the process.”

Yeah, sure it is.

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General is investigating the special internal panel that probed the Benghazi terror attack for the State Department, Fox News has confirmed.

The IG’s office is said by well-placed sources to be seeking to determine whether the Accountability Review Board, or ARB — led by former U.N. Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen — failed to interview key witnesses who had asked to provide their accounts of the Benghazi attacks to the panel.

The IG’s office notified the department of the “special review” on March 28, according to Doug Welty, the congressional and public affairs officer of the IG’s office.

This disclosure marks a significant turn in the ongoing Benghazi case, as it calls into question the reliability of the blue-ribbon panel that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton convened to review the entire matter. Until the report was concluded, she and all other senior Obama administration officials regularly refused to answer questions about what happened in Benghazi.

But State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell disputed the characterization of the review, saying it is “simply false” to assert the panel is being investigated.

And that smoke you see is not indicative of a fire.

That’s why whistle-blowers who wanted to testify before the ARB are lawyering up in advance of next Wednesday’s House hearings — just “normal process:”

In an interview for the Fox News program “Geraldo” taped Thursday afternoon and set to air this weekend, Joe diGenova, a former U.S. attorney, told host Geraldo Rivera that he is legally representing a career State Department officer whom the board failed to interview. DiGenova called the ARB a “cover-up.”

DiGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official who represents another State Department whistle-blower in the Benghazi case, said their respective clients will testify next Wednesday at a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee being chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

The review board’s report was rightly regarded at the time as a whitewash, making scapegoats of senior officials well-below Hillary Clinton’s level and attempting to appease the public with severe punishments laughable wrist-slaps.

Jim Geraghty is right that this could be deadly to Hillary’s 2016 prospects, but there’s something else to bear in mind: if the question of “cross-border authority” discussed yesterday is is true, then what the whistle-blowers have to say –and perhaps wanted to say to the ARB– may well implicate the President’s actions or non-actions that night. It’s not hard at all to imagine pressure from both the White House and Clinton’s office on the ARB to “find some responsible flunkies, fast” because there were two arses that needed covering — Clinton’s and Obama’s.

Question: IF all this turns out to be true and IF it looks like “Hillary 2016″ is about to go down like the Hindenburg, will she rat-out her former boss? It’s not as if there is any love lost between the Clintonistas and the Obama camp.

RELATED: Wait, al Qaeda operatives were at the Benghazi attack? You mean they were working for the video maker, too?

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 Responses to “State Dept. Inspector General investigating State Dept. Board that investigated #Benghazi”

Comments

  1. There is a line from Lycidas about “Hence with denial vain, and coy excuse” that fits this cheap charade at ferreting out the truth. There is a reason students do not grade their own papers and defendants do not get to sentence themselves and that is an absolute lack of objectivity. This is more or less a repeat of the shell game Nixon tried during the Wateragte scandal where he went shopping for favorable opinions of his skullduggery, firing anyone along the way who did not suit his purposes.

    Watching Shrillary’s poitical fortunes descend in flames will be a sight for the ages. It serves her right for hitching her wagon to Obhammud’s star, which is in the process of disintegrating due to “friction with the atmosphere” as NASA phrases it.

  2. Carlos says:

    This WH and administration is unfamiliar with the term “whitewash.” They think ALL that white stuff is the only paint available anywhere, anytime. Apparently, the colors on walls, cars, houses, pictures, etc., just magically appear from white paint.

  3. Joy says:

    I hope Obama and Hillary are beginning to feel the heat. Too many lies have been told to Americans about Benghazi. We must insist on exposing the truth by all of the government players — the folks in the White House, the State Department, the Department of Defense, as well as the Central Intelligence Agency. We must also make sure the media’s refusal to cover this story is exposed as a direct effort to protect Obama prior to and after the election. If Americans cannot trust our government and we cannot trust our media, who can we trust?

  4. I was at the 10th District Republican Gala in Leesburg Va tonight, and our congressman Frank Wolf gave a very informative talk about Benghazi and his efforts to get to the truth. He has been hitting this very hard, but the Obama Administration has been stonewalling from day one.

    More here from Wolf on the link between Bengazi and al Qaeda

  5. Tango says:

    Obama paid no political price for Benghazi. And the SCM will try to see to it that Hillary doesn’t either.

    “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?”

  6. “For there is nothing hid, except to be made manifest; nor is anything secret, except to come to light.”–Mark 4:22

  7. Carlos says:

    The typical low-info voter probably wonders why all the hubbub, and why people will question the results of the new fox’s report of the previous fox’s report of the hen house.

    I’m sure we will have no cause to think there is anything amiss, or that the new report would exclude any vital information, or might, just might, include misleading information. That never happens in anything this administration does, and certainly wouldn’t if it involved a potential presidential candidate.