NEARLY 100 House Republicans submitted a letter to President Obama this week, urging him not to nominate U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice to succeed Hillary Clinton as secretary of state.
Their reason?
They believe Ms. Rice “either willfully or incompetently misled the American public in the Benghazi affair,” destroying her credibility in Washington and around the world.
These congressmen (U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Savannah, isn’t one of the signatories) are right to question why a top diplomat for the Obama administration initially gave the wrong information to the American people. But it’s unclear that Ms. Rice is the appropriate culprit.
There’s no question, using 20-20 hindsight, that Ambassador Rice was flat out wrong about the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi in which four Americans were killed.
Shortly after the murders, she appeared on several political talk shows and suggested there was no evidence that the violence in Libya was a terrorist act. Instead, she explained, it appeared to be a spontaneous event prompted by an inflammatory, anti-Muslim video.
Since then, the evidence strongly suggests that terrorists were behind the attacks. This issue surfaced as a late-breaking campaign issue prior to the Nov. 6 presidential election. While President Obama successfully deflected the heat, the public is still entitled to a full airing of the facts.
In the case of Ms. Rice, it appears that she may have been a dupe, not an instigator.
It has been reported that David Petraeus, the former CIA director, told Congress that he agreed to release the information about a link to al-Qaeda in an early draft of the talking points. But he apparently didn’t have the last word.
According to CBS News, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence cut specific references to “al-Qaeda” and “terrorism” from the unclassified talking points given to Ambassador Rice. If that’s the case, then it’s unfair to hold her totally responsible. It’s a matter of garbage in, garbage out.
James Clapper, an Obama appointee, is the head of DNI. It has been reported that he reviewed the doctored talking points before they were given to Ambassador Rice and members of the House intelligence committee Sept. 14. If it’s proven that Mr. Clapper intentionally fudged things, then his career should be finished.
Ambassador Rice may or may not be qualified to succeed Hillary Clinton. She certainly didn’t help herself here.
But it is clear that the nation’s intelligence community, perhaps with an unwitting assist from the Obama administration, failed to shoot straight about Benghazi. That’s intolerable, no matter which party is in control.
Given the state of the world, there’s no question that the government’s intelligence community must be allowed to keep secrets. Otherwise, national security could be compromised.
However, top officials shouldn’t intentionally tell lies to protect those who made mistakes or for political reasons. It contributes to the breakdown of trust.
It’s up to all members of Congress — Democrats and Republicans — to dig for the truth and hold any liars accountable.