Rep. Jim Jordan Obsesses Over Long-Debunked Right Wing Media Attacks Over YouTube Video's Link To Benghazi Attacks

Sub: Jordan: “With No Evidence ... The Official Statement Of The State Department Blames A Video. Why?”

From Hillary Clinton's October 22 testimony before the House Select Committee on Benghazi:

Video file

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): You just gave a long answer, Madam Secretary, to Ms. Sanchez about what you heard that night and what you're doing, but nowhere in there did you mention a video. You didn't mention a video because there was never a video inspired protest in Benghazi. There was in Cairo, but not in Benghazi. Victoria Nuland, your spokesperson at the State Department, hours after the attack said this, “Benghazi has been attacked by militants. In Cairo, police have removed demonstrators.” Benghazi you got weapons and explosions. Cairo you got spray paint and rocks. One hour before the attack in Benghazi, Chris Stevens walks a diplomat to the front gate. The ambassador didn't report a demonstration. He didn't report it because it never happened. An eyewitness in the command center that night on the ground said, “no protest, no demonstration.” Two intelligence reports that day: “no protest, no demonstration.” 

The attack starts at 3:42 Eastern time. Ends at approximately 11:40 P.M. that night. At 4:06 an ops alert goes out across the State Department, says this: “Mission under attack. Armed men. Shots fired. Explosions heard.” No mention of a video. No mention of a protest. No mention of a demonstration. But the best evidence is Greg Hicks, the number two guy in Libya -- the guy who worked side by side with Ambassador Stevens. He was asked, “If there had been a protest, would the ambassador have reported it?” Mr. Hicks response, “Absolutely. For there to have been a demonstration on Chris Stevens' front door and him not to have reported it is unbelievable,” Mr. Hicks said. He said secondly, “if it had been reported he would have been out the back door within minutes and there was a back gate.” Everything points to a terrorist attack. We just heard from Mr. Pompeo about the long history of terrorist incidents, terrorist violence in the country.  And yet five days later, Susan Rice goes on five TV shows, and she says this: “Benghazi was a spontaneous reaction as a consequence of a video.” A statement we all know is false. 

But don't take my word for it, here's what others have said: “Rice was off the reservation. Off the reservation on five networks, White House worried about the politics.” Republicans didn't make those statements. They were made by the people who worked for you, in the Near Eastern Affairs Bureau, the actual experts on Libya in the State Department. So, if there's no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start? It started with you, Madam Secretary. At 10:08 on the night of the attack, you released this statement: “Some have sought to justify the vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on internet.” At 10:08, with no evidence -- at 10:08, before the attack is over, at 10:08 when Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty are still on the roof of the annex fighting for their lives, the official statement of the State Department blames a video. Why? 


A Comprehensive Guide To Myths And Facts About Hillary Clinton, Benghazi, And Those Emails

FACT: Intelligence Community, The Suspected Attackers, And Eyewitnesses All Linked The Inflammatory Anti-Islam Video To The Attacks

Right-Wing Media's New “Benghazi Bombshell” Recycles Smears About Role Of YouTube Video