[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E937-E939]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LETTER TO THE SPEAKER URGING THE CREATION OF A HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE
ON THE TERRORIST ATTACK ON THE U.S. CONSULATE IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA

______

HON. FRANK R. WOLF

of virginia

in the house of representatives

Thursday, June 20, 2013

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit a copy of my June 19, 2013 letter
again urging the creation of a bipartisan Select Committee to
investigate the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate and annex in
Benghazi last September.
There are only five legislative weeks left before the one-year
anniversary of the attacks. Yet there remain too many unanswered
questions resulting from too few public hearings with key witnesses who
were present the night of the attack.
That's why 158 Members have cosponsored H. Res. 36 to create a Select
Committee to conduct a full investigation with public hearings. The
Select Committee has also been endorsed by family members of the
Benghazi victims, more than 700 retired Special Operations officials
and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association.
I urge the prompt creation of a Select Committee to ensure the
American people learn the truth.

Congress of the United States,

House of Representatives,

June 19, 2013.
Hon. John A. Boehner,
Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, The Capitol.
Dear Mr. Speaker: The American people are losing confidence
in their government. The tragedy in Benghazi, along with a
stream of recent controversies, including the IRS and the
Justice Department's targeting of reporters at Fox News and
the Associated Press, as well as the ambiguity about recently
disclosed programs at the National Security Agency, are
eroding public trust in the institutions of government.
This diminishing of public confidence isn't limited to the
Executive Branch. Congress' approval rating is at an all-time
low. A June 14 National Journal article said, ``Nearly 8 in
10 Americans told Gallup pollsters this month that they
disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job, the 45th
consecutive month that more than two-thirds of Americans
graded Congress poorly. The problem isn't as much what
Congress is doing as what it is not getting done.'' I believe
most Americans would agree that one of the items ``not
getting done'' is a thorough, comprehensive and ultimately
definitive investigation into the response to the Benghazi
attacks.
That is why I have been pushing so hard for a bipartisan
Select Committee to investigate the September 11, 2012
terrorist attack in Benghazi. The response among most of our
colleagues and the public has been overwhelming. Since
January, when I proposed including the Select Committee in
the House Rules package for the 113th Congress, more than
two-thirds of House Republicans--a majority of the majority--
have cosponsored my bill, H. Res. 36, to create the Select
Committee. Since that time, there has been a growing chorus
of support. The bill has been endorsed by the parents of some
of the victims, by more than 700 retired Special Operations
officials, by the Federal Law Enforcement Officers
Associations, which represents the State Department security
officers who were on the ground in Benghazi, and by The Wall
Street Journal editorial page in addition to dozens of other
commentators, former diplomats and military officials. I
believe this broad support speaks to the public's hunger for
clear answers on Benghazi--answers which to date have been
elusive. That is why more than nine months after the
devastating attack, my resolution continues to add new
cosponsors; it now has the support of 158 Republicans.
I recognize that ``regular order'' has made some progress
over the last six months; most notably Chairman Issa's
constructive hearing with several State Department
whistleblowers. I also understand that Chairman McKeon has
planned a hearing with Gen. Carter Ham for next week, but
like so many of these hearings, this, too, will be held
behind closed doors. There is no reason Gen. Ham's
testimony shouldn't be public. This latest classified
hearing is symptomatic of a broader problem with respect
to the current congressional approach to investigating
Benghazi: Too much has been done in a piecemeal fashion,
behind closed doors,

[[Page E938]]

thereby robbing the American people of clear answers to
important questions surrounding the murder of a sitting
U.S. ambassador and three civilian employees, and the
grievous injury of untold others.
Deuteronomy 16:20 tells us, ``Justice, justice shalt thou
pursue.'' As we quietly marked the nine-month anniversary of
the attacks last week, I know many people wondered if there
will ever be any clear resolution to this investigation, let
alone justice.
Writing about Benghazi in The Wall Street Journal last
month, columnist Peggy Noonan pondered, ``Was all this
incompetence? Or was it politics disguised as the fog of war?
Who called these shots and made these decisions? Who decided
to do nothing?''
More than nine months later, the Congress still cannot
answer these questions. No one has been held responsible for
the failure to respond that night. A few mid-level career
officials have been penalized, but ultimately those senior
officials who were in the position to actually say the buck
stops here--cabinet secretaries and political appointees at
the White House, State Department, Defense Department and
CIA--have emerged unscathed, and in some cases, seemingly the
better for it.
Consider that former Secretary Clinton now earns hundreds
of thousands of dollars for every speech she gives, former
Secretary Panetta just signed a $3 million book deal and
former CIA Director Petraeus recently joined an investment
firm in New York.
Similarly, several other administration officials
associated with the Benghazi response to the attack have been
promoted. Ambassador Rice has been promoted to national
security advisor, then-deputy national security advisor
Dennis McDonough has been promoted to White House chief of
staff, and then-White House chief of staff Jack Lew has been
promoted to Treasury Secretary.
If all responsible for the government's response to
Benghazi have been rewarded with lucrative contracts or
promotions within the administration, what signal does this
send to the American people about accountability?
Mr. Speaker, we're fast approaching the Independence Day
recess. We will only have four legislative weeks in July
before the August recess. When we return in September we will
be just days away from the one-year anniversary of the
Benghazi attacks.
We must not wait until the second year of this
investigation to commit the focused resources of a Select
Committee in pursuit of government accountability and,
ultimately, truth. Sources are disappearing and leads are
drying up. The Select Committee legislation needs to be
Swiftly brought to the floor for a vote, so the House can
hold public hearings over the summer--focused exclusively on
the core issues about why no assistance was sent to the
Americans under fire in Benghazi--and attempt to provide a
final public report by the first anniversary of this attack.
You have a number of committee chairman who would be
excellent at leading the Select Committee. Chairman Issa has
shown in his hearing with the State Department whistleblowers
that he would be a good chairman. Similarly, Chairman Royce,
Chairman Rogers, Chairman McKeon, Chairman Goodlatte and
Chairman McCaul are all strong leaders and would ably chair a
Select Committee. Further, we have a lot of talent in our
conference to draw from. There are a number of newer members
who have proven themselves to be capable and insightful
investigators. You could consider appointing some of them to
the Select Committee, too.
As I mentioned earlier, a number of new controversies
involving the Obama Administration have surfaced in recent
months that demand the committees' full attention. This is
all the more reason to take the best of the best under a
Select Committee to build, at no additional cost, on the work
that has already been done through regular order. There would
be no need to start over, as some have tried to say. Nor
would there be additional costs--the resolution specifically
states that we should use existing resources.
We owe it to the families of the Benghazi victims and to
the not yet named survivors, whose lives will be indelibly
marked by the wounds they endured protecting the annex, to
honor their sacrifice and their service. Harkening back to
Deuteronomy, we must pursue justice on their behalf,
recognizing their heroism and an accounting for the failures
in leadership that left them exposed and vulnerable. We also
owe it to the men and women who serve our country now and in
the years ahead to restore confidence that if they come under
fire, we will make every effort to come to their defense. For
these reasons alone, we should not give up on this issue.
I am afraid that if we don't move on a Select Committee,
we'll never find out the truth. Just as The Wall Street
Journal editorial page in May said, ``A Select Committee is
the only means available now for the U.S. political system to
extricate itself from the labyrinth called Benghazi.''
The need for a Select Committee is underscored by the
difficulty we're having getting answers on a number of
current investigations. Consider that in the case of the IRS
scandal, both the Ways and Means Committee and the Oversight
and Government Reform Committee have opened up independent
investigations that will likely take significant resources
for months to come. It is important that they investigate,
and they are doing an excellent job. But despite these
efforts, much remains unknown about the IRS scandal--which
involves only a single agency and does not have to deal with
sensitive, classified information--including whether the
political targeting of groups was confined to the Cincinnati
office or was actually directed by Washington. We still don't
have a clear answer.
In comparison, the Benghazi case cuts across multiple
national security agencies and the White House involving
sensitive information, thereby putting it in a league of its
own among the various scandal investigations. Also of great
interest is the increasing concern that the FBI is being used
by various agencies as an excuse to avoid answering
questions on Benghazi, especially as this investigation
drags on longer. The American people should be troubled by
the anemic pace of the FBI's investigation of those
responsible for the attacks. Nearly a year later, the U.S.
does not have a single suspect in custody. The Tunisians
released one suspect earlier this year, after making the
FBI wait for months to interview him. Another person of
significant interest has been held since last fall by the
Egyptian government, a recipient of billions of dollars in
U.S. foreign assistance, but they will not allow the FBI
to interview him.
Even more concerning, last month the Associated Press
reported that the FBI allegedly has identified five men
believed to be responsible for the Benghazi attacks, but
won't detain them because it does not have enough evidence to
try them in a U.S. civilian court. For the U.S. to know the
identities and possible locations of those who killed four
Americans and fail to take action immediately because the
administration insists on an Article III trial is shameful.
For these reasons, any worthwhile Benghazi investigation must
also consider how the Justice Department has managed its
investigation into the terrorists over the last year.
Despite these serious issues, much of the House's
investigation on Benghazi to date has centered on secondary
discussions like the ``talking points'' and the
Accountability Review Board process, to the detriment of more
fundamental issues like the administration's apparent
abandonment of Americans who were facing a deadly siege.
On the issues that matter most, there is nothing that
happened that deadly night in Benghazi that can't be
addressed in a public hearing and accompanying report of
findings. There are ways to protect classified information
while still allowing the public to learn what actually
happened that night. There is no legitimate reason that the
public shouldn't know what calls for help were made from
Benghazi, who received those calls and, most importantly, why
no support was sent to the Americans under siege. There is no
reason that officials in the chain of command at various
agencies shouldn't be asked to answer publicly why no effort
was made to rescue those in Benghazi.
It has been repeated often that there were no military
assets in the region that could have responded in time to
stop the initial attack on the consulate. But when the
attacks started, no one could have known whether it would
last eight minutes, eight hours, or eight days, or longer. It
appears that not even a single plane was scrambled. We can't
help but draw the deeply troubling conclusion that within
minutes of the attack, the decision was made that the battle
was lost and the Americans left there would be collateral
damage in the greater War on Terror.
If our government never sent a plane to help defend the
annex, it begs the question: Did they even send an American
plane to get the bodies and survivors out of Benghazi after
the attacks? There's no reason the public should not learn
the answer to this question, too.
As Lt. Gen. William. G. Boykin (ret.) and other former
Special Operations officials have noted, a bedrock American
ethos--that our nation never leaves anyone behind on the
battlefield--was shattered that night in Benghazi. No one
came to rescue them despite pleas for help. More than nine
months later, too many questions remain unanswered: Who took
the call that night? What were they told and how did they
respond? Why was the determination made not to intervene in a
horrific assault on a U.S. diplomat and his brave support
staff?
In the dangerous world in which we live there are
undoubtedly hard fought battles where American blood is
spilled, and lives lost--our nation is painfully aware of
this reality through our experience in distant lands like
Iraq and Afghanistan. But Benghazi was an unanticipated
battlefield where terrorist elements seized on the occasion
of the anniversary of 9/11 to strike at an American outpost
abroad. They did so with deadly consequence, and their attack
was met with silence from a superpower.
This is a black mark on our national history. It emboldens
others with similarly gruesome aims. It leaves vulnerable
Americans serving in dangerous posts. And ultimately, the
lack of transparency from the various government agencies and
entities involved undermines the faith of the American people
in their government.
This is a less obvious ``casualty'' of that dark day, but
it has lasting implications which we as public servants know
well. For in a functioning democracy there is a sacred trust
that must exist between the government and the governed and
that trust is precipitously eroding.
As the Wall Street Journal noted in its May editorial,
``Let Benghazi's chips fall. The House should appoint a
Select Committee.''
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Frank R. Wolf,
Member of Congress.

[[Page E939]]

____________________