[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 9969-9971]
[From the U.S. 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

[[Page 9970]]

     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, 
     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.

[[Page 9971]]

     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.

                          ____________________