[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8477-8479]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                BENGHAZI

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise to urge Senator Reid to say a very 
clear no to the request by 37 Republicans that we create a new Senate 
select committee on Benghazi. I was astounded to see 37 Republicans--
many of whom have worked on this issue with me and Senator Menendez on 
the Foreign Relations Committee--essentially make this request at a 
time when we have so much information already on Benghazi. To spend the 
funds for this separate committee--in addition to the one the House has 
set up--doesn't make sense unless you believe, as I do, that this is 
all a political witch hunt.
  The attacks of September 11, 2012, in Benghazi that took the lives of 
four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, were a tragedy. 
After such a tragedy, we should all come together and make certain that 
this never happens again, but we should not play politics. Instead of 
focusing and agreeing on how we can prevent future attacks against U.S. 
personnel overseas--as they have had an opportunity to do by adding 
more funding for diplomatic posts to protect our people--the 
Republicans want to turn the Benghazi-Libya tragedy into a scandal. 
That is scandalous. The way they are handling this issue is a scandal.
  The American people are smart. I have seen recent polls, and they get 
it. More than 60 percent--and I will look that up again--say this is 
all about politics; it is not about anything else.
  I wish to explain to the American people what we have done about this 
tragedy. Over the last 20 months, these attacks have received 
unprecedented scrutiny. I have a chart I wish to share that explains 
it.
  We have had nine House and Senate investigations on Benghazi. We have 
conducted 17 hearings. We have held 50--5-0--briefings. We have 
conducted 25 interviews, issued 8 subpoenas, and reviewed 25,000 pages 
of documents. There are 25,000 pages of documents that have been 
reviewed. We have had six reports released. All of these little boxes 
represented here show the various hearings, the various committees, the 
various briefings, the various documents. We look at this chart and 
realize this is unprecedented.
  Nine different House and Senate committees have investigated the 
attacks. Seventeen hearings have been conducted. Fifty briefings have 
taken place. Twenty-five transcribed interviews have been conducted. 
Eight subpoenas have been issued. More than 25,000 pages of documents 
have been reviewed, and 6 congressional reports have been released.
  I have gone over this a couple of times this morning because I want 
to make sure the Record reflects all of this accurately.
  In case that is not enough to convince the people of this country 
what a witch hunt the Republicans are on, I will show my colleagues a 
partial viewing of the materials, if my colleagues will excuse me while 
I bend down. That is just one stack of binders. All of these binders 
are filled--filled--with all of the information that came out of these 
reports.
  So before people get up here and say, Oh, we need more information, 
how about reading what we already have: stacks and stacks of 
information.
  Within these binders are the reports and the testimony Congress has 
already heard over the last 20 months, but my Republican friends would 
have us believe none of this happened and none of what the chart 
depicts happened. They are not satisfied with exhaustive reviews, much 
of which was conducted by House Republican committee Chairs, by the 
way. They walk away from their own work because they are playing 
politics. They should be proud of the work they did, but this isn't 
about the work they did. It is about playing politics. It is about 
hurting people--hurting people.
  Benghazi was a tragedy. We lost four beautiful, patriotic Americans. 
Don't turn it into a scandal.
  I guess these filled binders were not enough for them in the House of 
Representatives.
  I will take these down now.
  This wasn't enough for them: 9 committees, 17 hearings, 50 briefings, 
25 interviews, 8 subpoenas, 25,000 pages of documents, 6 reports. All 
of this was not enough for them. The House set up a new select 
committee and, again, 37 of my Republican friends now want their own 
select committee. That is right; they want two new committees to 
investigate what has been investigated, investigated, and investigated.
  A person doesn't need a degree in political science to know what a 
political witch hunt looks like. All a person needs to do is to look at 
this and a person understands. This is a campaign tactic by my 
Republican colleagues to gin up their base ahead of the midterm 
election and, by the way, look ahead to 2016, where they are filled 
with anxiety at the thought that the former Secretary of State, Hillary 
Clinton, may be the Democratic nominee.
  This is a campaign tactic, this call for these committees. We know 
Republicans have been actively fundraising off this tragedy. That is 
right; they have been fundraising off this tragedy. When Speaker 
Boehner was asked about it, all he did was walk away from the question. 
I watched that interview. It was painful.
  They said: Aren't you going to stop the fundraising?
  He said: We are just interested in the facts.
  They said: Aren't you going to stop this fundraising?
  He said: We are just interested in the facts.
  Answer the question. We know it is a political witch hunt because 
before he was minding his Ps and Qs, the House Select Committee 
chairman suggested the administration should be put on ``trial'' over 
Benghazi--put on trial.
  We also know the House GOP refused House minority leader Nancy 
Pelosi's offer to put an equal number of Democrats and Republicans on 
the panel. Oh, no, because it is a political witch hunt and they want 
total control over that committee.
  Here is one issue I know the select committee won't be investigating 
in the House, and that is the budget cuts House Republicans made to 
security at our embassies and at our consulates, at our diplomatic 
posts around the world--cuts that Republicans actually boasted about 
making. Here in the Senate, we have tried to get through an embassy 
security bill by unanimous consent and they objected I don't know how 
many times--a couple of times.
  So we are not going to see an investigation into why the Republicans 
thought it was wise to cut spending on

[[Page 8478]]

embassy security. Oh, no, they won't look at that. One Congressman in 
the House was asked by CNN whether the GOP cut embassy security, 
because the reporter was incredulous, and this Congressman said: 
Absolutely. Look, we have to make priorities and choices. You have to 
prioritize things. So, clearly, this particular Member of Congress was 
proud they cut embassy security; but, believe me, they are not going to 
be investigating that in their investigative committee.
  I will tell my colleagues what else they are not going to 
investigate. They are not going to investigate the tragedy and the 
scandal of more than 4,000 Americans killed in the Iraq war based on 
phony intelligence--4,000 Americans dead, based on phony intelligence. 
I never heard one call for a select committee to find out why that 
happened. And that ignores the tens of thousands of wounded, some with 
post-traumatic stress, and all the problems we know are happening.
  Here is something else they won't tell us. Between 1998 and 2013, 
there were at least 501 significant attacks against U.S. diplomatic 
facilities and personnel in 70 countries, resulting in the deaths of 
586 people, including 67 Americans. During the Bush administration, 
there were 166 attacks which killed 116 people, including 18 Americans. 
All of these attacks were terrible tragedies, but not one of them was 
exploited for political gain. Why would we exploit a tragedy where an 
American got killed for political gain? We could have done it.
  I was serving in the House back in 1983. I know that is probably 
close to when the Presiding Officer was born. I was serving in the 
House in 1983 when a truck bomb exploded outside the Marine barracks in 
Beirut, Lebanon, killing 241 American servicemembers. The attack came 
just 6 months after 17 Americans were killed in the bombing of the U.S. 
Embassy in Beirut. Let me tell my colleagues about how that was handled 
by then-Speaker Tip O'Neill when Ronald Reagan was President. Tip 
O'Neill conducted real oversight with the two parties working closely 
together. Within 2 months, the House stepped forward--Democrats and 
Republicans--and produced a report that criticized the lax security 
around the barracks and called for new measures to keep our brave 
military men and women safe. That is the way we should handle these 
things, not a kangaroo court, not a political witch hunt, not a 
partisan investigation.
  Let's face it. This is politics. They are about discrediting the 
Obama administration and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I 
repeat: Never in history, to my knowledge--and I have gone back and 
back--has any political party done what they are doing on Benghazi.
  There is disinformation. They say: Well, the President kept saying it 
was because of the movie that was produced. The President stepped 
forward and in his first comment said the attacks were acts of terror. 
That is his quote. We never hear that from the Republicans. He called 
them acts of terror.
  I will tell my colleagues what else they forget to mention: that 
Secretary Clinton was the first person to convene an independent 
investigation of the attacks. Let me reiterate. The very first person 
to convene an independent investigation of the attacks in Benghazi was 
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
  The independent investigation was nonpartisan. It was called an 
investigation by the Accountability Review Board. It was chaired by 
Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Michael Mullen. Talk about a 
nonpartisan team. I can attest to the fact they are nonpartisan. I am 
privileged to sit on the Foreign Relations Committee. I am the most 
senior member on that committee. I will tell my colleagues these two 
gentlemen came forward and delivered their report. They talked very 
openly and honestly about the systemic problems that undermined 
security in Benghazi. And guess what happened after that report. 
Secretary Clinton and the State Department quickly accepted all 29 of 
those recommendations and put them into place--first under Secretary 
Clinton and now Secretary Kerry.
  So let me say this again. There is this call for this political witch 
hunt because they want to hurt Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton was 
the first person to convene an independent investigation that made 29 
recommendations that she started to put in place, and Secretary Kerry 
is completing that task. Unbelievable. But we won't hear that from our 
Republican friends. They want to make Benghazi into a scandal, but they 
are the scandal. That is the scandal: playing politics with a tragedy. 
That is the scandal.
  The Senate Intelligence Committee produced a bipartisan report based 
on dozens of committee hearings, briefings, and interviews--that is in 
here as well--that highlighted the need to better respond to security 
threats against our diplomatic posts and personnel around the world.
  Instead of going over all of these reports--I showed my colleagues 
how many there are, and this chart demonstrates that as well in a very 
clear way how many investigations that have been conducted--instead of 
focusing on protecting Americans serving abroad by carrying out the 
recommendations of these reports, my colleagues are obsessing over 
talking points prepared for a Sunday TV show.
  There is nothing in the thousands of documents released that even 
remotely suggests an attempt to cover up what happened in Benghazi. As 
I said, the President said they were acts of terror. Hillary Clinton 
launched the investigation. The investigation made 29 recommendations.
  This new select committee request is a sham. It is a kangaroo court. 
It is a waste of taxpayer dollars. If Senate Republicans really wanted 
to help protect the men and women who bravely serve our country 
overseas, they would stop objecting to our request to take up our 
bipartisan embassy security bill.
  The Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed S. 1386. It is named 
after Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty. It is 
called the Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty 
Embassy Security Threat Mitigation and Personnel Protection Act.
  It was passed and reported in December of last year. It was authored 
by Senators Menendez and Corker. I thank them for that. This bill will 
authorize funding for key measures recommended by the Accountability 
Review Board, including security upgrades at our embassies, consulates, 
and other diplomatic posts, especially high-risk posts. It also 
authorizes new funding for security training, including language 
training for high-threat security environments. It would direct the 
Secretary of State to expand the Marine Corps security guard detachment 
program to help protect our diplomatic facilities and personnel.
  Why do the Republicans keep objecting to this bill? You cannot, with 
a straight face, tell me you truly care about our foreign personnel 
when you stand in the way of S. 1386, a bill to provide for enhanced 
security, a bill that is bipartisan, a bill that came out of the 
committee on which I serve, Foreign Relations.
  I hope other colleagues will come down and talk about this sham. We 
have so much to do. We need to grieve for the families, the deaths of 
four Americans. Their loss is deep, very deep. To turn that into some 
investigation, some witch hunt, is not the right thing to do for their 
memories. The right thing to do for their memories is to pass this 
embassy security bill.
  I do not know how to say it, but it does cost money to make upgrades 
to your home, to your buildings. We are here in the Capitol, we protect 
and upgrade these beautiful buildings because of their history. We have 
to upgrade our buildings. That does not come free. It does cost money.
  Yet House Republicans were bragging that they cut embassy security. 
So I am going to talk about this a lot because I care so deeply about 
making sure our personnel are safe all over the world. Until they allow 
this bill to go through, I truly question the deep concerns that are 
being expressed by my Republican friends. Oh, they need yet another 
committee to get to the bottom of Benghazi.
  We know what happened. It was a terror attack on a facility that 
needed

[[Page 8479]]

more protection. OK? How do we make sure that does not happen again? We 
have had more than 500 attacks--significant attacks--on our facilities 
since 1998, between 1998 and 2013 over 500 attacks.
  Never has anyone of any party tried to play politics with it. The 
reason I am so, shall we say, upset with this is because it is the 
wrong way to move forward. People look at us and they wonder if we can 
get anything done. I am so proud. I have a very important water 
resources bill coming up. We worked so well together across the aisle. 
We did a highway bill. We worked so well across the aisle. Why don't we 
do what we did when Tip O'Neill was Speaker and work well across the 
aisle on foreign policy? When I was coming up, foreign policy basically 
stopped at the water's edge. We respected the President, whoever it may 
be, Republican or Democrat.
  If we had a critique, we expressed it, but we did it in a way that 
was, if I can just say, less partisan. I will leave you with the image 
of this chart. This chart says it all. We have investigated this. We 
have looked at it. We have conducted hearings and briefings and 
interviews and issued subpoenas and reviewed documents and issued 
reports.
  We do not need to spend money on another committee because someone is 
afraid of Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Just deal with it. Do not try to 
revise history. She was the first person to convene an independent 
investigation to begin to put the pieces into play that would in fact 
make sure this did not happen again.
  Don't say you care about embassy security when you stand and oppose a 
bipartisan bill that would make sure we make the requisite improvements 
to our facilities? I hope Harry Reid, our leader, will not say yes to a 
committee that is nothing but a political witch hunt. I will continue 
to come down to the floor to discuss this issue, to debate this issue 
if it is necessary to do so.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________