Susan Rice, the Senate and Angry Mobs
Email
An armed man waves his rifle as buildings and cars are engulfed in flames after being set on fire inside the US consulate compound in Benghazi late Sept. 11, 2012. (STR/AFP/GettyImages)
ABC News’ Jonathan Karl and Sunlen Miller report:
Pop quiz: Who said this about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, shortly after it happened?
“The violence in Benghazi coincided with an attack on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also swarmed by an angry mob of protestors on September 11, 2012.”
Was it U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice?
No, it was the United States Senate.
The Senate passed a resolution the day after the attack in Benghazi, on Sept. 12, S. Res. 551. The resolution was updated and passed again Sept. 22 to add the names of those who had died. The original resolution and the update were approved by “Unanimous Consent,” meaning that all 100 senators were officially listed as sponsors or co-sponsors.
Neither resolution uses the words “terrorist” or “extremist” or “al-Qaeda.” Both resolutions use the phrase “swarmed by an angry mob of protestors” to describe the attacks in Cairo and Benghazi.
Several of the resolution’s co-sponsors – including Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., and moderate Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. – have criticized Susan Rice for using language similar to the Senate resolution in describing the attack days after it happened.
“This president and this administration has either been guilty of colossal incompetence or engaged in a cover-up, neither of which are acceptable to the American people,” McCain said Nov. 14. “If someone carried a message to the American people that was totally and utterly false with no basis in fact, then that person also has to be held accountable as well.”
The senators have targeted Rice’s use of the word “mob” to describe the attack, based on the talking points given to her by the CIA, rather than to admit that it was terrorism.
After meeting with Rice last week on Capitol Hill, Sen. Ayotte said Rice admitted that the information initially given to the U.S. people was wrong.
“It’s certainly clear from the beginning that we knew that those with ties to al-Qaeda were involved on the attack on the embassy and clearly the impression that was given, the information given to the American people was wrong,” Ayotte said after meeting with Rice last week. “In fact, Ambassador Rice said today, absolutely, it was wrong.”
Ayotte’s office says the resolutions’ language, which passed in the days after the attack, and that of Rice the Sunday after the attack are not comparable.
“A resolution honoring fallen Americans can’t be compared to Ambassador Rice’s Sunday show appearances, when she made misleading assertions that al-Qaeda had been ‘decimated,’ security at the consulate was ‘substantial’ and the attack was a ‘spontaneous’ reaction to a ‘heinous and offensive video,’” Ayotte spokesman Jeff Grappone told ABC.
Sen. McCain’s office called the comparison between the language of the resolution and Rice’s words “pathetic.”
“This is total nonsense,” McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in a statement to ABC News.
“This was a resolution honoring Ambassador Chris Stevens and the other brave Americans who died in Benghazi, drafted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and passed with the unanimous consent of all 100 members of the U.S. Senate one day after the attack.”
Hagel, Brennan to Face Tough Congressional Confirmation 
Obama Taps Sen. Chuck Hagel for Defense Secretary 
It sounds like the wording of the Senate resolution was based upon the intelligence provided by the White House. So what? Is the White House excused for doctoring the CIA report that Rice delivered to the Senate, and the country? No.
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 11:43 am 11:43 am
“This is total nonsense,” – Brian Rogers
Sounds right.
What’s the point of this Blog story Jonahan?
It’s not like McCain and the other Senators got briefed with what really happened in Benghazi.
Posted by: Noz | December 4, 2012, 11:47 am 11:47 am
Stop defending the stupid people, the white house and staff are all liars.
Posted by: Dan | December 4, 2012, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
As usual, the entire point is missed by a lefty writer. It doesn’t matter what the Senate was or wasn’t briefed on which is the bait and switch you’re attempting to divert with. What matters is that this woman took to FIVE talk shows and misled the entire country without even QUESTIONING the lies she told when real time footage showed otherwise. What is it you don’t get? The most ironic part of all the misleads you lefties are attempting (and I should know because I was ONE of you) is that while you’re rushing to label objection to her as “racist,” you, yourself are demonstrating exactly that when you blindly defend the defenseless and then try to twist it around on “angry white men,” The facts are the facts. As a cabinet member, it was HER responsibility to make sure her facts WERE facts before she took to the airwaves to perform her sword swallowing act for her incompetent boss who was (and is still) too busy campaigning. Stop the nonsense here, alleged Media. Your shilling is showing.
Posted by: Rocky | December 4, 2012, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
I don’t know why the Senate Republicans didn’t just consult with the right wing posters on here. They’ve know all of which facts about Benghazi are right and which are wrong right from the beginning. We should eliminate the CIA and just go with intelligence based on right wing blog posts.
Posted by: Stu | December 4, 2012, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm
Republicans don’t have a strong case against Susan Rice but they desperately want to block her appointment. What they secretly want is for Senator Kerry to be Secy State which will leave his senate seat in Massachusettes open for Scott Brown, poised with staff in place after losing the other Mass senate seat to Eliz Warren. If Republicans fail in this move it will be because there really is no case against Susan Rice.
Posted by: Kent Tolley | December 4, 2012, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
“…there really is no case against Susan Rice.”
Posted by: Kent Tolley | December 4, 2012, 2:10 pm
No, there really is. Rice went on almost every Sunday political TV show after the Benghazi attack, and regurgitated a version of events that was false, and which she should have known was false. There wasn’t wrong information such as the number of attackers being miscounted, they completely fabricated who was attacking and why -wouldn’t you think that information should be accurate? Then she said that the CIA gave her that information. Then she said that someone changed the CIA momo before they got to her, but she won’t say who.
Who wants a Secretary of State who can’t account for the information they’re receiving and delivering? She’s a lightweight. She shouldn’t even be considered for Secretary of State.
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
I agree with Kent – there really is no case against Susan Rice. None. Your not knowing all the facts does not constitute a case.
“I think it’s clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.”
Ambassador Susan Rice, Fact the Nation, September 16, 2012.
Posted by: John | December 4, 2012, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
Posted by: John | December 4, 2012, 2:34 pm
You’re still pushing this theory that there was some spontaneous protest that turned violent? They knew this was a ridiculous theory from the get go, but they pushed it on the American people anyway.
The American people were better informed about the Benghazi attack BEFORE Rice opened her mouth.
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
You’re still pushing this theory that there was some spontaneous protest that turned violent? They knew this was a ridiculous theory from the get go
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
No, the theory was it was a spontaneous and violent protest. And that was not a ridiculous theory at all. That’s what intelligence put forward – and that it was inspired by the spontaneous attacks on the embassy in Cairo as a result of the anti-Muslim video.
You don’t know all the facts. You presume.
Posted by: John | December 4, 2012, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm
No, the theory was it was a spontaneous and violent protest. And that was not a ridiculous theory at all. That’s what intelligence put forward – and that it was inspired by the spontaneous attacks on the embassy in Cairo as a result of the anti-Muslim video.
You don’t know all the facts. You presume.
Posted by: John | December 4, 2012, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm
This is exactly right. Some people presume they know all the facts about Benghazi when they really have no clue other than what they’ve read somewhere. Reports from the ground in Benghazi quoted people saying the attackers said they were incensed by the anti-Muslim video, and others said the attackers commandeered people to ‘protest’ while they attacked.
Very few people know the exact truth at this point – and people posting on blogs pretending to know the exact truth are simply not credible.
Posted by: Wayne | December 4, 2012, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm
“I think it’s clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.”
Ambassador Susan Rice, Fact the Nation, September 16, 2012.
Posted by: John | December 4, 2012, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
The truth is that the CIA knew immediately that it was a pre-planned al Qaeda attack, and that it wasn’t a protest.
The problem with these facts is that it ran counter to the narrative that Obama wanted to say at his upcomming party convention; that al Qaeda was decimated. Since it would be hard for people to belive that al Qaeda were decimated if his press secretary is out there saying that this decimated al Qaeda just murdered his ambassador.
The anti-islam video narrative was fabricated to match what they were saying at the DNC convention.
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
Posted by: Dalmation | December 4, 2012, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
You don’t have a clue whether the CIA thought it was planned in 3 hours or 3 weeks. And at the time nobody did. Please quit pretending you know all the facts – you don’t.
Posted by: John | December 4, 2012, 3:27 pm 3:27 pm
Rice is history. She is going NO WHERE!
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | December 4, 2012, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm
“This is exactly right. Some people presume they know all the facts about Benghazi when they really have no clue other than what they’ve read somewhere.” – Wayne
? ? ? ? ?
Are you referring to Susan Rice reading the talking points page handed her by the White House?
Posted by: Noz | December 4, 2012, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm
“The anti-islam video narrative was “Fabricated”" – Dalmation
That’s “Made Up” for you in Liberalistan.
Posted by: Noz | December 4, 2012, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
“The anti-islam video narrative was “Fabricated”” – Dalmation
That’s “Made Up” for you in Liberalistan.Posted by: Noz | December 4, 2012, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
____It must be very stressful for Repubs when you KNOW everything. You people are just plum scary. “The Senate passed a resolution the day after the attack in Benghazi, on Sept. 12, S. Res. 551. The resolution was updated and passed again Sept. 22 to add the names of those who had died.” Gee isn’t Sept 22 AFTER Sept. 16th when Susan Rice went on Face The Nation…shouldn’t McCain have known so he intentionally passed on false info and actually passes a Senate Resolution. Oh ya, what about the other Rice and Powell they INTENTIONALLY lied to the American people causing the death of 1000′s. Take off our patrician blinders and join reality….for once.
Posted by: thefirstone00 | December 4, 2012, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm
I’m was curious to note that the Senate blamed the mob action on a hateful video. Oh, wait, it didn’t….
So, I guess the two things are really nothing alike at all.
Posted by: Don | December 4, 2012, 5:29 pm 5:29 pm
US Senators attacking an Ambassador for information provided by CIA says that the Senators have a political agenda. Especially when McCain and Graham went around promoting the lie of WOMD that killed thousands of Americans. In fact it angers me to no end and I will campaign in 2014 as hard as I did 2012 to get more Republicans out of the Congress. In fact I will be sure to donate to the candidate running against the Republican candidate they put up If Kerry is selected for SOS.
Posted by: MTATL67 | December 4, 2012, 5:43 pm 5:43 pm
Why aren’t the wingnuts going after the agency that provided the “wrong” information to ambassador Rice? That’s who they should want to talk to if anyone. They obviously want Scott (playgirl man of the year circa ’78?) Brown back bad and as usual they are willing to go to any length to get what they want. No matter how selfish and foolish they look. Disgraceful.
Posted by: Sandy | December 4, 2012, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
Think of the American press as a keyboard on which Axelrod and Plouffe and Obama play. Karl is one of the guys who polish the piano stool.
Posted by: Michael | December 4, 2012, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
The Right wing responses here are representative of the parties ills and why they lost the election. You can try to make a mountain out of a mole hill but you are just heaping dirt on yourselves. Common sense people can see through the BS easy enough.
Posted by: Ty Northcutt | December 4, 2012, 8:19 pm 8:19 pm
What is so great about this is that Mitt Romney was right about the cover up by the administration. That the President, Vice President, Sec. of State, and all those involved who watched the attack live via drones and let it happen, “standing down.” Susan Rice played the liar liar pants on fire card. She’s as bad as they come. Why is the media so exact in areas they choose to be but refuse to go into areas they choose not to be. The media only chooses to print what makes their Lords look good. Totally Biased Media.
Posted by: Susan | December 17, 2012, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm