Watch Live: Holiday Yule Log

Sen. Jack Reed on 'This Week'

The Rhode Island Democrat on the Benghazi investigation and Syria.
3:00 | 05/12/13

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:

{{nextVideo.title}}

{{nextVideo.description}}

Skip to this video now

Now Playing:

{{currentVideo.title}}

More information on this video
Enhanced full screen
Explore related content
Comments
Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Sen. Jack Reed on 'This Week'
And joining us now Rhode Island Democrat senator Jack Reed you heard Senator McCain called Ben Ghazi and those emails a cover -- Actually not -- congress authority had. Eleven hearings on the topic. Over 25000. Pieces of documentation provide that congress in fact. The emails in question I believe were available in February in the context of the John Brennan. A confirmation hearing. And more critical I think is that to the most respective Americans. Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former chairman -- his staff. Mike -- and conducted a thorough report. And assessing did they did not look at those emails and in fact Thomas Pickering. Told ABC -- you have to be totally nigh -- to not believe politics was injected in several well I think what. I would suggest and looking at them play by play is what was going -- was not so much. The politics of the electioneering but the institutional also -- move for positioning. That -- Nolan who is that it worked in the State Department had a long career in public server she's not a partisan anti sure to Dick Cheney. She was I think very much interested in making sure that the state department's position and there. A recession this is an -- agents I think this was a classic issue of enter the -- agencies battle about who. Will say what and at the end I think what you had with the very. Sort of consensus document that avoided. All of the difficult issues. So except -- offered for Jay Carney to originally say there was just one small change in this and then we find these twelve different versions and including a very definitive statement. We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qaeda participated in the attack. That did not appear in there that's acceptable. That did not appear -- a third point that -- call one ambassador rice was food being. -- and -- TV show she essentially said there were streams element. She did not contradict that the president of bank statement immediately after the -- -- -- -- a day after the -- was this -- an act of -- There's no attempt as I think my -- -- aside a suggestion that there was a story being created that there was no terrorist involvement. That terrorism was not at all -- issue. I think what was being debated and and seriously again just a month ago Jim -- and ahead of them -- the intelligence community said. Based on his view as a professional only shares those comments -- about his fear exactly what. Again let me go back to that act of terror that you say President Obama talked about the next day in the rose garden and that Senator McCain disputed. If the president said it was an act of terror then why didn't that appear on the talking points. In the White House really have it both ways -- they say oh wait a minute he said act of terror but a few days later. They take out those reference if we don't they felt pretty confident about it if they sent the president about to say that. Well and I think again I think they've created. Through interaction agency process a document that everyone could agree upon America almost by definition -- -- something then is not as. Specific orange console what they did is acceptable to well what they did I think was trying to -- very. Chaotic situation to come up with points that they felt -- I don't know. They didn't wanna go too far in two concepts one there are intelligence resources -- -- that that you might not an undisclosed second. There's an ongoing investigation was just beginning. Those two fact is also frame to respond. But I think again when you talk about of this so political dynamic when the president comes out and says quite quickly. Within its authority in his office this was an act of terror the notion that the was somehow trying to disguises and make it something else I think for. Whatever equipment -- want to move on quickly to Syria. You heard Senator McCain and he's been saying it for weeks that there should be a no fly is sound with that really worked do we really know who these rebels are. We really don't have a good sense of who's on the ground and the cohesion of the of the elements that we have been trying to support over many months. And are no fly zone is is. It could could be feasible from an operational standpoint but it would I think an -- and what would it accomplish. Well I it would might accomplish very little effect because -- artillery you can still fire on innocent civilians and the rebels. With armored personnel carriers you can still move forward -- troops making the last to civilians on the ground. It might not accomplished a great a great deal but it would give us a step further. To our our engagement in a very complicated civil war I think the best approach -- is that diplomatic approach at this point I know it's always sort of the -- many times food food -- well that's just the old sort of diplomacy not working -- engaging and infantry Kerry has been I think made a step with the Russians to get them to sit down I want to go quickly to the Red Line. It's been two weeks since the United States that there was evidence. That the Syrian regime used chemical weapons. We've done nothing I know they're checking out chain of custody but this seems like this could go on forever and we may not do anything should the president do something since they. Appear to have use chemical weapon. I think we have to dig very seriously I think what we do have to be careful though because we've had situations in the past we've acted on information that was incomplete impartial and. Frankly to -- the detriment of our country and to our. National security we have be careful. I think there's several issues here one -- -- it. -- that red line. Very quickly well I think frankly he should it may declares he did that that'd be used to systematic use of chemical weapons. Against the innocent Syrian people is something with the international community cannot. -- -- So that that point has to -- the question is what you do he can't do it hastily. But you have to do it for deliberately not politically the president is trying to do thanks for joining us this thing I think senator Reid.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"id":19162824,"title":"Sen. Jack Reed on 'This Week'","duration":"3:00","description":"The Rhode Island Democrat on the Benghazi investigation and Syria.","section":"ThisWeek","mediaType":"Default"}