Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Able to testify tomorrow joining us now is congressman James Lankford a member of the house oversight committee he also -- that's on the Budget Committee.
And chairs the house Republican policy committee.
Congressman thanks for being with this I want to begin if -- may we have just received a -- buy you an attempted reputation if you will.
By the Pentagon saying the troops.
Could not have been on the ground and -- Gaza in time.
To stop the second attack or to mitigated.
And and we'll be taking -- up in some detail on this broadcast but I'd I'd like to get first your reaction.
To the -- the Pentagon response.
By the assistant secretary of defense for legislative affairs.
Right it did it's it's an interesting parsing of words on that -- it's it's -- say we can get there in time for the second attack when they're really three attacks.
It assumes they knew how many attacks -- -- going to be that night.
And we can't get there in time and so why go at all that's not the way you do it you know that your embassy or your facilities are under attack.
You don't know what's happening next don't know how many people -- there you know -- ambassador is missing.
At that time and not recovered and how many assets are in need are unknown so you -- what you have.
As soon as you can to get there as fast you can and that's not what occurred.
And and congressman if -- -- learning that hits Gregory hicks the whistle wore the number two on board in fact in Libya.
Asserts that military assets have tried to respond to Ben Ghazi.
We're told to stand down including a special operations team that was in Tripoli.
-- your thoughts on that.
Right there there was an argument about who had command and control of those individuals ever there and who can actually make the call.
And so -- -- debating on who can make the call the plane has to go.
And actually try to get there and be able to help people the key thing about this is we had enough security in place.
Just the month before in State Department said you had too much security there you don't need that much and pulled them out.
Bob Gregory -- while the ambassador while the regional security officer in Libya were all saying we've got to have these people please keep these people in place.
And State Department in Washington said no you you have too many people there were pulling them out.
And so it's not a matter of who else could we have -- we should have already had enough in place and they were withdrawn.
I assume that you you you have been privy to to the the questioning of the the principal witnesses throughout this.
And I and I'm going to charges and see if we can get your view.
As to whether or not you believe that there is compelling evidence.
It convincing evidence.
That our forces were told to stand down and that those forces that have made a difference.
In saving the lives of the two CIA operatives.
Entire turnaround woods and they're going door.
Who knows whether -- be able to protect as we don't know that that's hindsight -- we look back on it I do believe there -- -- no contingency plans in place to be able to help protect individuals.
There was no urgency to be able to step in and do that whether it be military assets coming from Italy where that be coming from Africa.
And I also firmly believe that there was confusion about who had control and who could actually -- more people that were on the ground there.
And so all that confusion in -- rolling battle that was happening Ghazi.
And the explanation mind the administration and autism -- effectively a curtain of silence that is descended around the entire administration.
On the issue of bank -- -- Stephen Hayes of the weekly standard reports that the initial draft of the CIA.
Talking points on -- Ghazi for the purpose of the the UN ambassadors.
Appearances on some Sunday talks -- the Sunday talk shows a few days later.
That Victoria new one the senior spokesperson for the State Department.
He is linked to purging references to extremists and talking points extremist being.
How references to al-Qaeda.
But if -- a couple things that we know for certain at this point one is the original intelligence piece that came out -- here's what occurred it.
Within 24 hours was dramatically changed now that White House and State Department said we're just saying what the intelligence community said.
We now have what the intelligence community said they say this is al-Qaeda -- -- -- these were Islamic extremists is that this is a terrorist attack.
-- were very -- there were no comments about demonstrations or videos within 24 hours that very clear long statement was cut in half.
Islamic extremists was pulled out of it al-Qaeda was pulled out of a terrorist was pulled out of it.
And it was replaced -- demonstrations.
In the middle of it and everything change no one in Libya -- be clear on this.
No one on the ground in Libya.
Thought that this was a demonstration based on -- video or demonstration all everyone there from the very beginning.
Thought this is a terrorist and his line about demonstration was created in Washington it definitely did not come out of Libya.
-- really appreciate your being with thank you so much congressman James -- what.
Filter by section