Contribute
CONNECT:

research

Clinton Falsely Blames Budget Woes For Benghazi Security Failure

- October 22, 2015

Clinton Blamed Benghazi Attack On Budget Shortfalls

Click To Watch

Clinton Testified That The State Department Did Not Have “The Amount Of Money That We Thought Would Be Necessary To Do What Was Required To Protect Everyone.” CLINTON: “The State Department has historically and certainly before this terrible incident not had the amount of money that we thought would be necessary to do what was required to protect everyone. So, of course, there had to be priorities.” (Hillary Clinton, Select Committee On Benghazi, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 10/22/15)

Claims Of Budget Shortfalls Influencing Security Decisions Are False

State Department Official Charlene Lamb Testified Before The House Oversight Committee That Budget Cuts Had Nothing To Do With Security Decisions In Benghazi. REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA): “It has been suggested the budget cuts are responsible for lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally, was there any budget consideration and lack of budget that led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?” CHARLENE LAMB: “No, sir.” (U.S. House Of Representatives, Oversight And Government Reform Committee, Hearing, 10/10/12)

The Department Of Defense Site Security Team (SST), Which Left Libya In August 2012 Because The State Department Failed To Request Its Renewal, Came At “No Cost” To The State Department. “There has been considerable public discussion about the DOD’s Site Security Team in Tripoli. The SST, which was provided by the DoD at no expense to the State Department, consisted of 16 special operations personnel detailed to the Chief of Mission in Libya, although its numbers fluctuated slightly due to rotations.” (“Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012 Together With Additional Views,” Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, 1/15/14, p. 20)

Robert Baldre, The State Department’s Chief Financial Officer For Diplomatic Security, Wrote ThatI Do Not Feel That We Have Ever Been At A Point Where We Have Sacrificed Security Due To Lack Of Funding.” “Robert Baldre, your chief financial officer for diplomatic security, stated, and I quote, ‘I do not feel that we have ever been at a point where we have sacrificed security due to lack of funding,’ Rep. Steven Chabot, Ohio Republican, told Mrs. Clinton.” (Guy Taylor and Shaun Waterman, “Tears And Rage: Clinton Testily Defends Depiction Of Benghazi Events,” The Washington Times, 1/23/13)

Senate Homeland Security Report: Congress Has Been Responsive To Appropriating More Money To The State Department For Security-Driven Requests, But Neither The President Nor The State Department Requested Additional Funds For Libya. “At the same time, Congress has generally been responsive in providing supplemental and Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funds to the Department of State – more than $1.7 billion since 2007 – in response to emergent, security-driven funding requests, although primarily for facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, there was no supplemental or OCO request made by the President for additional diplomatic security enhancements in FY2010 or FY2011. Neither the Department of State nor Congress made a point of providing additional funds in a supplemental request for Libya, or more specifically, Benghazi.” (“Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi,” United States Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, 12/30/12, p. 17)

The Washington Post Fact Checker: “The Reality Is That Funding For Embassy Security Has Increased Significantly In Recent Years.” “Moreover, while Boxer claims that Republicans ‘cut’ the budget, she is only comparing it to what the Obama administration proposed. The reality is that funding for embassy security has increased significantly in recent years. The Department of State’s base requests for security funding have increased by 38 percent since Fiscal Year (FY) 2007, and base budget appropriations have increased by 27 percent in the same time period,’ said the bipartisan Senate Homeland Security report on the Benghazi attack.” (Glenn Kessler, “Barbara Boxer’s Claim That GOP Budgets Hampered Benghazi Security,” The Washington Post's Fact Checker, 5/16/13)

Clinton Has Even Admitted That The State Department Did Not Make Proper Spending Decisions

During Previous Congressional Testimony, Clinton Stated That She Would “Be The First To Say” That The State Department’s Prioritization Of Funds Was “Imperfect.” SECRETARY CLINTON: “And I – I would go back to something the chairman said, because this was a point made in the ARB: Consistent shortfalls have required the department to prioritize available funding out of security accounts. And I will be the first to say that the prioritization process was at times imperfect, but as the ARB said, the funds provided were inadequate. So we need to work together to overcome that.” (Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 1/23/13)

Clinton Indicated That The State Department’s Designation Of The Benghazi Facility As Temporary Contributed To The State Department Not Allocating Additional Resources To Benghazi. SECRETARY CLINTON: “That's why we have a huge workforce of people who are given responsibility and expected to carry forward that responsibility and I think designating it as ‘temporary’ in the ARB's findings did cause an extra level of uncertainty to some extent.

You know, as the chairman said at the very beginning quoting from the ARB, the has been an enculturation in the State Department, the husband (ph) resources to, you know, try to be as -- as careful in spending money as possible and then I think adding to that the fact that it was quote, ‘temporary’ you know, probably did lead to some of the confusion that we later saw played out in the cables, but not the -- the status of it for the Libyan government.” (Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 1/23/13)

The State Department Was “Hesitant To Allocate Money” On Security Upgrades On The Benghazi Facility, “A Post That May Be Closing In A Few Months.” “The RSO should be aware that the requests for expensive security upgrades may be difficult to obtain as headquarters is hesitant to allocate money to a post that may be closing in a few months.” (“Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012 Together With Additional Views,” Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, 1/15/14, p. 17)

  • Four Months Before The Benghazi Attack, The State Department Spent $108,000 For An Electric Vehicle Charging Station At The Vienna Embassy. “In May 7, the State Department authorized the U.S. embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts. The purchase was a part of the State Department’s ‘Energy Efficiency Sweep of Europe’ initiative, which included hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on green program expenditures at various U.S. Embassies.” (Representative Mike Kelly, “Libya Security Cut While Vienna Embassy Gained Chevy Volts,” The Washington Times, 10/10/12)
  • In 2009, The State Department Spent Nearly $300,000 On Alcohol.  “Last year alone, the State Department sent taxpayers tabs totaling nearly $300,000 for alcoholic beverages — about twice as much compared to the previous year, according to an analysis of spending records by The Washington Times.” (Jim McElhatton, “Taxpayers Foot State Department’s Stiff Liquor Bill,” The Washington Times, 4/15/10)

IG Report: Clinton’s State Department Failed To Prioritize Security Funding

The State Department’s Inspector General Conducted An Audit Of The Process Used By The Department To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Funding At Overseas Posts In FY 2012. “The Office of Inspector General (OIG) contracted with Kearney & Company, P.C., to conduct a performance audit of the processes used by overseas posts to request funds for physical security-related activities and the processes used by the Department of State (Department) to determine which requests for physical security-related activities to fund. Specifically, the objectives of this audit were to identify the FY 2012 funding mechanisms and amounts expended for physical security-related activities at Department-owned or -operated buildings overseas, determine whether the process for posts to request funds for physical security needs at Department-owned or -operated buildings was easy to use and was understood by post security officials, and determine to what extent the Department used physical security funds for high-priority physical security needs at overseas posts during FY 2012…” (“Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At Overseas Posts,” State Department Office Of The Inspector General, 3/14, p. 41)

The State Department Did Not Have A Process To Prioritize Requests For Physical Security Funding. “In addition, neither DS nor OBO had formal processes to prioritize physical security needs; funding decisions were often made by one individual without documented standards and guidance.” (“Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At Overseas Posts,” State Department Office Of The Inspector General, 3/14, p. 2)

The State Department Did Not Have A Comprehensive Long-Range Physical Security Plan, Which Prevented The Department From Ensuring That The Highest Priority Issues Were Addressed. “Nor had DS and OBO prepared a comprehensive long-range physical security plan that would help focus attention on critical needs. As a result, the Department could not ensure that the highest priority physical security-related needs at overseas posts were corrected and that posts’ vulnerability to threats had been sufficiently reduced.” (“Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At Overseas Posts,” State Department Office Of The Inspector General, 3/14, p. 2)

The Report Found That There Was Confusion As To What State Department Agency Was Responsible For Physical Security-Related Issues. “The lack of coordination between DS and OBO may also create confusion about which bureau is responsible for addressing physical security deficiencies outside of OSPB standards, what risk factors should be considered when determining which projects to fund, and how to handle physical security deficiencies at posts where future work is planned.” (“Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At Overseas Posts,” State Department Office Of The Inspector General, 3/21, p. 34)

A “Significant Number” Of State Department Officials Believed The Process To Request Security Related Funding Was “Unclear And Difficult.” “Kearney found that the majority of post security officials responding to an OIG questionnaire believed that the processes to request funds for physical security-related needs were clear and easy to use. However, a significant number of post security officials believed the processes were unclear and difficult and expressed dissatisfaction with the timeliness or sufficiency of the responses received to their formal requests for physical security funding.” (“Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At Overseas Posts,” State Department Office Of The Inspector General, 3/14, p. 1)

The Difficulty Of Requesting Funds Caused Security Officials To Not Submit Their Requests, Which Could Result In “Destruction Of Property, Injury, Or Loss Of Life.” “In fact, two respondents to the OIG questionnaire indicated that they did not formally request funding for all of their physical security needs because their posts considered the process to be confusing or difficult. If even one post does not request funds for a significant security need, that post may become more vulnerable to an attack that could result in destruction of property, injury, or loss of life.” (“Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At Overseas Posts,” State Department Office Of The Inspector General, 3/14, p. 21)


Previous post

Clinton Falsely Claims Marines Not Stationed At Posts For Personnel Protection

Next post

Clinton’s Accountability Review Board Was Hardly Independent
Republican National Committee

Connect With Us

Republican National Committee
Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel
News & Videos
  • 310 First Street SE, Washington, DC 20003
  • 202-863-8500

By providing your phone number, you are consenting to receive calls and SMS/MMS msgs, including autodialed and automated calls and texts, to that number from the Republican National Committee. Msg&data rates may apply. Terms & conditions/privacy policy apply 80810-info.com.

Paid for by the Republican National Committee. Not Authorized By Any Candidate Or Candidate's Committee. www.gop.com

By providing your phone number, you are consenting to receive calls and SMS/MMS msgs, including autodialed and automated calls and texts, to that number from the Republican National Committee. Msg&data rates may apply. Terms & conditions/privacy policy apply 80810-info.com.

Paid for by the Republican National Committee.
Not Authorized By Any Candidate Or Candidate's Committee. www.gop.com