CIA Fires Back at Congress' Benghazi Theories

Mohammad Hannon/AP

House members on Wednesday grilled a former CIA official over allegations of a cover-up in the administration's messaging after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.

Michael Morell, the deputy director of the agency at the time, stressed that politics or an alleged attempt to mislead Congress and the public didn't influence his editing of talking points or his view of the CIA's analysis.

"Let me emphasize again: There is no truth to the allegations that the CIA or I 'cooked the books' with regard to what happened in Benghazi and then tried to cover this up after the fact," he said in written testimony, adding in a House Intelligence Committee hearing that "I never allowed politics to influence what I said."

Lawmakers dug into why administration officials said publicly—and in unclassified talking points given to congressional committees—in the days after the attack that it sprang from a spontaneous protest. CIA analysts later concluded that it was a deliberate, coordinated terrorist attack.

Members pointed to emails from the CIA's station chief in Benghazi that showed he believed as early as Sept. 15 that there had not been a protest. Lawmakers on Wednesday criticized Morell for not including the station chief's concerns in the classified interagency documents.

Morell said the CIA's analysts, who were collecting information from intelligence and press reports, disagreed with the station chief's assessment. Morell did not believe at the time that the station chief's reasons for disagreeing with the analyst's findings were substantive enough. Analysts revised their findings on Sept. 22 to say that they now believed based on new information that there wasn't a protest.

Morell also deleted references to Islamic extremism in the unclassified talking points, which were also used by then-U.N. Representative Susan Rice on the Sunday shows. Morell said that while Rice had access to the body of intelligence work done up to that point, the station chief's concerns would not have been included, because that document wasn't shared outside of the CIA.

But he added that he did give a "heads up" at a Deputies Committee meeting—which included participants from a handful of agencies—that the station chief disagreed with the assessment that there was a protest.

The CIA also removed references to al-Qaida from the talking points. Morell said that he also removed language that the agency had previously warned about security threats in Libya to avoid having the CIA appear as if it were trying to exonerate itself in the attack.

"What I'm puzzled by as you look at those edits that you made, you take out most of the words that are in the talking points," Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas said. "… To me it seems like you're more interested in protecting the State Department than the State Department is. You are more interested in protecting the FBI than the FBI is.… That doesn't make sense to me."

Morell admitted that his edits were not the CIA's best work, adding that "there are things we should have done differently, there are areas where the CIA's performance, and my own performance, could have been better."

But Republican members cast doubt on his testimony, suggesting that he made edits to protect the White House. GOP Rep. Devin Nunes of California, who is running to be the next committee chairman, said, "The problem is you've got all these conflicting stories."

And Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican who is also interested in the committee chairmanhip, added: "We have to believe an awful lot of circumstances to believe your version with totality."

But committee Democrats tried to steer the hearing toward focusing on the need to capture the militants behind the attacks.

"We have only found evidence that the talking points were edited to ensure accuracy, to check classification, and to safeguard the investigation and eventual prosecution—which has to be our ultimate goal: finding and holding accountable those who committed this terrible act," said Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md.

Multiple committee reports, including one by the House Intelligence Committee, have largely blamed the White House and the State Department for failing to respond to increasing security risks within Libya leading up to the 2012 attack which left four Americans dead.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.