Share This Page

Boehner asked to retract Libya report

| Thursday, April 25, 2013, 7:51 p.m.

WASHINGTON — A senior House Democrat called on House Speaker John Boehner on Thursday to retract a report blaming former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for security deficiencies at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya before the deadly attack in September.

Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said in a letter to Boehner that the report, written by five Republican chairmen, misrepresents an important document and suggests that Clinton lied to Congress. Cummings said Boehner also should apologize to Clinton on behalf of the report's authors. Boehner's office did not comment.

The GOP report, released Tuesday, said an April 19, 2012, cable bearing Clinton's signature acknowledged a request from then-envoy to Libya Gene Cretz for more security at the mission in Benghazi, yet allowed further reductions. The cable contradicted Clinton's testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee in January that requests for more security at the mission in Benghazi, Libya, didn't reach her, the report said.

But Cummings said his staff reviewed the cable, and it does not bear Clinton's signature. The cable includes only her typed name at the bottom of the page next to the word “signature,” just as thousands of other cables sent each year from the State Department do.

“Although a telephone call could have clarified this issue in a matter of moments, you chose not to check with the department before making these highly inflammatory and erroneous accusations in a public forum,” Cummings told Boehner. “The allegations in your staff report are false, extremely irresponsible, and lack even a rudimentary understanding of how State Department cables are processed.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.