In 2012, 4 Americans are killed in Africa. The President condemns the “act of terror” within 24 hours. The Secretary of State briefed Congress within 10 days. Critics hound the administration about the initial classification of the attack as possibly (or partially) spontaneous, as opposed to a pre-planned terrorist attack. Charges of cover-up continue for years, but the debate was largely over conspiracy theories about a lack of urgency in response or a cover-up about the groups involved. In reality, there was hair splitting in use of terms as the investigation to motive unfolded.
However, that was enough to initiate Congressional investigations, hearings, testimony and reports.
This month, 4 Americans are killed in Africa. The President doesn’t mention (or tweet) about the attack for 12 days. His first response is silent on the attack. 21 days later, he continues to ignore it. There has still been no condemnation of the terrorist attackers. No promise of justice for the armed service members killed.
As a refresher, a few milestones from a comprehensive 2012 Benghazi timeline at factcheck.org.
- 9/11/12 - Attack in Benghazi kills 4 Americans
- 9/12/12 - President Obama refers to the incident as an “act of terror”. Clinton issues a statement confirming that four U.S. officials, not one, had been killed. She calls it a “violent attack.” Clinton: All the Americans we lost in yesterday’s attacks made the ultimate sacrifice. We condemn this vicious and violent attack that took their lives, which they had committed to helping the Libyan people reach for a better future.
- 9/13/12 - At a campaign event in Colorado, Obama again uses the phrase “act of terror.” He says: “I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished.”
- 9/14/12 - FBI investigation continues and no new clarifications are offered by the administration.
- 9/20/12 - White House language now includes “terrorist act”, but does not conclude who specifically was responsible or how much was pre-planned as evidence is still being gathered.
- 9/21/12 - Clinton, speaking to reporters before a meeting with Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, calls it a “terrorist attack” for the first time. She says, “Yesterday afternoon when I briefed the Congress, I made it clear that keeping our people everywhere in the world safe is our top priority. What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans.”
- 9/26/12 - Carney is asked at a press briefing aboard Air Force One en route to Ohio why the president has not called the Benghazi incident a “terrorist attack.” He said, “The president — our position is, as reflected by the NCTC director, that it was a terrorist attack. It is, I think by definition, a terrorist attack when there is a prolonged assault on an embassy with weapons. … So, let’s be clear, it was a terrorist attack and it was an inexcusable attack.”
Leaks from the CIA push the theory of an organized terrorist attack. Congress quickly seizes the narrative to portray the administration as covering up a terrorist act and overall as weak on terrorism and related groups. This all based on the initial comments within weeks of the attack.
It was serious enough to become a defining moment in the second presidential debate. Mitt Romney charged (falsely) that "it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror."
Obama: "The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened -- that this was an act of terror -- and I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."
Romney: "I think interesting the president just said something, which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror."
Obama: "That's what I said."
Romney: "You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you're saying?"
Obama: "Please proceed, governor."
Romney: "I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror."
Obama: "Get the transcript."
Again, the debate centered on whether the attack was spontaneous or planned. Was it an armed mob that committed the murders in a night of chaos or an organized terrorist group that prepared and carried out the attack? The answer shapes the response. Is it an action that demands retaliation against a specific terrorist group or combatants? Was it an event that could have been prevented? An incorrect interpretation projects a weakness on terrorism that potentially emboldens enemies of the U.S.
Fast forward to Niger.
- 10/4/17 - U.S. soldiers were accompanying Nigerien troops on a mission near Tongo Tongo. They were ambushed by about 50 militants and a firefight ensued. 4 Americans died. No mention or tweet by President Trump about the attack for the next 12 days.
- 10/16/17 - At a Monday afternoon press conference, a reporter asked, “Why haven't we heard anything from you so far about the soldiers that were killed in Niger?” Trump responded not to the attack, but about the notification to families and how he was more active than other previous presidents.
- 10/17/17 - President Donald Trump took credit for the fact that ISIS is in retreat during an interview Tuesday.
US-backed forces fighting ISIS in Raqqa said "major military operations" in the city have ended and that the jihadists have lost control of their self-declared capital.
"I totally changed rules of engagement. I totally changed our military, I totally changed the attitudes of the military and they have done a fantastic job," Trump said on "The Chris Plante Show." "ISIS is now giving up, they are giving up, there are raising their hands, they are walking off. Nobody has ever seen that before."
When Plante asked why that hadn't happened before, Trump continued…
"Because you didn't have Trump as your president," he said. "It was a big difference, there was a big, big difference if you look at the military now."
- 10/20/17 The Defense Intelligence Agency has said it believes the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara was behind the attack. The group has been around at least since 2015, when its leader split from al-Qaeda. According to U.S. officials, this isn't an “officially recognized” branch of the Islamic State — one American official called it a “wannabe.” In the past, the group has attacked French counterterrorism forces, but it has never before launched an attack on U.S. forces. (A rival group, Jamaat Nusrat al-Islam wal Muslimeen, kidnapped an American aid worker, Jeffery Woodkey, from his home in Abalak, Niger, in 2016. Woodkey is still being held with five other hostages.)
- 10/23/17 - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Monday pledged a thorough, transparent investigation into the deaths of four U.S. soldiers in Niger, saying they had been attacked on patrol by a group “affiliated” with the Islamic State. Among other details, Dunford disclosed about an hour passed from when the special operations team first took fire on Oct. 4 and when headquarters received a request for air support. Dunford also clarified that, while an ISIS-affiliated group is suspected in the attack, the Pentagon doesn’t believe the ambushers were foreign fighters. “Our assessment right now is it is an ISIS-affiliated group,” he said. “These are local tribal fighters that are associated with ISIS.”
Deja vu? No, Niger is much worse.
Again, the President has yet to even recognize a terrorist attack took place. He has not articulated any condemnation of those that murdered American service members. There has been no response pledged against the attackers.
I would normally conclude the Commander-in-Chief is AWOL, but with his history of draft dodging, it’s clear he never wanted to report for duty in the first place. He recently found time to tweet about crime and terror in the UK. Why not Niger? What is this White House doing? Where is the outrage about the complete lack of answers? What is the policy? What will be the response? Who is in charge?
The GOP led House and Senate need to immediately issue subpoenas and schedule hearings with the same persistence waged against Secretary of State Clinton and the Obama administration following the Libya attack.
It’s time to hold President Trump accountable. When the timeline of the two attacks are compared, this is not Trump’s Benghazi. It’s much worse.
Wednesday, Oct 25, 2017 · 7:10:05 AM +00:00
·
ptgkc
I'm impressed with the range of thoughtful comments.
To be clear, in no way do I believe the response to the Niger attack is to emulate the GOP response to Benghazi and that opinion is expressed in virtually all of the feedback. There is no need to make up a scandal about this attack.
The comparison, is first, to display recent history specifically to those that screamed about national security concerns during the Benghazi hearings, and highlight how much more serious the ineptitude of the current White House communication is. There is a shocking lack of acknowledgement of reality. We have a president that has said nothing about the events in Niger involving an attack on U.S. troops.
Stating basic events in a Niger timeline and providing honest answers about what happened should be provided as a course of normal White House conduct. Instead, Trump ignores yet another threat to national security. Additionally, he concurrently is personally claiming victory over ISIS in another attempt to gaslight the American people. That is when is not distracting us with disgusting insults to gold star families.
This terrorist attack deserves serious debate about the global expansion of U.S. military force. Why does an outdated AUMF continue to provide cover to secretly expand military involvement in countries which were never envisioned to be a part of response to the 9/11/2001 attacks. Why is Congress not regularly briefed? Our constitutional republic is not functioning properly when war policy and military operations are not properly overseen.
The use of an accurate Benghazi timeline and associated GOP debates (which in hindsight become more exposed as petty and conspiratorial) can be a valuable reference point to show in comparison how abhorrent President Trump conduct is and his misuse or abdication of his role as Commander-in-Chief. Over the next few months, Congress involvement will also be judged against this history.
For a few seconds today, I was hopeful about the direction of Congress with the announcement of a new hearing on Russia. Foolish on me. They quickly veered into Trump's conspiracyland again, this time to investigate a long multi-departmental U.S approval process over the sale of uranium. Unbelievable. All this proves to me is the need for journalists to continually report real facts and history. Trump and GOP can not be allowed to continue rewriting history, or more commonly now, just making it up.