About that Benghazi “senate” report. Here it is.

I haven’t gotten past the first 3 pages and already noticed these (actually, they jumped out at me):

The title itself “REVIEW of the TERRORIST ATTACKS ON U.S. FACILITIES IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA, SEPTEMBER 11-12,2012 together with additional views (my emphasis)

Page 2: All attacks against US Embassies since 1998 are listed as examples, 273 “significant attacks were carried out against U.S. diplomatic facilities and personnel.”

One of the “interviewees” was Gerald Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission during the attacks in Tripoli during the attacks (sic).

Hicks met with Committee staff without Senators in a follow up interview. See SSCI transcript, “Staff Interview of Gregory Hicks”, June 19, 2003.

Obviously, this is made to initially look like a “comprehensive” overview of attacks on US embassies around the world in the last 15 years, but it immediately jumps into the Benghazi attack.

According to the NYT, it is the first report to “implicitly” criticize Chris Stevens, “It is also the first report to implicitly criticize Mr. Stevens, raising questions about his judgment and actions in the weeks before his death. Like previous inquiries, the Senate investigation does not cite any specific intelligence warnings about an impending attack.”

nytimes.com

“In an addendum to the bipartisan report, Republican committee members singled out former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, as bearing ultimate responsibility for lax security at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi. “

Obviously, this “report” looks like nothing more than a fishing expedition which winds up blaming Chris Stevens himself, who, it’s claimed turned down additional US help and suggested local Libyan officers, but even more importantly, the Republicans’ biggest headache for 2016, Hillary Clinton.

It truly looks to me like just another hatchet job.