By ANNE FLAHERTY
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) - Lawmakers
said Sunday they want to know who had a hand in creating the Obama
administration's now-discredited "talking points" about the Sept. 11
attack on a U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, and why a final
draft omitted the CIA's early conclusion that terrorists were involved.
The answers could explain
why President Barack Obama and top aides, including U.N. Ambassador
Susan Rice, described the attack for days afterward as a protest against
an anti-Islam video that spontaneously turned violent and why they
played down any potential link to al-Qaida, despite evidence to the
contrary.
Administration officials
have defended the portrayal of the attack as relying on the best
information available at the time that didn't compromise classified
intelligence. Democrats say CIA and other intelligence officials signed
off on the final talking points.
Republicans have alleged a
Watergate-like cover up, accusing White House aides of hiding the
terrorism link in the run-up to the Nov. 6 presidential election so
voters wouldn't question Obama's claim that al-Qaida's power had
diminished.
"I know the narrative was
wrong and the intelligence was right. ... We're going to get to the
bottom of how that happened," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman
of the House Intelligence Committee.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who
heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, said she doesn't believe the
White House altered the document for political reasons. But she said she
has lingering concerns about how the talking points were created when
it was clear early on that the military-style assault wasn't a simple
protest gone awry.
She said Congress has asked the administration to provide a detailed explanation.
"We gave the direction
yesterday that this whole process is going to be checked out," said
Feinstein, D-Calif. "We're going to find out who made changes in the
original statement. Until, we do I really think it's unwarranted to make
accusations."
The inquiry comes on the
heels of closed testimony to the committees last week by former CIA
Director David Petraeus. According to lawmakers who attended the
meetings, Petraeus said the reference to al-Qaida was removed from the
final version of talking points, although he wasn't sure who or which
federal agency deleted it.
A senior U.S. official
familiar with the document, who spoke on condition of anonymity because
the official was not authorized to discuss the process publicly, said
the al-Qaida reference was deleted because the information came from
classified sources and the links were tenuous. The administration also
did not want to prejudice a criminal investigation in its early stages,
that official said.
Feinstein confirmed that
intelligence officials told her in closed briefings that they were
reluctant to name any particular terrorist group without being certain.
But, she added, it was clear very soon after the attack that the
violence didn't stem from a political demonstration.
Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy
national security adviser, told reporters traveling with the president
to Asia that any substantive edits to the talking points would have come
from intelligence agencies themselves. The only change the White House
made, he said, was to correct a reference to the facility in Benghazi as
a "diplomatic facility," instead of a "consulate."
"Other than that we were
guided by the points that were provided by the intelligence community.
So I can't speak to any other edits that may have been made," he said.
But lawmakers said that
Capitol Hill briefings last week represented the FBI, State Department
and CIA, and that officials did not address what role political
appointees such as Rice might have played in the generation of the
talking points. Republicans said they want Rice to testify about what
she knew and when she knew it.
"What I do know is that
every member in the intelligence community says that references to
al-Qaida were removed by somebody, they don't know who," said Sen. Saxby
Chambliss, R-Ga.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.,
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Petraeus had
signed off on the final talking points and that going after Rice was a
useless witch hunt.
But Rep. Peter King said senior intelligence officials were strong-armed into doing so.
"Well, they had no choice,"
said King, R-N.Y., chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.
"They had no choice at that stage."
King did not elaborate on
how he would know whether Petraeus was compelled to sign off on the
talking points, and the lawmaker did not give any more details to
bolster his allegation.
Sen. Olympia Snowe, a
member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said she expects the
committee will hold at least three more hearings on the matter and
publish a report on its findings.
"It took 17 days for the
director of national intelligence even to issue a statement to say that
it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack," said Snowe,
R-Maine. "That's unacceptable in today's environment."
Feinstein and Rogers spoke
on NBC's "Meet the Press." Levin and King were on ABC's "This Week."
Chambliss appeared on "Fox News Sunday" and Snowe was on CBS' "Face the
Nation."
___
AP Intelligence Writer Kimberly Dozier contributed to this report.
Copyright
2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not
be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.