beth jones from the state department actually said that the libyan president was responsible. explain to me how that evolved into a massive lie about the youtube video. >> that massive lie that you just described was written by the cia based upon their best current intelligence. fact, are you going to deny that? >> you didn't answer my question. you can't answer a question with a question. the state department -- the state department -- >> the cia came to that conclusion. >> i know you're obsessed with her being president. i ask the questions and you answer them. the day after beth jones said, al sharia was responsible for the attack to the libyan president, how did that evolve into an entirely different story? why didn't they listen to the station chiefs on the ground? >> the answer to that is that we made a misjudgment based upon current intelligence. i ask you to answer my question. did it -- >> when you get your show, i'll answer your question. >> you know the truth, sean. >> i can answer the question. it's pretty simple. the chronology is not difficult to understand. on t

] >> answer -- >> i ask the questions and you answer them. >> i can rebut it. >> the day after beth jonessharia was responsible to the attack to the president, how did that evolve into an entirely different story and as it relates to langly, why didn't they listen to the station chiefs on the ground? >> the answer that the cia said is that we made a misjudgment -- >> judgment. >> based upon current intelligence. i ask you to answer my question -- >> when you get a show, i'll answer your question. >> you won't answer the question until you know the truth, sean. >> i can answer the question. it's simple. on the evening of september 11th, hillary clinton put out a statement, which in part blamed the video, when you fast forward to what the cia said, the cia did say that there were spontaneous protests that evolved. >> thank you. >> but did not make the story about a video and if you go back to the testimony and written testimony when he was asked questions about it, he specifically said that the video story did not come from the cia. so those are the facts. >> what you just said actually was

talking about sharia -- >> the point is, beth jones says that the libyans thought it was former moammar people. and they say no, it was tied to extremists. >> where did she get that information? one assumes from the cia station chief who also had written a memo. greg hicks, there is a new dia document that has not been much discussed that was published just before ben rhodes sent his e-mail on september 24th, laying out his e-mail. the white house had to have this information. >> the tough part of the story is trying to get it in context, trying to go back to that time and make sure you understand it all. sometimes that takes time. when we return we'll take you back to the horrific events in benghazi and the surprising political fallout that followed. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] great rates for great rides. geico motorcycle, see how much you could save. you're not doing anything as fast as you used to, which is funny, 'cause i still do it better than her. [ afi ] i do not like sweeping! it's a little frustrating. [ zach ] i can't help out as much as i used to. do you need help? [ doorbell

and i think in your interview, and in fact in the beth jones e-mail and the ben rhodes discussion ofking points what you see is a white house trying to get to the bottom of what happened. it was not clear what happened initially. and again, i just don't understand why the committees, after nine hearings, close to 50 briefings from the administration on the issue, are not focusing on trying to fix the problems, for example, such as greater support for our diplomats abroad. quick diplomatic security forces where they're needed and making sure the department of defense and state can defend. >> so do you think it is politically motivated with an eye toward secretary clinton running in 2016? >> well, it is either politically motivated, i don't think we're talking about ignorance here yes, so they're going after secretary clinton, trying to create a political agenda that can help kind of drive this false scenario for the 2010 campaign. >> this was drummed in the last presidential cycle and without the intended effect. do you think now this issue has some new resonance that it lacked? i don

the e-mail was titled beth jones was then assistant secretary of state to hillary clinton. d according to the e-mail, jones spoke to libya's ambassador at 9:45 a.m. on september 12, the day after the attack. and when the libyan ambassador said the government suspected that former gadhafi regime elements carried out the attacks, i told him the group that conducted the attacks was ansar al sharia, which is affiliated with islamic extremist s. now wait a minute. if hillary knew or her state department knew the day after 9:45 in the morning, why did she along with the president and everybody else go out there with a the youtube video narrative? i think the answer is obvious, because of political concern. >> exactly. in other words, this fit the narrative of this being a strong leader and by the way, we killed bin laden. it was very important to continue that myth all the way through the elections. >> all right. so you mentioned that you know a thing or two about special select committees. i think boehner has been very slow in doing this. i'm glad he finally did this. memo pushed

what i can tell you is that on september 12, there was an e-mail from beth jones memorializing a conversation she had with the libyan ambassador. she was very clear this was how sharia, an extremist organization. every change he made to the talking points in my judgment sanitized them to go from the word terrorist to extremist. to the word attack to the word demonstration. to take out any reference of the priorefforts so it's -- episodes of violence. he didn't want to embarrass the state department. i am not interested in embarrassing or not embarrassing anyone. it is fair to ask why on that date given what had been happening in libya prior to that, why were we caught so flat-footed by what turned out to not be a protest but an organized attack on our facility? miket me listen to what said to me on this program on a conversation about him and the ci. you can hear. >> in the entire process i talked about, the white house suggested three changes. of them were, all editorial. none of them were substantive. the white house had no substantive input in the talking points. there have been allegation

on september 12th, beth jones at the state department said ansar al sharia was responsible for the attack and then steve cross was told that very day on "60 minutes" what was the truth, james? do we care? >> can i finish? what does the president say on september 12th. >> no act of terror will go unanswered. then why did he have to mention protests and steve croft said he didn't talk about terrorism. >> first of all, that was reflected in what the cia intelligence was. you have to say that it was produced or general petraeus is a liar. >> there was no evidence that it was because of a protest. you know that. >> what he said was -- sure there was eavidence. there was a cia brief. >> they were told repeatedly that there was no protest and they kept doing it anyway. >> and they will show all of the cia things, show what general petraeus said and the president said and my guess is they won't find anything new. >> james, i feel like it's a time warp going back to lewinsky, but what about that? does that help hillary in the snend. >> if there's somebody who doesn't know what happen it may hurt t

. >> didn't beth jones at the state department, did she not tell the president of libya on the morning after the attack that in fact, our state department knew that it was the person responsible for the attack? isn't that the very next day? >> you know, secretary kerry votes for things before he votes against them. it appears as though also beth tells the truth before the spin goes against that. it's one of the reasons that one of the channels libya's head of state was saying it was a terrorist attack. ambassador rice was saying it wasn't. this is exactly the kind of web you weave when you decide to deceive. the deciding to deceive came from the white house. that's why a select committee as of later today will begin work on getting to the bottom of what happened at the top at the white house in this scandal. >> our state department knew the very next day and we were telling the libyans it was sharia. the white house, did they not also say they were not responsible for changing the talking points except for the change to consulate? that's all they said they were involved in, right? >> t

none of this information made it to the white house, then we have the state department e-mail from beth jonesng about the al qaeda group, we have a cia memo -- >> that from the state department says the libyans thought this was former gadhafi people, and the state department says no, it's the al qaeda link extremists. >> where did she get that information? one assumes from the cia station chief who had written a memo, greg hicks. there had been a individual year teleconference. there's a new dia document that was published just before ben rhodes sent his e-mail september 14 laying out who was to blame. the white house had to have this information. >> the tough part about this story is getting it all in context. trying to go back to that time and make sure you understand it all. sometimes that takes time. when we return, we'll take you back to those instead of mailing everyone my vacation photos, i'm saving a ton of time by posting them to my wall. oh, i like that one. it's so quick! it's just like my car insurance. i saved 15% in just 15 minutes. i saved more than that in half the time. i unf

. >> didn't beth jones at the state department, did she not tell the president of libya on the morning after the attack that in fact, our state department knew that it was the person responsible for the attack? isn't that the very next day? >> you know, secretary kerry votes for things before he votes against them. it appears that also tells the truth before in fact the spin goes against that. it's one of the reasons that on one of the channels, libya's head of state was saying that it was a terrorist attack. while, ambassador rice said it wasn't. this is the web you wave wheave. that's is eye trey gouty and later today, will it work getting to the bottom at what happened at the top of the scandal. >> so our state department knew the next day and we were telling the libyans we knew who it was and the very next day it evolved into a spontaneous demonstration and a lie emerged. the question is and the white house, did they say they were not responsible for the talking points except to change the name of the consulate? that's all they said they were involved in, right? >> that's exactly o

none of this information made it to the white house, then we have the state department e-mail from beth jonestalking about the al qaeda group, we have a cia memo -- >> that from the state department says the libyans thought this was former gadhafi people, and the state department says no, it's the al qaeda link extremists. and we know they were behind it. >> that comes from somewhere. where did she get that information? one assumes from the cia station chief who had written a memo, greg hicks. there had been a teleconference. there's a new dia document that was published just before ben rhodes sent his e-mail september 14 laying out who was to blame. the white house had to have this information. >> the tough part about this story is getting it all in context. trying to go back to that time and make sure you understand it all. sometimes that takes time. when we return, we'll take you back to those horrific events in benghazi and the surprising political fallout that followed. back to those ♪ [ girl ] my mom, she makes underwater fans that are powered by the moon. ♪ she can print amazing things

and after, where we had the sharlene lamb saying she witnessed this on videotape in realtime and beth jonesnt on september the 12th saying it was on sharia and that involved into a big lie. don't we need answers to this? >> of course we do, sean. the democrats are rating from the same partisan talking points. they are saying we had lots and lots of hearings. there is no reason to answer any more questions. i laid out ten basic questions that haven't been answered. yes, there are been hearings but the democrats and white house stone walled and refused to answer questions. i asked bob menendez a simple question, did president obama sleep the night of september 11th? do you remember hillary clinton's famous tv ad against president obama, would he be there to answer the 3:00 a.m. call -- >> do we know where he was? >> the democrat admitted he had no idea if obama was awake or asleep and if anyone told him at all and talking points are so disconnected from reality. this should not be a partisan endeavor, every american, republican or democrat should want to get to the truth and it's really unfor

testimony is consistent with the september 12th e-mail from 2012 from state department official beth joneshere she tells mrs. clinton's closest aides, she is in touch with the libyans and told them sharia was behind the attack, not gadhafi loyalists. this e-mail was entered into the record today at the hearing. >> what are democrats saying? >> this morning house minority leader nancy pelosi seemed to dismiss the testimony. >> diversion, subterfuge. benghazi, benghazi. why aren't we talking about something else? what i know of what i've read in the press about the -- the e-mails were very consistent with what was put out there before. i don't think there's anything new there. >> another democrat at the hearing this morning made clear it was levels opinion more should have been done-not that more could have been done to save the four americans killed in benghazi. >> might be some who, for various ropes would like to distort your testimony and suggest that you're testifying we coulda, shoulda done a lot more because we had capables we didn't utilize. >> that's not my testimony. >> the house s

that they were musing because i can tell you september 12th, the state department sent ant e-mail, beth jonesaccording to the libyan ambassador, think was ansar al sharia. mike morrell testified before a house committee, he was shocked susan rice mentioned the video because none of their intelligence connected the video. you are have three options, preplanned premeditated, it was a spontaneous uprising or you have that it was linked to the video. morrell will tell you there's no evidence linging it to the video and he was shocked rice said that not the day after benghazi but five days after benghazi, where morell would defend himself, he would say there's evidence it was a spontaneous uprising as opposed to preplanned and premeditated in which case i would say, great, call your first witness. every ingle change that mike made was calculated to cast the administration into a more favorable light. >> he said he felt no political pressure. you're say you don't believe him? >> in a word, yes, i'm saying i don't believe him. >> i guess the question is whether or not there was a scintilla of eviden

the next morning, beth jones, assistant secretary of state, wrote in an e-mail that ansar al sharia,qaeda affiliate, likely responsible for this attack, no me memgz of a protest or a video. the fact the narrative continued to get pumped by the president on shows like "the view" is quite curious, but it was a presidential season as well. we're out of time. >>> on deck, lynn cheney enters the no spin zone. the wife of dick cheney weighs in on hillary's presidential chances. >> the condi rice rutgers controversy. the factor will be right back. ♪ [ male announc ] your eyes. even at a distance of 10 mis... the length 146 football fields... they can see the light of a single candle. your eyes are amazing. look after them with centrum silver. multivitamins with lutein and vitamins a, c, and e to support healthy eyes and packed with key nutrients to support your heart and brain, too. centrum silver. for the most amazing parts of you. centrum silver. i'm on expert on softball. and tea parties. i'll have more awkward conversations than i'm equipped for, because i'm raising two girls on my own.

are familiar with now, for weeks after their own state department, i'm sure you heard about that beth jonesmemo that from 9:45 a.m., the following morning, on september 12th, she was referring to on sar al cherie a al qaeda, no mention of video protests it was understood at the time, this is a terror attack. yet, they continued to peddle that narrative and they held those documents back, which i think, again, if this were the bush administration, the same kind of narrative, i would think all these same people crying conspiracy would say we need acouldn'tability here. >> well, i do think ambassador pickerring, a very respected diplomat did an inquiry that i read thoroughry. and, basically, i think the administration made some mistakes in terms of beefing up security of, perhaps, not responding faster. but at the same time, i don't see a conspiracy. this is, obviously, become a very political issue. you know, it keeps coming back. i do think it is a bit of a witch-hunt. >> what about when you say witch-hunt, but that's demeaning, governor. when you say witch-hunt, we have four dead americans.

the assistant secretary of state, beth jones, said ansar al saria was responsible.ou knew it was a terror attack. >> i don't think we have a prosecution here. >> i think people want a prosecution. >> you do. >> look at the reporting on benghazi, it's like alternate universes. a group of people saying we were not doing anything. another group saying it was all evil. truth is, the white house should have released this e-mail. that was a big either mistake or a denality. it is true that everybody does talking points before sunday programs. the talk points are about politics and limiting political damage. >> first of all, i worked in the white house. you get these requests. let's talk about reality. you get these foyer requests. it's a judgment call. you have a lot of stuff to get out there. they got out there what they thought was appropriate, looked at it again. there was two bullet points out of 20 that were on benghazi. they went, let's get more out. no good deed goes unpunished. they did another review. put more out there. now that's a -- >> this was an atrocity. >

the next morning, beth jones, assistant secretary of state, wrote in an e-mail that ansar al sharia,eda affiliate, likely responsible for this attack, no me memgz of a protest or a video. the fact the narrative continued to get pumped by the president on shows like "the view" is quite curious, but it was a presidential season as well. we're out of time. >>> on deck, lynn cheney enters the no spin zone. the wife of dick cheney weighs in on hillary's presidential chances. >> the condi rice rutgers controversy. the factor will be right back. my dad has aor afib.brillation, he has the most common kind... ...it's not caused by a heart valve problem. dad, it says your afib puts you at 5 times greater risk of a stroke. that's why i take my warfarin every day. but it looks like maybe we should ask your doctor about pradaxa. in a clinical trial, pradaxa® (dabigatran etexilate mesylate)... ...was proven superior to warfarin at reducing the risk of stroke. and unlike warfarin, with no regular blood tests or dietary restrictions. hey thanks for calling my doctor. sure. pradaxa is not for people

we got an e-mail from beth jones to cheryl mills and jake sullivan and a plethora of other people. i told him with him being the libyan ambassador the group that conducted the attacks is affiliated with islamic history miss. so the state department knew the day after that this video had nothing to do with the attack in benghazi. that is the state department. cia station chief in tripoli, mr. chairman, and for those who do not know what that new word means, he repeated it again, not an escalation of protest. this is someone in libya at the time. cia says video had nothing to do with it. now we go to dod, military. what evidence did you have that this was an escalation of a protest rooted in spontaneity it that got out of control and resulted in the murder of our fellow americans? did the military have any evidence supporting the video narrative? >> no, sir. >> that is what is so confounding, mr. chairman, is the state department knew it was not a video, the cia knew it was not a video, and for those who are a little bit slow, they repeated the word not twice, the military knew it ha

lovell's testimony is consistent with the september 12th e-mail from state department official beth jones to secretary of state hillary clinton's closest aides, including sheryl mills, that the libyan ambassador was told -- was responsible. what's been overlooked is hours later on 10:00 p.m. september 11th even before the attack was over mrs. clinton sent out a press release directly linking the video to the benghazi violence. while mrs. clinton waes statement was out of sync with the intelligence it was reinforced three daze later by the ben rhodes e-mail which critics say intended to shape the public discussion of a terrorist attack. lovell testified that the state department did not respond quickly that night. >> it's not what they did in that particular situation. it's what they didn't do. they didn't come forward with stronger requests for action. >> what was the mood in the room? what was the feeling? was it to save our people? >> it was desperation there to be able to -- >> it was what? >> desperation there to gain situational awareness and be able to do something. >> lovell was no

. >> beth jones at the state department says that she told the libyan ambassador, this is september 12tht the group that conducted the attack is a affiliated with islamic extremist. end quote. would you agree or disagree? >> i would agree. the timing i don't know. but the content, yes. >> the scandal that is here that some chose to ignore is a phony scandal is that fact the cia station chief and the person sitting in front of us, the head of intelligence, they come to the conclusion it is an al qaeda group and you have the department of state telling the libyans who it was. none of them thought it was a video. none of them. the military, the cia, the cia station chief, the state department -- all of them. the facts at the time mr. chairman, the facts do not point to a video. that only comes from the white house. what was going on in the room, general? our people are under attack. there are people dying. what is the military doing? >> desperately trying to gain situational awareness in an area where we had a dearth of it. >> were they moving to the sound of the gun or sitting around waiti

we got an e-mail from beth jones to cheryl mills and jake sullivan and a plethora of other people. told him with him being the libyan ambassador the group that isducted the attacks affiliated with islamic history miss. so the state department knew the day after that this video had nothing to do with the intact -- the attack in benghazi. that is the state department. cia station chief in tripoli, mr. chairman, and for those who do not know what that new word means, he repeated it again, not an escalation of protest. this is someone in libya at the time. says video had nothing to do with it. now we go to dod, military. what evidence did you have that this was an escalation of a protest rooted in spontaneity it that got out of control and resulted in the murder of our fellow americans? did the military have any evidence supporting the video narrative? >> no, sir. >> that is what is so confounding, mr. chairman, is the state department knew it was not a video, the cia knew it was not a video, and for those who are a little bit slow, they repeated the word not twice, the military knew i

released, sheryl atkisson had the report, that the secretary of state, assistants secretary of state, beth jonesiser the day after? >> what is happening here and it's spoked by fox -- stoked by fox news. it's an amazing thing. >> you're masters at this. >> you say? >> well, the key words they use such as conspiracy and delusional are in my opinion, clearly designed to try to controversialize a store, a legitimate news story, to some degree, that's successful. but i think primarily among those that don't want to look at this as a story in the first place. but i see that as a well-orchestrated strategy to controversialize a story they really don't wants to hear about. >> it's interesting in the past, when something pops up that there is an ongoing investigation about, you had george bush say, i'm going to put a special prosecutor involved and he demanded everybody cooperate with the investigation. now you have someone who just puts up -- you have an administration who puts up blocking signs and goes after those asking the questions. we look at your background, you're hardly somebody who goes after