Transcripts For CSPAN 20151024 : vimarsana.com

Because you wanted to hear from people outside what you called the bubble. We will ignore for second whether or not Sidney Blumenthal is outside the bubble but i wanted to ask you a couple things. Because he was an old fwloend knew nothing about libya, was critical of president obama and others that you work with, loved to send you political and image advice, had business interests in libya which he not only alerted you to but solicited your help for and you often forwarded his emails but usually on after you redacted out any identifier so nobody knew where the information was coming from. What does the word unsolicited mean to you . It means that i do not ask him to send me the information that he sent me and as i have previously stated some of it i found interesting, some of it i do not. Some of it i forwarded, some of it i do not. I do not know anything about any business interest. I thought that just as i said previously newspaper articles, journalists of which he is one, a former journalist, had some interesting insights and so we took them on board and evaluated them and some were helpful and others were not. Were going to get to all the points you just made but i want to start with your Public Comment that these emails were unsolicited. You wrote to him another keeper, thanks and please keep them coming. Greetings from kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming. Any other info about it what are you hearing now . Got it. Will follow up tomorrow. Anything else to convey . Now, that one is interesting because that was the very email where mr. Blumenthal was asked you to intervene on behalf of a disease deal he was pursuing in libya. What did you mean by what are you hearing now . I have no idea, congressman. They started out unsolicited and, as i said, some were of interest, i passed them on and some were not so he continued to provide me information that was made available to him. I dont want to parse words and i dont want to be hypertechnical because its not a huge point but its an important point. You didnt say they started off unsolicited. You said they were unsolicited. Well they were unsolicited. But obviously i did respond to some of them. Well and im sure that encouraged him. Anything else to convey . What are you hearing now . Im going to paris tomorrow night will meet thenc lead joers th leaders so this useful. Still dont have blackberry coverage postiran so i have to resort to my new ipad. Let me know if you received this. Well talk about the new ipad in a little bit. Heres another one. This report is in part a response to your questions. Thats an email from him to you. This vort in part a response to your questions. There will be further information in the next day. If youre the one asking him for information, how does that square with the definition of unsolicited . I said it began that way, mr. Chairman, and i will add that both Chris Stevens and gene cretz found some of the information interesting. Far more than i could because they knew some of the characters who were being mention and they were the ones, the kind of persons with the expertise that i asked to evaluate to see whether there was any useful information. Well get to that in a second. Before you give mr. Blumenthal too much credit you agree he didnt write a single one of those cables or memos he sent you. Im sorry, what . He didnt where write a single one of those cables or memos. I dont know who wrote them. He sent them to me. Would you be surprised to know not a single one was from him. I dont know where he got the information that he was sending to me. Did you ask . Youre send megavery specific detailed intelligence, what is your source . That seems like a good question. I learned later he was talking to or sharing information from former american intelligence official zbs s. By the name of who wrote those cables. I dont know, mr. Chairman. You had this information passed on to others is but at least on one occasion you miss abedin can you print without any identifiers . Why would you want his name removed . Because i thought it would be more important to just look at the substance and to make a determination as to whether or not there was anything to it. Well, dont people have a right to know who the source of the information so they can determine credibility . But he wasnt, as you just said, the source of the information. But you didnt know that madam secretary. And thats what you just said. No, mr. Chairman, i said that i knew that he didnt have the sources to provide that information. I knew he was getting it from somewhere else, whether he knew a lot of journalists, he knew others in washington, it could have been a variety of people if youre going to determine credibility, dont you want to know the source . Well, it wasnt credibility so much as trying to follow the threads that were mentioned about individuals and as i already stated, some of it was useful and some of it was not. Well, did the president know mr. Blumenthal was advising you . He wasnt advising me. Mr. Chairman did he know he was your most prolific emailer that we have found on the subjects of libya and benghazi . Thats because i didnt do most of my work about libya on email. Thats fair. Im not challenging that, madam secretary. I am not challenging that. All im telling you is that documents show he was your most prolific emailer on libya and benghazi. And did the president , the same white house that said you cant hire him did he know he was advising you . He was not advising me and i have no reason to have ever mentioned that or know that the president knew that. All right. I want to draw your attention to an email about libya from mr. Blumenthal to you dated april 20 2011 and it will be exhibit 67. This is informative. Shall we pass this on then in pa parentheticals, unidentified to the white house . Why would wow take that off . A lot of information i reviewed over the yours you often dont have the source of if intelligence. You look at the intelligence and you try to determine whether or not it is credible. Whether it can be followed up on. Well, im going to accept the fact that you and i come from different backgrounds because i can tell you that an unsourced comment could never be uttered in any courtroom. But were not talking about courtrooms, mr. Chairman, were talking about intelligence. No, were talking about credibility and the ability to assess who a source is and whether or not that source has ever been to libya, knows anything about libya, or has business interests in libya, all of which would be important if you were going to determine the credibility which i think is why you probably took his information off of what you sent to the white house. . One email he wrote this. Tyler knows him well and says hes a mean vicious little im not going to say the word but he did. This is an email from blumenthal to you about the president and secretary of defense. Heres another one about president S National Security advisor. Frankly, tom donelans babbling rhetoric about narratives on a phone briefing of reporters on march 10 has inspired derision among Foreign Policy analysts here and abroad. And heres another from what you say is your old friend Sidney Blumenthal. This is a quote from him. I would say obama and by the way he left the president part out. I would say obama appears to be intent on seizing defeat from the jaws of victory. He and his political cronies in the white house and chicago are to say the least unenthusiastic about regime change in libya. Obamas lukewarm and selfcontradicting statements have produced what is at least for the moment operational paralysis. I think that may give us a better understanding of why the white house may have told you you cannot hire hiblumenthal bl been to libya, had no expertise in libya, was critical of the president and others that you worked with, shared polling data with you on the intervention in libya, gave you political advice on how to take credit for libya all the while working for the Clinton Foundation and some pseudo news entities. And madam secretary, he had unfittered access to you. And he used that access at least on one occasion to ask you to intervene on behalf of a business venture. Do you recall that . You know, mr. Chairman, if you dont have any friends who say unkind things privately i con gooj late you. But from my perspective id like to think id correct them. I dont know what this line of questioning does to help us get to the bottom of the deaths of four americans. Ill be happy to help you understand that, madam secretary. But i want to reiterate what i said to congresswoman sanchez. These were originally unsolicited. Youve just said that perhaps the main if not the exclusive author was a former intelligence agent for our country who rose to the highest levels of the cia and who was given credit for being one of the very few who pointed out that the intelligence used by the Bush Administration to go to war in iraq was wrong so i think that, you know, the sharing of information from an old friend that i do not take at face value, that i sent on to those who were experts is something that, you know, makes sense but it was certainly not in any way the primary source of or the predominant understanding that we had of what was going on in libya and what we needed to be doing. Well, madam secretary, im out of time and well pick this back up the next round but ill let you know ahead of time why its relevant. Its relevant because our ambassador was asked to read and respond Sidney Blumenthals drivel. It was sent to him to read and react to, in some instances on the very same day he was asking for security. So i think its imminently fair to asked why Sidney Blumenthal had unfittered access to you, madam secretary, with whatever he wanted to talk about and theres not a single solitary email to or from you to or from ambassador stevens. I think that that is fair and well take that up. Will the gentleman yield . Sure. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, youve made several inaccurate statements over the past month as you have tried to defend against multiple republican admissions that the select committee has been wasting millions of tax dollars to damage secretary clintons bid for president. On sunday you made another inaccurate statement during your appearance on face the nation and its being taken up here. Heres what you said, and i quote there are other folks who may have equities in her emails and there may be other entities who are evaluating her emails. But my interest in them is solely making sure that i get everything im entitled to so that i can do my job. The rest of it, classification, Clinton Foundation, you name it, i have zero interest in it. Which is why you havent seen me send a subpoena related to it or interview a Single Person other than Brian Fabiano because i need to know that the record is complete. And im going back to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Im waiting mr. Chairman, let me finish. Im coming, just wait. Im waiting on the inaccurate statement. Im getting there. Well, we have to take a break. Well its not going to take a long. You took up four minutes over so let me have three. Ive let everybody go over, including you. Thank you very much. You issued a subpoena to Sidney Blumenthal on may 19, 2015, compelling him to appear for a deposition on june 25, 2015. You issued the subpoena unilaterally without giving select Committee Members the opportunity to debate or vote on it. You sent two armed marshals to serve the subpoena on mr. Blumenthals wife at their home without ever having sent him a request to participate voluntarily which he would have done. Then, mr. Chairman, you personally attended mr. Bumen all that blumenthals deposition, you person personally asked him about the Clinton Foundation and directed your staff to ask questions about the Clinton Foundation which they did more than 50 times. Knees these facts directly contradict the statements you made on national television. No, sir, with all due respect, they do not. We just heard email after email after email about libya and benghazi that Sidney Blumenthal sent to the secretary of state. I dont care if he sent it by morse code, carrier pigeon, smoke signals, the fact that he happened to send it by email is irrelevant. What is relevant is that he was sending information to the secretary of state. That is whats relevant. Now, with respect to the subpoena, if he bothered to answer the telephone calls of our committee he would havent needed a. Would the gentleman yield . Ill be happy to but you need to make sure the entire record is correct. And thats exactly what i want to do. Go ahead. Im about to tell you. I move we put into the record the entire transcript of Sidney Blumenthal. Were going to release the emails, lets do the transcript. That way the world can see. It i second that motion. Well, we didnt that motion has been seconded . We wont take that up in a hearing. Mr. Chairman, i have consulted with the palme parliamentarian and they inform us we have a right. You asked for the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Thats what we want to have. Let the world see. It why is it that you only want mr. Blumenthals transcript released . Id like to have all of them released. The survivors . Even their name . You want that released . Let me tell you something the only one youve asked for is Sidney Blumenthal. Thats the only one youve asked for, miss mills. Cheryl mills. Thats not true. Thats two out of 54. The chairman asked for a recorded vote . I ask for a recorded vote on the blumenthal you said from the beginning we want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Why dont we put the entire transcript out there and let the world see it . What do you have to hide . These are the only emails that you have to release and in fairness to mr. Blumenthal and the american people, in the interest of a complete record, if youre going to release the emails, release the transcript where he has a chance to give the context of those emails. Well, you keep referring to blumenthal emails. I would hasten to remind both of you the only reason we have blumenthal emails is because he emailed the secretary of state. Those are her emails. Thats why they were released. Theyre not blumenthals emails and she wanted all of her em l emails released. Shes been saying since march i want the entire world to see my emails. When he will Sidney Blumenthals emails are part of that. So heres what ill do. Ill be happy to talk to the parliamentarian because the parliamentarian told me your motion would