clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

The seventh Benghazi investigation is out, finds there was no intelligence failure

By Dylan Matthews
House Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI), right, and House Intelligence ranking member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD).
House Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI), right, and House Intelligence ranking member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD).
Mark Wilson/Getty Images
Dylan Matthews is a senior correspondent and head writer for Vox's Future Perfect section and has worked at Vox since 2014. He is particularly interested in global health and pandemic prevention, anti-poverty efforts, economic policy and theory, and conflicts about the right way to do philanthropy.
  1. The House Intelligence Committee has issued its final report investigating the attacks on US officials in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012, and September 12, 2012.
  2. The report concludes that "the CIA ensured sufficient security for CIA facilities … and, without a requirement to do so, ably and bravely assisted the State Department on the night of the attacks … Appropriate US personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night, and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down order or a denial of available air support."
  3. It also claims there was "no intelligence failure prior to the attacks."
  4. The report defends then-UN Ambassador Susan Rice by concluding that her comments on September 16 attributing the attacks to a protest came before the CIA concluded there was no protest.
  5. There is no evidence, the report states, that any officers were "intimidated, wrongly forced to sign a nondisclosure agreement or otherwise kept from speaking to Congress."
  6. It backs up six previous investigations into the attacks; the United States House Select Committee on Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi has yet to issue its report.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple reasons that we can't rely only on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on.

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. We can’t do that if we have a paywall.

That’s why we also turn to you, our readers, to help us keep Vox free. If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today?

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Next Up In The Latest

The Latest

You gotta just ignore annoying tweets

By Rebecca Jennings

David Brooks thinks Americans are getting meaner

By Sean Illing

What a striking new study of death in America misses

By Dylan Matthews

Why Kenya is sending police officers into Haiti

By Ellen Ioanes

The government’s case to break up Amazon, explained

By Sara Morrison

Kevin McCarthy is out. Who might replace him as speaker?

By Nicole Narea

Sign up for the newsletter Sign up for Vox Recommends

Get curated picks of the best Vox journalism to read, watch, and listen to every week, from our editors.