Critics slam White House on Benghazi attack

• Clinton said she is responsible for security at embassies
• Hearings have revealed there were attacks targeting Western diplomatic sites
• Consulate attack called a "significant" intelligence failure

WASHINGTON — Critics assailed the White House on Tuesday for repeatedly refusing to explain lax security at the consulate in Libya and whether it deliberately withheld information from the public indicating the attack there had ties to a terrorist group.

"There are still questions about judgments and improper reporting left unanswered from both before and after the attack," Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said. "The more important thing we have to understand is exactly what went wrong and what's going to change."

Issa and other Republicans said U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's statement on Monday that she is ultimately responsible for security failures at embassies did not answer why President Obama and top aides characterized the attack as a spontaneous response to an anti-Islam video.

The Sept. 11 attack on the consulate resulted in the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. The FBI, a Clinton-appointed panel and Congress are investigating the attacks.

Testimony during Republican-led hearings on Capitol Hill have revealed that there was a series of attacks targeting Western diplomatic missions and organizations in Benghazi in the six months before the attacks, including a bomb that blew a hole in the U.S. Consulate's security wall.

Clinton told Fox News on Tuesday that she "can't speak to who knew what" about particular incidents.

"We knew that there were security breaches and problems throughout Libya," she said. "It was certainly taken into account by the security professionals as they made their assessments."

In an interview Monday with CNN, Clinton said "confusion" and "fog of war" led to the initial reports. "As time has gone on, that information has changed," she said.

A House hearing led by Issa last week revealed several diplomatic cables from security officers in Tripoli to the State Department's top security official in Washington requesting more bodyguards for the ambassador and additional security teams for the embassy in Tripoli and the consulate in Benghazi. Undersecretary Charlene Lamb, State's top security official, rejected the requests.

Lamb "still thinks the level of security in Benghazi was appropriate," Issa said.

Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire praised Clinton, but accused the White House of "trying to avoid any responsibility whatsoever." The senators also said they want to know why President Obama and senior members of his administration portrayed the attack as motivated by an anti-Islam video "long after it had become clear that the real cause was a terrorist attack."

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice repeatedly said in a series of television interviews Sept. 16, five days after the attack, that the investigation at that point did not indicate a planned attack tied to a terrorist group. In one interview, with NBC's David Gregory, she described the attack as a "spontaneous reaction" to protests in Cairo inspired by the anti-Islam video. Several days later, the White House acknowledged that the attack appeared to be planned.

Vice President Biden said last week during a debate with Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan that he and President Obama did not know that security officers in Libya had requested help at the U.S. missions in Libya.

Ayotte said Americans still do not know whether the "conflicting stories" from the Obama administration were due to the failure of its intelligence staff to keep it up to date, or deliberate deception on the part of the White House.

"These are fair questions to be answered," she told Fox News. "They're not being straight with the American people."

Joseph Wippl, director of graduate studies at Boston University's Department of International Relations and a former CIA operations officer for 35 years, called the consulate attack a "significant" intelligence failure.

"U.S. intelligence did not know that this particular group was planning an attack on this particular day," Wippl said. "Generally, intelligence services worldwide are very effective, but you cannot stop it 100%. It's going to happen again. It could be less serious or it could be worse."