Re: Benghazi Survivors Forced to Sign Non-Disclosure Agreements
posted at 7/19/2013 9:49 AM EDT
"On Tuesday I raised the question of why none of the Benghazi survivors, whether State Department, CIA, or private security contract employees have testified publicly before Congress," said Wolf.
Greg Hicks testified before congress on May 8th and a transcript of that testimony is online.
Mark thompson testified before congress on May 8th as well and a transcript of his testimony is online and video of it is on Youtube.
Eric Nordstrom testified before congress on May 8th and a transcript of that testimony is online.
Additionally, Congressman Wolf is leaving out the fact that the survivors have already spoken. They have already told their stories of the terror attack. And they have done it on the record. In fact, they've done it twice. Within days of the attack, survivors were interviewed by FBI investigators. Transcripts of those interviews were made available to the Senate Intelligence Committee (with some redactions). Later, survivors spoke to investigators working for an independent review conducted on behalf of the State Department.
CIA and other intelligence officials would not testify publically because the CIA outpost in Benghazi was an operational CIA facility, so obvious national security issue come into play. In other words there are reasons to keep people with sensitive positions in the intelligence community from speaking publicly that don't involve government conspiracies. That, and the fact they're witnesses in an ongoing investigation.
"According to trusted sources that have contacted my office, many if not all of the survivors of the Benghazi attacks along with others at the Department of Defense, the CIA have been asked or directed to sign additional non-disclosure agreements about their involvement in the Benghazi attacks. Some of these new NDAs, as they call them, I have been told were signed as recently as this summer."
As for the non disclosures, depending on who the survivors are, the department of employment, individual access to secret or confidential materials, having them sign non disclosures would actually be a standard protocol, again for reasons that should be abundantly obvious. The spin, that this somehow represents a COVER UP is ludicrous on its face and Rep Wolf is banking on the fact that most people won't give a second thought to the inner workings of intelligence work, investigative work as it realtes to national security, and simply assume that the public will be given full access to all information relating to the incident.