posted 10-10-2012 10:40 PM                  

This is a rush transcript from "Special Report," October 9, 2012. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

BRET BAIER, ANCHOR: This is a Fox News alert, as you look at the White House. Just finished up a phone call, conference call with two senior State Department officials. Fox News was not invited on to this conference call for reporters. We usually are on this list, but we were not invited to this conference call.

We do have a transcript of some of these quotes about the Benghazi attack. Here is one of them about Ambassador Chris Stevens, quote, "The ambassador walked guests out at 8:30 p.m. or so." This is the night of the attack on 9/11. "There was nobody on the street." This is about the possible protests before the attack. "There was nobody on the street" according to this call with two senior State Department officials. Then at 9:30 p.m. they saw on the security cameras at the consulate that there were armed men invading the compound. Again, no protest, no spontaneous protest. There were armed men invading the compound. Quote, "Everything is calm at 8:30 p.m., nothing unusual. There had been nothing unusual during the day outside all day. And then the attack."

Again, this contradicts directly what was said by the U.N. ambassador, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, and it contradicts essentially what the administration had been saying for five days after we reported that intelligence officials had within 24 hours that this was a terrorist attack.

This also comes ahead of committee hearing tomorrow up on Capitol Hill where a House committee -- Oversight Committee will start calling witnesses. They have uncovered a full list of some 230 security incidents that happened in the year before on the consulate and the area around the consulate in Libya. And one of the congressman who just got back from Libya talked about that today, and the State Department responded.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON CHAFFETZ, R – UT, HOUSE OVERSIGHT/GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE: Twice in the lead up to this -- the attack on 9/11 our compound in Benghazi was bombed. Twice the British ambassador had an assassination attempt. We were moving into 9/11 and now the White House wants to say well we had no direct information, no actionable intelligence. Are you kidding me? Where else in the world was the consulate bombed twice?

VICTORIA NULAND, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESWOMAN: I'm not going to go into all of these kinds of timeline details as to what we have when and where. Some of those things I'm guessing will be covered tomorrow in the open hearing. But again, these are all pieces that we are pulling together now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BAIER: Kirsten, this is getting worse by the day.

KIRSTEN POWERS, COLUMNIST, NEW YORK POST: Yeah. Well first of all, it's completely outrageous that nobody from Fox News was on this call, because the only people who have been asking any questions -- which is why, frankly, let's just put it out there, nobody from Fox News was on that call. It's because they're the only ones who have been following this closely and could catch them in all the things that they say that don't add up.

It's not just that they suggested that there was something going on outside of the embassy. It's that Susan Rice sat at this desk and sat at multiple desks around the city and weaved an unbelievable tale that had already been disproven by other reporters. There were already reports saying that it was quiet outside the embassy before. And I just urge everybody to go back and look at the transcripts, at how specific she was and the specific detail she offered about how it was a copycat of what was going on in Cairo and how it built and built, and how these people came in and sort of took it over. They're accusing Romney lying in the debate. The lying that's going on here should be causing a -- you know -- front page scandal in this city.

BAIER: Quickly, the State Department by the way is apologizing profusely to Fox News for leaving us off that call. Charles?

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: As they should. When you go back and look at what Susan Rice said, she didn't just say this was a demonstration and it wasn't a terror attack. I think I remember the words, she said, there was no evidence it was a terror attack. Now that is a stretch way beyond simply getting it wrong. There was a ton of evidence it was a terrorist attack. You might have said the preponderance that it was a demonstration or we have some evidence. So they went way out on a limb on something that was absolutely wrong, obviously wrong, embarrassingly wrong. And this is a scandal, and the fact that it's only been of interest to us and to a few others is really a second scandal.

JONAH GOLDBERG, AT LARGE EDITOR, NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE: Yeah. Maybe you will get a muffin basket from the State Department. I think that we're at the point now where the majority of what the Obama administration said in wake of this was untrue rather than true. They've told more lies than they've told truths. And you are getting the distinct whiff of almost a Nixonian-style cover-up and distortion of the truth on this. What's interesting to me, just in terms of the politics of it, is right now you have Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's political interests are aligned. That may not last very long. It certainly won't last through the election. It will be very interesting to see who throws who under the bus. But as it is right now, it's just really an astounding scandal, that hasn't gotten the attention it deserves.

BAIER: This conference call coming ahead of the committee hearing which we will cover fully here on Fox News Channel. And I ask you to go to "Special Report" on our home page, Foxnews.com/specialreport. There is a full timeline that you can watch of the whole thing from the beginning.

That is it for the panel. But stay tuned to see why politics is a family affair.

posted 10-11-2012 04:45 AM                  

------------------

posted 10-11-2012 07:59 AM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by heynow14:
In fact he himself voted to cut funding.

Hmmmm............

---

Yes,,, Hmmmm is the question,,,why you have NOT been around to respond since the azz whooping DEBATE?

Sore azz or what?

posted 10-11-2012 01:54 PM                  

Turns out that more Democrats (149) voted for the budget cut for security than Republicans (147). There are 190 Democrats and 240 Republicans in the House . That means that only 41 Demcorats did not vote for the budget cuts while 93 Republicans did not vote for the budget cuts. Percentage wise 78% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans voted to cut the budget. Ooops I guess Robert missed that part.

An excerpt from the below article.

However, the U.S. government is also trying to deal with severe budget constraints at a time of trillion-dollar deficits, and that last budget was passed on a bipartisan vote -- by a hair, more Democrats ended up supporting it than Republicans in the House. Cummings was among the 149 Democrats who voted yes, along with 147 Republicans

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/1 1/rep-questions-state-department-green-energy-spending-amid-security-concerns/#ixzz29194ZatP

Published October 11, 2012

FoxNews.com

Report: No protest prior to deadly Benghazi attack

Lawmakers grill State Department officials on...

The raging debate on Capitol Hill over the Libya consulate attack has put a spotlight on the State Department's security spending, with some questioning whether money spent on electric cars and green-embassy programs could have been put to better use.

Federal contract records show the department in May spent $108,000 on Chevy Volt charging stations for the American Embassy in Vienna. It apparently was part of a broader program to make diplomatic posts more energy efficient, and the upgrades and electric cars were on full display at a gala a few days after that contract was signed.

But Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., is scrutinizing the spending in light of concerns that the State Department turned down requests for more security in eastern Libya in the run-up to the Sept. 11 attack that killed four Americans.

"There's something wrong," Kelly told FoxNews.com.

Though it's unclear how easily the department could have freed up money from its green-energy program to beef up security, Kelly claimed officials would have "great flexibility" over how the budget is spent.

"We're got lives on the line. Doesn't that trump anything else that could possibly be going on?" Kelly said. "It's all about priorities."

Records show another $47,500 was spent in March on a Chevy Volt for the American Embassy in Oslo. That's more than the usual $39,000 that 2013 Volts are going for -- and certainly doesn't include the $7,500 tax credit individuals can reap for electric car purchases.

Democrats, though, suggest Republicans are the ones undermining security at U.S. embassies with sweeping budget cuts. As Republicans hammered the Obama administration during a House hearing Wednesday on the Libya attack, Democratic lawmakers claimed it was Republicans who had their priorities mixed up.

"The fact is that since 2011, the House has cut embassy security by hundreds of millions of dollars, below the amounts requested by the president," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Cummings called on Republicans to join him in calling for a supplemental funding bill to "restore funding for embassy security," suggesting lawmakers do so by closing tax breaks for oil companies.

While the GOP-led House has pushed to reduce the budget for embassy security, construction and maintenance, Congress, which included support from Democrats, ultimately agreed on a $1.54 billion budget. That's more than the $1.43 million committee Republicans recommended, though 5 percent less than the 2011 figure. The budget was $1.63 billion in fiscal 2011 and $1.82 billion in fiscal 2010.

However, the U.S. government is also trying to deal with severe budget constraints at a time of trillion-dollar deficits, and that last budget was passed on a bipartisan vote -- by a hair, more Democrats ended up supporting it than Republicans in the House. Cummings was among the 149 Democrats who voted yes, along with 147 Republicans.

"I might note that the funding that is currently enjoyed by the State Department was voted bipartisan," Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House oversight committee, said Wednesday in response to complaints about the budget levels.

Kelly argues that the problem isn't the level of funding but how the money that's budgeted is being spent.

The pressure on the State Department, and other agencies, to carefully prioritize spending may be even greater come next year. The White House estimates that under automatic spending cuts -- which members of both parties enacted and which Washington has not yet figured out how to avert - that embassy budget will face a $129 million cut.

State Department officials suggested at Wednesday's hearing that granting additional security might not have protected American diplomats in Benghazi. They noted, for instance, that a 16-member security team whose assignment ended shortly before the attack was stationed in Tripoli, not Benghazi.

But former security officers expressed frustration at the hearing over their efforts to get more staffing.

"We were fighting a losing battle. We couldn't even keep what we had," said Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, former head of that 16-member U.S. military team.

A representative with the State Department did not return a request for comment on the electric-car equipment purchases.