The conclusions of a months-long New York Times investigation that found no evidence al Qaeda played a role in the 2012 attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya don’t “jibe” with Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
“I believe that groups loosely associated with al Qaeda were” involved in the attack, Feinstein told The Hill in a story published Tuesday. “That’s my understanding.”
The California Democrat also told the Hill that the Times’ finding the attacks were largely motivated by outrage at an American-made anti-Islam video didn’t “jibe” with her.
A spokesman for Feinstein qualified those comments.
“When Senator Feinstein said ‘loosely affiliated’ she clearly was referring to groups not directly connected to (or taking orders from) core AQ in Pakistan — which was essentially the conclusion of The New York Times as well,” Brian Weiss told The Hill. “So to say she ‘rejected’ the conclusion of The New York Times is an overstatement.”
Other lawmakers cast doubt on the newspaper’s report almost immediately after it was published. Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Mike Rogers (R-MI) appeared on “Fox News Sunday” soon after the report was released and argued the intelligence community disputed its findings. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) was similarly adamant that an al Qaeda affiliated group did participate in the attacks.
Rogers went a step further when asked if the article was intended to exonerate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ahead of a potential presidential run, suggesting that the timing of the report was “odd.” The newspaper’s editorial page editor shot down that claim, asserting the Times hasn’t chosen any potential candidate to support.
