SIGN UP FOR THE BREITBART EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Gowdy: ‘Eye-Opening,’ ‘Surprising’ Results to Come From Benghazi Investigation

On Monday’s “Hugh Hewitt Show,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi advised there would be “eye-opening” and “surprising” results to come out of his committee’s investigation.

Gowdy said the results would come “sooner rather than later” that dealt with the timing of the U.S. response to the events on the ground in Benghazi.

When we issue our report, and hopefully, it is coming sooner rather than later, I think that part of our investigation is going to be the most eye-opening, the most surprising, and frankly, will dwarf the other two tranches of Benghazi in terms of what we have been able to find. So you put your finger on a couple of the issues. Number one, how were the assets positioned? If they were not positioned in such a way as to respond to Libya, Tripoli or Benghazi within the time frame, why not, particularly on the anniversary of 9/11 with, frankly, with Cairo having just happened? Why would your assets not be moving after Cairo? But there’s a third part to this, which is if the president did say do everything you can, and Secretary [Leon] Panetta communicated that order to his command staff, do everything you can, both of those communicates took place before 7 p.m. Eastern time. Why did the first wheel not take off for hours and hours and hours? That is the part that we are getting at, that I would submit to you the other committees did not, and I think you’re going to be surprised at that part of our report.

Partial transcript as follows:

HEWITT: Changing subjects, have you seen 13 Hours, Mr. Chairman?

GOWDY: I have not. We have one more book author to interview, and I realize I’m old-fashioned, and a lot of people could see the movie and still do a fair job of questioning one of the book authors. But it is important to me that I have his testimony in mind as opposed to what I may have seen in a movie theater. I think of all the folks in the world who are entitled to tell their version of what happened, the eyewitnesses would be number one on that list. So I support those guys, and I like them personally. I have explained to Tonto, I promise I’m going to see the movie. But I’m going to do it after I finish the last interview.

HEWITT: I get that, and I understand that completely. Do you believe the question has been asked and answered adequately, yet, as to whether or not assets were proximate and available that night to come to the assistance to the people under attack in Benghazi?

GOWDY: Hugh, I will tell you this. When we issue our report, and hopefully, it is coming sooner rather than later, I think that part of our investigation is going to be the most eye-opening, the most surprising, and frankly, will dwarf the other two tranches of Benghazi in terms of what we have been able to find. So you put your finger on a couple of the issues. Number one, how were the assets positioned? If they were not positioned in such a way as to respond to Libya, Tripoli or Benghazi within the time frame, why not, particularly on the anniversary of 9/11 with, frankly, with Cairo having just happened? Why would your assets not be moving after Cairo? But there’s a third part to this, which is if the President did say do everything you can, and Secretary Panetta communicated that order to his command staff, do everything you can, both of those communicates took place before 7 p.m. Eastern time. Why did the first wheel not take off for hours and hours and hours? That is the part that we are getting at, that I would submit to you the other committees did not, and I think you’re going to be surprised at that part of our report.

HEWITT: We’ll look forward to that. Now let me ask a very specific question. You’re a prosecutor, I am not. So you’ll answer this in prosecutor’s fashion. Have you been asked by anyone at the Bureau or the Department of Justice not to pursue any lines of questioning for fear of compromising any investigation?

GOWDY: No, sir, but I will tell you that, and I’m actually proud of this, they would not have to ask me. I would stay so far away from what is purely an executive branch inquiry, and I’ll prove that to you. There was a little bit of discussion about offering Bryan Pagliano immunity. He, of course, is the one who set up the server. And there was some really notable folks on the side of offering him immunity from the legislative branch’s perspective. And I was the only saying no, we should not do that. I don’t want to do anything that jeopardize an ongoing executive branch investigation. The legislative branch cannot convene a grand jury. We can’t issue search warrants. We are not the branch to conduct criminal or quasi-criminal investigations. That is the executive branch. So Mr. Comey would not have to ask me. I would run a hundred miles away from anything that would jeopardize what he’s trying to do.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

P.S. DO YOU WANT MORE ARTICLES
LIKE THIS ONE DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX?
SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY BREITBART NEWSLETTER.


Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.

SIGN UP FOR THE OFFICIAL
BREITBART EMAIL NEWSLETTER

GET TODAY'S TOP NEWS DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

I don't want to get today's top news.

x