from tripoli on his own. i want to ask david a question, though, that was not answered in this hearing. it's not really been answered since 201, one that keeps coming up, which is why weren't the requests for security, why were they not granted over time? more requests for security, hundreds of requests for security. i understand hillary clinton explaining that they never got to her. that's a separate issue. but she has never explained why she believes that they were not granted. isn't that important? isn't that the crux of the issue here in finding out what happened in benghazi and making sure it doesn't happen again? >> yes, that is an important question. as you said, these requests never came to the secretary. but i think the elephant in the room and secretary clinton did mention this in her testimony yesterday, was that you had a republican congress that wasn't willing to fund embassy security. and now i think it's really hypocritical for them to come out and make a big issue of this when they in fact wouldn't fund it. they've done better since. learning the lesson of benghazi, whi

speck tor of that video being the cause of what happened in tripoli. >> there was a prosecution o of that film maker for tax evasion and a lot of attention on the film, when we know now that was not the reason for this terrorist attack that killed four americans in libya. i don't think we're going to have somebody in the obama administration say, yes, we were trying to divert attention from our anti-terrorism policy was failing, but that is something that we need to have more questions on and more answers from secretary clinton. >> and in that exchange, the republican congressman from ohio had with her in an exchange saying you knew that night you were e e-mailing your own family this was a terrorist attack. why didn't you stick with that in the days that followed the administration? >> it sounds like there's a lot of contradictory information she was getting, but that's not what she said. >> standby. everyone standby. much more of our special coverage. in a break right now. they are having lunch. they are getting ready to resume part 2 of this special hearing. the benghazi committee

, and after benghazi we were able to get marines deployed to tripoli. this is a constant effort between the state department and defense department. but it's my strong belief that the isat process has been and should be institutionalized. >> as a young platoon leader out in a platoon, we got and read the defense review, which is a review that happens on a periodic basis, that gives an individual soldier an idea of what the defense department is trying to do. i understand you initiated something similar in the state department. and this goes to -- there's been discussion already about the culture at the state department, especially when it comes to security. i find it's very good at instilling culture throughout the department. can you talk a little bit about how and why you decided to do the review for the state department. is it useful for getting out there? is it a waste of time and we shouldn't be wasting money on it and we should be doing something else? >> well, i hope it's not the latter. i learned about the review serving on the armed services committee in the state durin

remember chris spent the vast majority of his time in tripoli, not in benghazi. so a lot of what he was looking at is how you deal with not only those in authority positions in libya based in tripoli at that time but also representatives of other governments and the the like. and i think it is fair to say that any time your trying to figure out what's the best argument to make, possess leshl i if you're like chris stevens trying to make the best argument about why the united states should remain committed to libya and others as well he's going to engage in that. >> no matter what city he was in in libya, having to stop and provide public messaging advice to your press shop and having to read and respond to an e-mail sent by zsydney blumenthal, he needed help with the violence. you have said several times this morning that you had people in processes and place. and you want to ask you about an e-mail that was sent to you by another one of your aids. that would be exhibit 70 in your folder. the libyan people needed medicine, gasoline, diesel and milk. do you know how long it took you to r

in tripoli before he was killed in the benghazi attacks. for more, let's bring in cnn's chris frates in washington. >> reporter: good morning. gowdy says the e-mails will reveal that stevens e-mails will show he wanted more security in benghazi. and washington wanted help with how to spin the increasing violence there. here is how gowdy put it. >> he needed help with security. he didn't need help with pr. he was asking for more security. and one occasion, he joked in an e-mail, maybe we should ask another government to pay for security upgrades because our government is not willing to do. it. >> reporter: despite the previous investigations, gowdy was the first to get the e-mails. now when it comes to political, he had some choice words for republican colleagues. he was taking aim at house members who suggested the committee was designed to damage hillary clinton's run for president. here is what he said. >> i told my own republican colleagues and friends shut up talking about things you don't know anything about. unless you are on the committee, you have no idea what we have

spoke directly with people on the ground at the embassy in tripoli that night at around 7:00 p.m., and ki tell from the documents that we've seen that you asked to speak tripoli.puty chief of mission in can you explain the purpose of that call and why you felt that was important? >> well, for a number of reasons. they were a source of information. they had their own sources on the ground that they were reaching out to trying to gather additional insight into what happened, what provoked it, who was behind it. but much more importantly even than that, they were in a great state of dismay and grief, and i thought it was important to speak with our team in tripoli directly so they knew we were trying as best we could from so far away to help them and to help their colleagues. we also had pushed to have an additional team of security officers fly from tripoli and really the embassy in tripoli just took that on. they, in fact, probably came up with the idea and put it together and got the plane and sent more help on the way to benghazi. but it was a very personal conversation between me and

understanding libya where tripoli will give you one vantage of the country, and benghazi always a rival p power center to tripoli to find out what happened in libya, he had to go if benghazi, and we know that given the attack that did occur, he did not have enough security, but this is something that we are countering around the world in post conflict environments all of the time. and even in a major first world capital like seoul, korea, our ambassador was attacked by a guy with the knife. these things do crop up on a regular basis unfortunately and it is something that we have to deal with going forward and i think that tammy duckworth was one among the committee trying to figure out what have we learn and what do we apply to the future experience? >> general kimmet one issue raised the people there in benghazi were cia or contractors and it yet it is former s secretary of state hillary clinton there being grilled and the question is why wouldn't you have officials from the cia and why not former director general petraeus as part of the grilling as well? >> well, at the end of day, the

time. you said that ambassador chris was pulled out of tripoli because of threats on his life? >> there were threats from people associated with gadhafi after the publication of cables he had written that were made public by wikileaks. >> you say you where aware of the two attacks at the mission facility in benghazi. >> uh-huh. >> mr. morrell in his book states there was 20 attacks on that facility. are you familiar with the other 18? >> there were two that we thought rose to the level of being serious. and i -- >> were you familiar with the other 18 -- >> i'm not aware of 18 others. i would point out -- i'm sure former deputy director morrell made this point when he was testifying. the cia stayed in libya. the cia had a much bigger presence than the state department. despite the overall decline in stability. some might argue actually because of the overall decline in stability, it was thought to be even more important for the cia to stay there, and they also did not believe that their facility would be the subject of a deadly attack either. because i think sometimes -- >> ma'

that country. that was in the tripoli in the embassy where they have real security and a real safe room. i have no idea why he was in benghazi at that time. it just makes no sense to me. i'm sure there's a reason, but i haven't heard it yet. >> lieutenant colonel rick francona, always a pleasure having you on the show. thanks for the insight and perspective. thank you. >> we have an e pert on u.s. foreign policy swell the middle east. benghazi is a lot more than a republican talking point. it is a real place with a lot of real problems. this week is the fourth anniversary since the death of gadhafi. now the place is in chaos and no one is looking back at the u.s. policy, apart from the international coalition, but it was part of secretary clinton's policy. why isn't anybody asking questions about that? >> i think that was addressed to some degree today. some of the republican congress members asked about the rationale for the intervention, also the aftermath, after gadhafi fell, was there a plan. but i think what we heard forcefully and effectively from secretary clinton today as well a

hearings. it is not a wise thing to do. try to get to the tripoli airport today. you can't do it. >> secretary webb, you served in vietnam, you're a marine. once a marine, always a marine. you're a decorated war hero. you became secretary of the navy. during the vietnam war, the man standing next to you, senator sanders applied for a status as a con che yen shus objector. >> everybody makes their decisions at the time there is conscription. as long as they go through the legal process, i respect that. it would be for the voters to decide whether senator sanders or anyone else should be president. i will say this. coming from a military family with my brother a marine, my son was a marine in iraq, i served a a marine, i am very comfortable that i am the most qualified person standing up here today to be your commander in chief. >> tell an american soldier watching right now tonight in afghanistan why you can be commander in chief? >> let me applaud my good friend jim webb for his service to his country in so many ways. jim and i, under jims leadership, passed the most significant

try to g-- do, ge tripoli airport. >>> once a marine, always a marine. you served as a american. during the vietnam war the man standing next to you, senator sanders stood as a conscientious object or. could he be a commander in chief. >> as long as they go through the legal process that our country requires, i respect that. it would be for theers to decide whether he should be president. i will say this, coming from the position that i've come -- come from from a military family, with my brother a marine, my son was in iraq, i served as a marine. five years in the pentagon, i'm comfortable that i'm the most qualified person to be your commander in chief. >> senator sanders, tell an american soldier who is watching tonight in afghanistan why you can be commander in chief. >> let me applaud my good friend jim webb for his service to this country in so many ways. [ applause ] jim and i under jim's leadership as indicated passed the most significant veterans education bill in recent history. we followed suit a few years later passing under my leadership of the most significant vete

tripoli. >> right, and i understand that. secretary clinton, i guess one of the questions that we need answered is you were a huge advocate for our presence there to begin with. what prevented you from making the decision based on the knowledge that you had from these memos about the deteriorating security situation? what prevented you as secretary of state from making that decision on your own? >> well, congresswoman, i took into consideration a wide variety of factors where violence would strike and we would have to make a decision. at this point what we were trying to do is work with the libyan authorities. that's what the august 17th memo from deputy secretary nides refers to. we were trying to provide additional security assistance so that the libyans could do more to assist themselves. and, you know, it is the case that in the world we're in today there are a lot of places that are dangerous. violence goes up and goes down. part of what acting assistant secretary beth jones was referencing in this memo is this is -- is this a new normal? and the secretary does personally oversee

that i was in tripoli with chris stephens. he told me at that time of his concerns about security. it is very obvious that susan rice absolutely told -- gave false information to the american people saying that it was a spontaneous demonstration. secretary clinton told the families when the bodies came back that she would get the people who made the, quote, hateful video. there are a lot of questions that are still unanswered. >> so you believe that. you believe that there are things to account for that have not been to this point that are material to making america safer. >> as with any event that takes place, whether it be 9/11 or whatever it is, where american lives are lost, we have to have a thorough and complete investigation. and if people misled the american people, as i believe they were. particularly about the nature of the attack. people don't bring rocket propelled grenades and the mortars to spontaneous demonstrations. then i think the american people deserve to know the answers. >> you don't think there's been enough time and spent so far? >> i don't think the answers ha

libya. even though tripoli was the de facto capital that there were people in benghazi that were providing intelligence. and that the power structure really of the new government was in benghazi. and we needed to have a presence there in order to understand what was happening in that country. as i said, the eight different reports, all laid this out. and either the republicans on that committee aren't reading those reports. or they're asking the same questions over and over again that have already been answered multiple times. there's nothing new that they, in 17 months -- there's nothing new that they've uncovered that changes the narrative of what happened that evening. >> when you say that there's nothing new however people like john boehner and republicans say they're getting new information all the time. for instance -- let me tell you this specifically. john boehner said this week it wasn't until monday, this past monday, they got 1300 pages of ambassador chris stevens e-mails. >> that's simply not true. >> he said just monday. so he's wrong? >> well -- well, they've been i

remember them. sean smith who joined the state department in 2002. glen dougherty part of a tripoli rivers team that reached the annex seven hours after the initial attack. tyrone woods, a former seal workiwork ing as a security contractor at the annex. and of course ambassador stephens who we've heard a lot about. let's bring in brianna keeler. according to a new poll the majority of americans think they are doing this for political gain. >> really interesting poll numbers out today carol. you hear from the republican chairman of this committee trey gowdy and he says he wants this to be the final and definitive accounting for benghazi. you talk to democrats who back hillary clinton and they say this is just a political hatchet job. while what we see is that americans are split on whether they think the committee has gone too far, most of them, democrats and republicans think that politics are at play. >> they ended up becoming a partisan arm of the republican national committee. >> a new cnn orc poll reveals the public agrees with the democratic front runner. 72% believe the investigation