- By John HudsonJohn Hudson is a senior reporter at Foreign Policy, where he covers diplomacy and national security issues in Washington. He has reported from several geopolitical hotspots, including Ukraine, Pakistan, Malaysia, China, and Georgia. Prior to joining FP, John covered politics and global affairs for the Atlantic magazine’s news blog, the Atlantic Wire. In 2008, he covered the August war between Russia and Georgia from Tbilisi and the breakaway region of Abkhazia. He has appeared on CNN, MSNBC, BBC, C-SPAN, Fox News radio, Al Jazeera, and other broadcast outlets. He has been with the magazine since 2013.
Last month, Senator Lindsey Graham vowed to block the confirmation of every Obama administration appointee because the administration was preventing Benghazi survivors from testifying before Congress. Now, three Benghazi witnesses are set to testify for the first time. Their lawyer says the administration never discouraged their testimony, but Graham’s office says the holds aren’t going anywhere.
"Still have holds in place," Graham’s spokesman Kevin Bishop tells The Cable.
It’s unclear what further actions might change Graham’s calculus on the holds, but the South Carolina Republican maintains that the administration has prevented Benghazi witnesses from testifying before Congress, and until that changes, he’ll continue to block the confirmation of top U.S. officials.
When The Cable asked the lawyer representing the Benghazi survivors if his clients had been intimidated or discouraged from testifying, attorney Mark Zaid said he was unaware of anyone who had experienced such problems. "Actually, the executive branch has been very cooperative with us to date," he said.
Zaid, a veteran national security lawyer, declined to confirm or deny his clients’ affiliation to the U.S. Government and would only note that the three men served as members of the "elite security team" who were present in Benghazi.
In the highly politicized debate over Benghazi, it remains unclear if the testimony of the three men will benefit the White House or its critics in the Republican Party who maintain that the officials failed to provide adequate security and emergency backup during the attack. Zaid said his clients’ motivation for testifying is anything but political.
"My clients, who were never before directly asked to testify to Congress as to what actually happened in Benghazi on September 11-12, have no political ax to grind," he said. "Their testimony will be purely factual in nature and completely truthful."
Still, some Republican lawmakers are likely to zero in on the witnesses’ timeline of the attack in order to prove that U.S. officials should’ve called in for air support during the siege of the U.S. compound.
According to the State Department, the first attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi lasted between 9:45 p.m. and 10 p.m. After midnight, a lull in fighting lasted until 5 a.m., when a second offensive with mortar rounds targeted the CIA annex one mile away from the compound. According to a report by The Daily Beast’s Eli Lake, at least one of Zaid’s clients will dispute that timeline, saying there was no lull in the fighting between the compound and the annex. That’s an issue Republicans such as Rep. Devin Nunes are likely to focus on next week in order to prove that U.S. officials should’ve called in air support. (Administration officials have given a number of reasons for not calling in air support, including the rationale that it appeared the assault had ended.)
Another inspiration for Graham’s hold is a 60 Minutes report on Benghazi that aired last month. "The 60 Minutes piece detailed the people on the ground saw this attack coming. Has anybody been fired for letting the consulate become a death trap?" said Graham. However, the credibility of 60 Minutes’ key source, a private security contractor named Dylan Davies, has been called into question after he admitted lying to his bosses about his whereabouts the night of the Benghazi attack. (Davies maintains that the account he gave to 60 Minutes is true.)
Graham has remained single-minded in his attack on the administration, however. "I don’t think it’s over the top to find out what happened to four dead Americans. I don’t think it’s over the top for the Congress to be able to challenge the narrative of any administration when an ambassador’s killed. I don’t think it’s over the top for us to be able to talk to the survivors," the South Carolina Republican repeated on Sunday.
Still, Democrats on the House Intel Committee who will hear from Zaid’s clients next week are likely to push back on Graham’s demands for more witnesses. "It concerns me that it is not a higher priority to make sure that bring these people to justice, than to carry on this political exercise," Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) told The Cable.
Meanwhile, the list of Obama administration nominees stuck in confirmation limbo continues to grow. On Wednesday, President Obama announced the nominations of Joseph William Westphal as ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Colleen Bradley Bell as ambassador to Hungary, and Madelyn Creedon as a principal deputy administrator for National Nuclear Security Administration at the Department of Energy. Other high profile nominations in purgatory include Jeh Johnson for secretary of homeland security and Janet Yellen as chair of the Federal Reserve.
"Where are the Benghazi survivors?" Graham tweeted from his official account. "I’m going to block every appointment in the U.S. Senate until they are made available to Congress."