--- title: Benghazi Hearings Focus on Hillary Clinton, Pentagon Response description: To Republicans, the deadly September 11 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was a huge, conscience-shocking security scandal, one that Democrats are... canonical: https://time.com/archive/7182543/death-security-and-hillary-2016-making-sense-of-the-benghazi-hearings/ author: TIME Staff article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2013-05-08T20:40:24.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-03-18T07:02:09.959Z article:section: Politics og:title: Benghazi Hearings Focus on Hillary Clinton, Pentagon Response og:description: To Republicans, the deadly September 11 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was a huge, conscience-shocking security scandal, one that Democrats are... og:url: https://time.com/archive/7182543/death-security-and-hillary-2016-making-sense-of-the-benghazi-hearings/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt52b4b8068c3dfe75/698a9da3c9e9419904124bfb/benghazi1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 3500 og:image:height: 1969 og:image:alt: Officials are sworn in before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on "Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage" in Washington og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Benghazi Hearings Focus on Hillary Clinton, Pentagon Response twitter:description: To Republicans, the deadly September 11 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was a huge, conscience-shocking security scandal, one that Democrats are... twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt52b4b8068c3dfe75/698a9da3c9e9419904124bfb/benghazi1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  * [Politics](/section/politics/) # Terror, Security, and Hillary 2016: Making Sense of the Benghazi Hearings > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=f8aa53f6-ce9c-4913-be9e-fe453e5b3c99&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=f8aa53f6-ce9c-4913-be9e-fe453e5b3c99&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=f8aa53f6-ce9c-4913-be9e-fe453e5b3c99&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=f8aa53f6-ce9c-4913-be9e-fe453e5b3c99&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) by [TIME Staff](https://time.com/author/time-staff/) May 8, 2013 8:40 PM UTC  (L-R) Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Counterterrorism Mark Thompson, Gregory Hicks, foreign service officer and former deputy chief of mission/charge d'affairs in Libya at the State Department, and Eric Nordstrom, diplomatic security officer and former regional security officer in Libya at the State Department, are sworn in before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on "Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage" on Capitol Hill in Washington May 8, 2013\. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS) - RTXZF3B (L-R) Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Counterterrorism Mark Thompson, Gregory Hicks, foreign service officer and former deputy chief of mission/charge d'affairs in Libya at the State Department, and Eric Nordstrom, diplomatic security officer and former regional security officer in Libya at the State Department, are sworn in before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on "Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage" on Capitol Hill in Washington May 8, 2013\. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS) - RTXZF3B REUTERS by [TIME Staff](https://time.com/author/time-staff/) May 8, 2013 8:40 PM UTC To Republicans, the deadly [September 11](http://topics.time.com/september-11/) attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, [Libya](http://topics.time.com/libya/), was a huge, conscience-shocking security scandal, one that Democrats are shamelessly trying to cover up. To Democrats, the attack was the sort of tragedy that inevitably comes from practicing diplomacy in a dangerous world, one that Republicans are shamelessly exploiting for political gain. Those two views came no closer to agreement during a Wednesday House hearing on the subject. The hearing by the Republican-led House Government Oversight & Reform Committee was not the first on the events surrounding the death of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, and three other Americans. [Hillary Clinton](http://topics.time.com/hillary-clinton/), who was running the State Department at the time of the attack, [testified for hours](http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/23/politics/clinton-benghazi) back in January. But the story was given fresh dramatic life and new narrative details through the testimony of two self-described whistle blowers who had not previously spoken in public: Mark Thompson, acting deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism; Gregory Hicks, the former deputy of mission in Libya. Joining them was Eric Nordstrom, a former regional security officer in Libya, who had previously testified on the issue. Virtually no one disputes the basic facts of that violent night, in which a group of militants stormed the compound and battled the Americans for hours. But the sharply different interpretations of why the attacks happened, and how the Obama administration responded, have left many people understandably confused. So has the way “Benghazi” has come to describe several different arguments related to the incident. Here’s a breakdown by TIME’s Washington staff of the key plot lines, and what we know about them: **Could the U.S. military have done more to help?** Not according to the Pentagon – and the hearing’s key witness. Aircraft that might have buzzed the compound where the second pair of Americans died – and scared the militants away — were 900 miles north in Italy. “Time and distance are a tyranny of their own,” Admiral James Stavridis, who responded to the attacks as the NATO commander, told Congress earlier this year. Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, estimated it would take as long as 20 hours to get the planes above Benghazi. Hicks testified that he asked the U.S. defense attaché in Tripoli if planes could be scrambled to help those under attack in the CIA annex in Benghazi, a battle that unfolded hours after the initial assault on the nearby U.S. consulate, which killed Stevens, and led to two more American deaths. “He said that it would take two to three hours for them to get on site, but that there also were no tankers available for them to refuel,” Hicks said Wednesday. “And I said, ‘Thank you very much,’ and we went on with our work.” Hicks also testified that a four man team of Green Berets in Tripoli were denied a request to deploy to Benghazi the morning after the attack began, though officials doubt they could have arrived early enough to save lives at the CIA annex. “We continue to believe there was nothing this team could have done to assist during the second attack in Benghazi,” Pentagon spokesman George Little told reporters. **Did the Obama administration distort the truth?** Hicks [testified](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/05/08/i-was-stunned-my-jaw-dropped-and-i-was-embarrassed/) Wednesday that his “jaw dropped” when he saw United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, [appearing](http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/16/flashback-what-susan-rice-said-about-benghazi/) on multiple talk shows on September 16, largely blame the attack on demonstrations over an anti-Muslim YouTube [video](theweek.com/article/index/233335/mideast-riots-who-is-the-filmmaker-behind-the-anti-islam-video). Hicks says it was clear from the outset that what happened in Benghazi was premeditated terrorism. Rice has said she was simply working from talking points [produced](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323717004578155250839482098.html) soon after the attacks by discussion between the CIA, White House and the State Department. New details revealed in a House Republican [report](http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Libya-Progress-Report-Final-1.pdf) show that the CIA’s initial assertion that “Islamic extremists with ties to al Qa’ida participated in the attack” was removed, leading to Republican charges that the language was struck to protect the Obama campaign’s boasts about success in the fight against al Qaeda. But the final version of the talking points did note “indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations,” and even the CIA’s original version had called the Benghazi attack “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo” over the notorious YouTube video. Moreover, David Petraeus, who was then CIA director, [testified](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/world/africa/benghazi-not-petraeus-affair-is-focus-at-hearings.html) last fall that he had urged the removal of any reference to al Qaeda to avoid tipping off suspects whom the U.S. was monitoring. **Was the State Department’s internal review legit?** One target Wednesday was the independent Accountability Review Board formed to study the attacks. Co-chaired by former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former joint chiefs of staff chairman Mike Mullen, the board reviewed 25,000 pages of documents and heard testimony from dozens of senior national security officials. The board issued a harsh report which led to the resignation of four State Department employees, but which pointed no specific fingers at senior personnel like Clinton and her top deputies. On Wednesday, Nordstrom called it “inexplicable” to him that the panel didn’t scrutinize the role of top State officials more carefully: “It is not what is contained within the report that I take exception to, but what is left unexamined,” Nordstrom testified. “Specifically, I’m concerned with the \[board’s\] decision to focus its attention at the assistant secretary level and below.'” Democrats and the State Department challenged that assertion, and on MSNBC Tuesday Pickering likened charges of a cover-up to “Pulitzer Prize fiction.” **What could this mean for Hillary Clinton in 2016?** Whether or not Republicans intended it, the shadow of national politics loomed over Wednesday’s hearing. Hillary Clinton completed a generally well-reviewed tenure of Secretary of State, as evidenced by her sky-high public approval ratings. But Benghazi is a clear black mark on her Foggy Bottom record, one that could haunt Clinton if she runs for president in 2016\. Conservatives [seized on](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/347748/2am-david-hicks-libya-briefed-secretary-clinton-terrorist-attack) Hicks’s testimony that, in a call with Clinton on the fateful night, he told her that a terrorist attack was underway–a fact that was slow to appear in the administration’s public rhetoric. Still, despite repeated discussion about what Clinton knew and when she knew it, no smoking gun emerged from Wednesday’s hearing, leading one Congressional Democrat to [dismiss](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/347776/dem-representatives-take-msnbc-say-no-news-today-benghazi-hearing) questions about her role as a “witch hunt.” **Are Our Diplomats Safe Enough?** The one thing both parties agree on is that another Benghazi can’t be allowed to happen. But a 2012 Government Accountability Office report suggested that embassy security remains vulnerable so long as the State Department maintains missions in dangerous locations amid staffing shortages. President Obama’s new budget includes $4 billion to improve security at America’s more than 270 diplomatic posts worldwide. That includes a $2.2 billion boost–proposed by the Accountability Review Board–in State’s embassy security construction budget to fund new facilities in high-threat areas. (Congress has yet to approve the funding.) The Pentagon last month deployed the first of 500 Marines to Spain as part of a new rapid reaction force that can respond to emergencies in northern Africa. The Marines are also working with the State Department to add an additional 1,000 troops across the globe, nearly doubling the size of their current embassy guard force. Meanwhile, the threat remains: on February 1, a suicide bomber detonated an explosive device in Ankara, Turkey, outside the U.S. embassy, killing himself and a Turkish security guard. _With reporting by Zeke Miller, Jay Newton-Small, Alex Rogers, and Mark Thompson_ ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/archive/7182543/death-security-and-hillary-2016-making-sense-of-the-benghazi-hearings/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/archive/7182543/death-security-and-hillary-2016-making-sense-of-the-benghazi-hearings/"},"headline":"Terror, Security, and Hillary 2016: Making Sense of the Benghazi Hearings","datePublished":"2013-05-08T20:40:24.000Z","dateModified":"2026-03-18T07:02:09.959Z","description":"To Republicans, the deadly September 11 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was a huge, conscience-shocking security scandal, one that Democrats are...","url":"https://time.com/archive/7182543/death-security-and-hillary-2016-making-sense-of-the-benghazi-hearings/","keywords":["hospitals","TIME","Investigation","treatment","cost","probe","patients","medical"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt52b4b8068c3dfe75/698a9da3c9e9419904124bfb/benghazi1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"TIME Staff","url":"https://time.com/author/time-staff/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt52b4b8068c3dfe75/698a9da3c9e9419904124bfb/benghazi1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Officials are sworn in before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on \"Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage\" in Washington","caption":"Officials are sworn in before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on \"Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage\" in Washington","creditText":"REUTERS","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/archive/7182543/death-security-and-hillary-2016-making-sense-of-the-benghazi-hearings/","name":"Terror, Security, and Hillary 2016: Making Sense of the Benghazi Hearings"}}]}] ```