I’m Anderson Cooper. Welcome to the podcast. For the first time, we could know why the FBI hasn’t yet to set foot in Libya where terrorists killed four Americans, also back home, the ridiculous. Let’s get start. 

We begin tonight on this Friday once again with breaking news that you will only see right here on 360. After being the first to tell you that FBI investigators still have not set foot in the ruins of the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Tonight, we were the first to tell you why. Tonight, we have the likely reason and we have it from a top law enforcement official. Four Americans as you know were murdered in the assault, one American ambassador, Christopher Stevens, that was two and a half weeks ago. Two and a half weeks that have seen the administration first described this as a spontaneous outburst even though our reporting revealed that officials knew within 24 hours that it was not. Only much later, did them back away from that assessment. 

 

Today, the firector of national intelligence, James Clapper, put out a statement explaining that early evidence supported that theory so that’s why they told the White House and Congress. Clapper says that throughout the investigation, his agency made it clear that the assessment was preliminary and could change. Neither his statement nor our sources specify a time frame for the DNI’s change of view. Again, our sources tell us that law enforcement officials knew within 24 hours that this was a terror attack. Our reporting also reveals that even though the administration says the investigation is going smoothly, the FBI has hit a bump in the road to the crime scene. Tonight, we’ve got reporting that could explain why that is. A senior law enforcement official telling Fran Townsend the FBI wanted the U.S. military to provide perimeter support in Benghazi, protection in other words, but that request was not granted. Fran’s a former White House homeland security advisor. She served in the George W. Bush administration, currently she sits on the CIA external advisory panel and recently visited Libya with her employer, McAndrews and Forbes. Also joining us, a former FBI assistant director, Tom Fuentes. So Fran, so the FBI sought military protection to go into Benghazi, why didn’t they get it?

 

Well, the answer to that question, Anderson, I think is not really clear. So it’s unusual when you want to set up a security perimeter you may look to the host country. If the host country is unable or unwilling to provide it, we don’t know what the answer to that is, you may ask if you think you need it for U.S. military support, but that’s got to go through a process, right? So, it needs state department and NSC support. The U.S. military would have to make an assessment about how big a security package that would entail. And lastly, and perhaps most importantly, you need host government. The Libyan government, in this case, support to allow U.S. military boots on the ground to provide sort of the defensive security perimeter around the Benghazi compound. Now, I spoke to a senior administration official who said they have been having regular meetings twice daily, secure video teleconferences on updates of the investigation. There has been regular Deputy Committee meetings hosted by Dennis McDonough, the deputy national security advisor and discussions regarding Libyan support and cooperation. My law enforcement source was quite clear it’s not that the Libyans haven’t been cooperative. There have been discussions that the Libyans were concerned that they themselves couldn’t provide the sort of comprehensive security to protect the FBI team and that there were concerns on the Libyan part about having a U.S. military presence on the ground. 

 

All of that said, Anderson, as you point out, 18 days later after the attack, the FBI today sort of indicated to me through a senior law enforcement official they’re having serious debates as to whether or not with the passage of so much time, whether it makes sense to take the risk at all even if they could have gotten the kind of support early on. Now, what will they gain by going to Benghazi and taking the security risk. They may decide not to go at all. 

 

So just to be clear, we’re not sure at this point where the breakdown occurred in terms of who said, who wouldn’t, I mean, whether it was the Libyans, whether it was or state department, we don’t know where the breakdown occurred. 

 

No, that’s right. And Anderson, it may, could have been something as simple as this sort of when the interagency discussion at the U.S. government writ large decided that if that’s what you’re required for your perimeter security, that indicated itself it was too dangerous and that they shouldn’t be bothered, they shouldn’t go at all. It’s not even clear to us yet whether or not his request was put to the Libyan government.

 

And Fran, you say not only FBI investigators not gone to Benghazi yet, but that some are not even in Libya. 

 

That’s right. Anderson, whenever there’s an international terrorism investigation, there’s a protocol where FBI agents with palletized cargo and equipment pre-deploy in the region to get closer. In this case, that did happen, there were agents in Germany where they conducted interviews of U.S. personnel who were coming out of Libya, and there are also in another country, a third country in the region where they pre-deployed also to be nearby, but many of those still remain in that third country awaiting visas to get into Tripoli.