President Obama's Benghazi lies unravel

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," May 6, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: This week may be the defining week in the Obama presidency as the lies about Benghazi now begin to unfold.

Tonight, evidence is mounting to prove what we have been saying on this program for months, and that is that the Obama White House engaged in a widespread cover-up in the immediate aftermath of the Benghazi terror attack; and they did it all simply to win an election.

Now, there are three breaking developments regarding the investigation into the September 11th assault that took the lives of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Now, this news is emerging in large part thanks to these three men collectively known as the Benghazi whistle-blowers. Each of whom will appear before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.

But as we wait to hear directly from these high ranking State Department officials, details about what they plan to tell lawmakers, well, they are already coming to light.

Let's begin with Mark Thompson, a former marine who currently runs the State Department's counter terrorism bureau. Now, FOox News has confirmed that Mr. Thompson plans to testify that on the night of the Benghazi attack, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to remove our agency's counter terror bureau out of the chain of reporting and decision making. Now, that's the first piece of evidence proving the administration intended from day one to suppress the notion that this was a coordinated terrorist attack.

Now, the second piece of evidence comes to us courtesy of the second highest ranking U.S. official on the night of the attack, now that's Greg Hicks. He's served as a foreign service diplomat for more than 20 years. He says he knew it was an act of terror, quote, "From the get-go." Now, in addition, he says, his jaw hit the floor when he turned on the television and saw Ambassador Susan Rice saying this on one of those five Sunday shows.


SUSAN RICE, UN AMBASSADOR, "MEET THE PRESS"/NBC, SEPT. 16, 2012: Our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what has just transpired hours before in Cairo. Almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video.

RICE, "FOX NEWS SUNDAY"/FNC, SEPT. 16, 2012: This was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. That what happened initially, is it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video.


HANNITY: Not true. Now, let's remember, Susan Rice did not independently decide to appear on those shows nor did she independently come up with the notion that a YouTube video was to blame for Benghazi. Far from it. Because thanks to an investigation conducted by the Weekly Standard, we now have prove that her talking points were developed and edited by top administration officials for days.

Now, let's review the facts. Now we know that on the day of the attack, the State Department Operations Center sent out two alerts. Now, one came just after 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time stating that the consulate was under attack. Now, the other was sent two hours later saying an Al-Qaeda-linked group had already claimed credit for this attack. Now, that was Tuesday, September the 11th. But Rice's talking points weren't sent out until just before 7:00 p.m. on Friday night.

Now, the original draft accurately included references to jihadists, Islamic extremists, experienced fighters and Al Qaeda and details of five recent terror attacks in Benghazi.

But take a look at your screen. On the left, that's draft number two of the talking points. And as you can see, several of the bullet points referencing Al Qaeda were redacted, in other words taken out. And that's how the final version on the right of your screen came to be. It reads in part, quote, "The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protest at the U.S. embassy in Cairo."

And that as we know, was a complete and utter lie.

Now, there are three main things here. Number one, why were repeated requests before the attacks denied? They knew that they were in trouble.

Number two, during the attack why were rescue troops told to stand down? We need answers to that. And why did the president, why did he go to sleep that night without asking about the ambassador, asking about the embassy, and why did he decide to go campaigning the next day?

Also number three, who is responsible for the outright lies after the attack and the cover-up? Now remember, Watergate was about lying and covering up. By the way, in that case, nobody died in Watergate.

Here to talk about these developments, two men who will be on hand for the whistle-blowers' testimony on Wednesday, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Congressman Darrell Issa, along with the member of that committee from Utah, Congressman Jason Chaffetz.

Gentlemen, welcome back to "Hannity."



HANNITY: All right. Congressman Issa, we've been through this. Both of you have been very generous of your time as we've been trying to get answers to all of this. Although, Jay Carney says, "Oh, that's eight months ago." Hillary, "What difference does it make?"

Let's start at the beginning. Requests for a security were denied, Congressman Issa. Why?

ISSA: Well, on October 10th we made the case that it was denied and at that time, people closely associated with these clear professionals really believed that it was based on this concept of normalization. In other words, pretend like Libya was safe and the war on terror was behind us. We still believe that's probably the genesis of so much of the cover-up, if you will, that occurred immediately following it. But you said very well in your intro, there was a campaign going on, there was a president trying to win re-election, and the changes were made at a very high level.

HANNITY: All right. And Congressman Chaffetz, there was -- we now have discovered through testimony, Greg Hicks among others that there was a C-130 ready to bring reinforcements during the attack to help those that were under fire and they were ordered to stand down?

CHAFFETZ: The administration including Secretary Panetta were very crystal clear, there were no military assets, but I got to tell you, we had proximity, we had capability, we had four individuals in Libya armed, ready to go, dressed, about to get into the car to go in the airport to go help their fellow countrymen who were dying and being killed and under attack in Benghazi and they were told to stand down.

And Sean, of all the things I've seen, that's as sickening and depressing and disgusting as anything I have seen. That is not the American way. We had people that were getting killed, we had people who are willing to risk their lives to go save them and somebody told them to stand down.

HANNITY: But we confirmed, that C-130 was on the tarmac, we had people ready to get on the plane willing to say that?

CHAFFETZ: It left without them.

HANNITY: Who gave the order?

CHAFFETZ: Well, that's what we got to still get some more information about. I think, this is what we anticipate on Wednesday at the hearing. We're going to have people who were on the ground there in Libya that will talk directly to this.

HANNITY: All right. Let me show both of you a series of statements that were made about the Benghazi attacks and the YouTube video and I want juxtapose this to what we know, that the original talking points were correct. They've mentioned Al Qaeda. They mentioned that this was terror. And by the time that Susan Rice went on those Sunday shows by Friday, they had all been changed, altered, redacted.

But let's listen to the administration tell what we now know was a lie and that the Libyan president said was a lie, but yet they still went out with this message to the American people. Let's remind people what they were saying.


HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE, SEPT. 12, 2012: Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN, SEPT. 18, 2012: We can all condemn this reprehensible video.

JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY, SEPT. 19, 2012: We find the video that has been so offensive to Muslims to be disgusting and reprehensible.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, SEPT. 20, 2012: Although we had nothing to do with the video, we find it offensive. It's not representative of America's views.

OBAMA, SEPT. 25, 2012: The crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video.


HANNITY: Congressman Issa, that's two weeks after. Now I don't want to laugh, and Gregory Hicks is saying they knew from the get-go. And yet this witness -- you were denied access to these witnesses. Were those statements concerted lies, in your opinion?

ISSA: Well, I think not only were they untrue and no one to be untrue, but these brave individuals, particularly Gregory Hicks, coming forward, putting his career on the line to say I told them this was an attack, I tried to tell them consistently, he even talks in his testimony about calling the State Department and saying that what Susan Rice said, couldn't have been true. How did they do it? And he said that his -- his statements were unwanted. And that ever since then it's been even harder on him.

This is the kind of thing that you see and you don't believe, you don't believe the denials, the delays, and then the outright counter attack. You understand the administration, including Jay Carney is on the attack trying to claim that these whistle-blowers somehow are just disgruntled or lying. This kind of attack is what we expect. It's one of the reasons that the whistleblowers laws are in effect, is to prevent the kind of things that are going on with these brave men.

HANNITY: Let me ask both of you then this question. These terrorists' attacks happened just two months before the presidential election. Is it your belief and will the evidence show this week that the American people were purposely lied to, so that this would not have an impact, that they were covering up the scandal to win this election?

Congressman Chaffetz?

CHAFFETZ: I think it's clear, but for the committee, except for Darrell Issa and myself and the committee, Trey Gowdy and others --

HANNITY: Fox News.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, Fox News, James Lankford, others tenaciously, we would still be led to believe by this administration that there was a video, that there is nothing wrong there, that the military did everything they could, that they didn't tell anybody to stand down. I mean, all of these things are uncovered by Congress and pushing them to reveal the truth and they still perpetuate these mistruths.

HANNITY: Congressman Issa, did they cover-up this to win an election?

ISSA: It was part of a pattern that began before the attack of denying that there was a real threat and then denying that there was been a real attack and that's what we need to get answers directly from people who were there like we will on Wednesday.

Content and Programming Copyright 2013 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2013 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.