Pentagon chief says no specific evidence Iran was plotting to attack four U.S. embassies

By Valerie Volcovici

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper speaks about airstrikes by the U.S. military in Iraq and Syria, at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., December 29, 2019. REUTERS/Tom Brenner/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Sunday said he did not see specific evidence from intelligence officials that Iran was planning to attack four U.S. embassies, an assertion made by President Donald Trump in justifying the killing of Iran's top general.

 

While Esper said he agreed with Trump that additional attacks against U.S. embassies were likely, he said on CBS's "Face the Nation" that Trump's remarks to Fox News were not based on specific evidence on an attack on four embassies.

 

"What the president said was that there probably could be additional attacks against embassies. I shared that view," Esper said. "The president didn't cite a specific piece of evidence."

 

When pressed on whether intelligence officers offered concrete evidence on that point he said: "I didn't see one with regards to four embassies."

 

Since confirming that Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani had been killed by a U.S. airstrike in Baghdad, administration officials have claimed they acted because of an imminent risk of attacks on American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region.

 

Democrats and a few Republicans in Congress have questioned the justification of the attacks and said they have not been given adequate, detailed briefings.

 

Trump said on Friday Iran probably had targeted the U.S. embassy in Baghdad and was aiming to attack four U.S. embassies before Soleimani was killed in a U.S. drone strike on Jan. 3.

 

“We will tell you probably it was going to be the embassy in Baghdad,” Trump said in a clip of an interview on Fox News. “I can reveal that I believe it would have been four embassies.”

 

Esper said in a separate interview on CNN's "State of the Union" that the administration had "exquisite intelligence" that a broader attack against multiple embassies was likely but that could only be shared with the "Gang of Eight," a group of top congressional leaders who get briefed on sensitive information that the rest of Congress does not have access to.

 

National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien echoed Esper's comment that the administration had "exquisite intelligence" on NBC's "Meet the Press" that a threat was imminent but did not comment on evidence saying four embassies were targeted.

 

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, a California Democrat and member of the Gang of Eight, said on Sunday that the group was not informed about possible attacks on four embassies.

 

"There was no discussion in the Gang of Eight briefings that these are the four embassies that are being targeted and we have exquisite intelligence that shows these are the specific targets," he said.

 

Republican Senator Mike Lee on Sunday said he was worried about the integrity of information the president and security briefers have provided Congress about Iran.

 

"We were given somewhat general statements, and I believe that the briefers and the president believe they had a basis for concluding there was an imminent attack. I don't doubt that. It is just frustrating to be told that and to not get the details behind it," he said on CNN.

 

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici; Editing by Mary Milliken and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-01-13

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

Not surprised but I am surprised they are admitting it trumps gonna be mad they aren’t covering for him lol 

"...U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Sunday said he did not see specific evidence from intelligence officials that Iran was planning to attack four U.S. embassies, an assertion made by President Donald Trump in justifying the killing of Iran's top general..."

 

It is all happening again, just like 2001-2003. And, the REALLY sad thing is that if you look at FOX "News", it is even the same people making false claims.

 

US officials and the President claiming, without solid evidence, that a country in the Middle East is doing extraordinary things and that military intervention is required.

 

How long will it be until Trump goes on TV to claim that Iran has WMD? The State of the Union speech in early February? When is the "debate" at the UN where Pompeo sits at the Security Council and lies his ass off?

 

How long will it be until US officials argue that "Preemption" is required?

 

I foolishly believed GWB back then; I do not and will not believe Trump now, barring incontrovertible evidence. Sorry USA, your credibility got used up last time and the goodwill you had has evaporated.

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

 

 

Edited January 12, 20206 yr by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

No matter how you feel about Trump, the man has pretty lousy luck in picking his mouthpieces 

maybe the info was misreported, and that there were 4 US people booked on that Flight?

- quickly spirited off the plane before it took off...

brainless people attract brainless people /have a look around trump 

The US Embassy's that have been attacked in the past; there were specific evidence they were going to be attacked? The pentagon chief isn't saying much 

If the US embassies were under such an "imminent" threat, why were they not evacuated? I guess the current administration is okay with US embassy personnel being under attack.

 

Here is the reason given by the White House national security adviser when pressed on why the U.S. did not evacuate its embassies...

 

'We're not going to cut and run': National security adviser on embassy threats

 

Quote

"We're not going to cut and run every time someone threatens us," national security adviser Robert O'Brien said on ABC's "This Week," citing reinforcements to the embassy in Baghdad, which occurred following attempts by protesters to storm the U.S. compound at the end of 2019, but before the U.S. drone attack on Soleimani.

"We're not going to have another Benghazi," he added. "We're not going to have another Tehran embassy takeover where our diplomats are taken hostage."

 

Um, that response makes no sense. The WH administration knows about the "imminent" threat yet doesn't evacuate any embassy and then states they don't want another embassy takeover hostage situation. Huh?

 

Um, if you don't want US embassy personnel taken as hostages, then remove such personnel from the danger zone.

 

What a joke of an administration. They can't even cover up their own lies without sounding like idiots.

 

Edited January 13, 20206 yr by Silurian

Like just about everything else the Don says.....unsubstantiated, facts are boring.

What role does international law played into this killing without justification nor evidence of any direct threats. He has the cheek to hint for Noble Peace Prize. Shameless and nauseating man. 

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

What role does international law played into this killing without justification nor evidence of any direct threats. He has the cheek to hint for Noble Peace Prize. Shameless and nauseating man. 

Well Kissinger, one of the worlds greatest mass murderers, got the prize didnt he?  Trump may still have a chance.

3 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

The US Embassy's that have been attacked in the past; there were specific evidence they were going to be attacked? The pentagon chief isn't saying much 

 

Exactly! Insurgents and terrorists don't formally declare their intentions to attack an embassy, bomb somewhere or whatever before doing it.

 

Solomeni had been orchestrating, funding, equipping and training proxy terrorist groups to carry out Iran's bidding for some time. He played the game and eventually his number came up!

 

 

18 minutes ago, ThaiFelix said:

Well Kissinger, one of the worlds greatest mass murderers, got the prize didnt he?  Trump may still have a chance.

 

Indeed. And Obama got it for .............................. well being Obama!

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

What role does international law played into this killing without justification nor evidence of any direct threats. He has the cheek to hint for Noble Peace Prize. Shameless and nauseating man. 

 

Angela Merkel disagrees with you Eric. She stated the the US were fully, and legally according to international law, within its rights to carry out the attack that killed Solomeni and others.

 

Why don't you tell her that she and her advisers got it wrong? Let us know the response.

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Exactly! Insurgents and terrorists don't formally declare their intentions to attack an embassy, bomb somewhere or whatever before doing it.

 

 

Then why did Trump feel the need to lie about 4 embassies being targeted?

12 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Angela Merkel disagrees with you Eric. She stated the the US were fully, and legally according to international law, within its rights to carry out the attack that killed Solomeni and others.

 

Why don't you tell her that she and her advisers got it wrong? Let us know the response.

Targeting killings without evidence violate international human rights and outside the context of active hostilities, the use of drones or other means for targeted killings are never likely to be legal - UN rapporteur on extra judiciary execution Agnes Callamard.

 

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Then why did Trump feel the need to lie about 4 embassies being targeted?

Because he ALWAYS lies and wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the leg.

 

How many verifiable lies has he told now?

12, 13, 14, 15,xxx in the 3 years at the White House.

If an American Contractor or Soldier was killed that it good enough for me to take out one of the worlds leading Terrorist. Trump executed the lead terrorist for many reasons. Why do you think he made the bad boy list to begin with by Democrates who did not have the balls to take him out? Sometimes doing the right thing is not popular but so many benefits. How easily people forget the harm that has been done by this terrorist. I tell you one thing - If you ever been in the military in arms way (ie.. on the battle field) or had a friend, child, wife, or husband killed by a terrirost in the middle east then you will always be blinded and support terrorist actions. You can't have it both ways.  Also, remember that the past admistration has killed thousands with over 300 hundered drone stikes and have engaged the United States in War with Libya without Congressional Approval. The SECDEF has a hit list of targets which has been in place since President Bush. So, if you open your eyes you will see it is the sickenss of the political parties who can jump back and fourth to create a narrative for thier own sick political agendy... which as it is turning out is money or political power. To stop this we need to audit every politician's financial statement both sides and also after they get out of office. Also, it would be smart to limit term of office in Congress. If you open your eyes everyone who is in Congress or leaves the Presidency earns way more that that office pays them - so lets start to clean house to get politicians who really want to be in office for the American people. 

6 hours ago, Silurian said:

If the US embassies were under such an "imminent" threat, why were they not evacuated? I guess the current administration is okay with US embassy personnel being under attack.

 

Here is the reason given by the White House national security adviser when pressed on why the U.S. did not evacuate its embassies...

 

'We're not going to cut and run': National security adviser on embassy threats

 

 

Um, that response makes no sense. The WH administration knows about the "imminent" threat yet doesn't evacuate any embassy and then states they don't want another embassy takeover hostage situation. Huh?

 

Um, if you don't want US embassy personnel taken as hostages, then remove such personnel from the danger zone.

 

What a joke of an administration. They can't even cover up their own lies without sounding like idiots.

 

Don’t try to trick Trump fans with facts or logic ????

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Angela Merkel disagrees with you Eric. She stated the the US were fully, and legally according to international law, within its rights to carry out the attack that killed Solomeni and others.

 

Why don't you tell her that she and her advisers got it wrong? Let us know the response.

Angela is unavailable for comment. She raced of to Russia to spend the weekend with Putin, to try and come up with a way out of this mess.

 

maga... by forcing your bedfellows into anothers boudouir

Edited January 13, 20206 yr by jany123

IF this is true then it's the textbook definition of an assassination.

6 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Exactly! Insurgents and terrorists don't formally declare their intentions to attack an embassy, bomb somewhere or whatever before doing it.

 

Solomeni had been orchestrating, funding, equipping and training proxy terrorist groups to carry out Iran's bidding for some time. He played the game and eventually his number came up!

 

 

What evidence have you of Iran terrorist groups. Iran is expanding its influence in the Middle East which Israel doesn't like because they themselves want to the top dog in the Middle East. They have been edging on Trump to rein in Iran. Murdering Solomeni was a terrorist act by Trump . There was no justification . How long is this madman Trump[ going to put the whole world at risk .

On 1/13/2020 at 6:04 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

"...U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Sunday said he did not see specific evidence from intelligence officials that Iran was planning to attack four U.S. embassies, an assertion made by President Donald Trump in justifying the killing of Iran's top general..."

 

It is all happening again, just like 2001-2003. And, the REALLY sad thing is that if you look at FOX "News", it is even the same people making false claims.

 

US officials and the President claiming, without solid evidence, that a country in the Middle East is doing extraordinary things and that military intervention is required.

 

How long will it be until Trump goes on TV to claim that Iran has WMD? The State of the Union speech in early February? When is the "debate" at the UN where Pompeo sits at the Security Council and lies his ass off?

 

How long will it be until US officials argue that "Preemption" is required?

 

I foolishly believed GWB back then; I do not and will not believe Trump now, barring incontrovertible evidence. Sorry USA, your credibility got used up last time and the goodwill you had has evaporated.

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

 

 

And I like the way that they think a country that can take out US Airbases will resort to embassey bombing like a hilltribe liberation front.. they really like to peddle the 'terrorist' smear..

 

..and I don't think we'll have to worry about a US pre-emtive war, difference is Iraq in 2003 couldn't kik their butts..

No!

Sheet!

Sherlock!

On 1/13/2020 at 9:38 AM, IAMHERE said:

The US Embassy's that have been attacked in the past; there were specific evidence they were going to be attacked? The pentagon chief isn't saying much 

so good was the specific evidence that they never warned the embassies targeted.

Four? there's gonna be a lot more.

On 1/13/2020 at 11:54 AM, Baerboxer said:

Solomeni had been orchestrating, funding, equipping and training proxy terrorist groups to carry out Iran's bidding for some time. He played the game and eventually his number came up!

 

There's a long list of groups and people around the world who can be said to doing the same kinds of things in support of this or that cause / ideology that's not friendly to the U.S., etc etc...

 

If the U.S. is going to go around assassinating all of them at will, our military's going to be VERY VERY busy. Where to go next, North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Mexico & Canada (in Trump's mind.... )???

 

 

Edited January 14, 20206 yr by TallGuyJohninBKK

Will any of the Trump voters care about those little details?

I am sure Trump will call it fake news.

Anybody who paid even a little attention over the last years does not need more evidence to know that Trump is lying constantly. And he shoots from the hip without much thinking.

 

I understand that most Trump voters won't vote for any of the Democrats, and that is fair enough. But why don't you try to get a decent honest competent president from the party you like?

10 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

But why don't you try to get a decent honest competent president from the party you like?

Decent honest competent people don't get there, isn't that obvious ?

On 1/13/2020 at 6:04 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

"...U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Sunday said he did not see specific evidence from intelligence officials that Iran was planning to attack four U.S. embassies, an assertion made by President Donald Trump in justifying the killing of Iran's top general..."

 

It is all happening again, just like 2001-2003. And, the REALLY sad thing is that if you look at FOX "News", it is even the same people making false claims.

 

US officials and the President claiming, without solid evidence, that a country in the Middle East is doing extraordinary things and that military intervention is required.

 

How long will it be until Trump goes on TV to claim that Iran has WMD? The State of the Union speech in early February? When is the "debate" at the UN where Pompeo sits at the Security Council and lies his ass off?

 

How long will it be until US officials argue that "Preemption" is required?

 

I foolishly believed GWB back then; I do not and will not believe Trump now, barring incontrovertible evidence. Sorry USA, your credibility got used up last time and the goodwill you had has evaporated.

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

 

 

 

 

Shhhh. You want to go to USA jail same Julian?