A number of current and former U.S. officials, and Middle East experts, have said the Istanbul operation would not have been launched without the knowledge and approval of the powerful crown prince, who is the son of King Salman and is considered Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler.

Many in Congress and the media are not satisfied with the sanctions response: Sen. Tim Kaine said:

“I am disturbed that following repeated Saudi lies about what happened to Jamal, the administration appears to be following the Saudi playbook of blaming mid-level officials and exonerating its leadership,”

Sen. Rand Paul tweeted “We are pretending to do something and doing NOTHING,”

The publisher of the Washington Post, Fred Ryan, issued this statement:

“In announcing actions against ‘those responsible’ for Jamal Khashoggi’s murder, the Saudi and U.S. governments are asking the world to take their word for it that this settles the matter. From the start, the Saudi ‘investigation’ has been an effort to shield those ultimately responsible for this heinous crime when there is every reason to believe that it was authorized at the highest levels of the Saudi government.”

So the Saudis seem to be saying this was the equivalent of a capture (by consent) or kill mission. What belies that is the fact that Khashoggi was planning on getting married to a woman from Turkey the next day - he only went to the embassy to get a document saying he was free to marry. Why would anyone think he would voluntarily agree to abandon his fiancee and marriage plans to return to Saudi Arabia? If the "capture (with consent)" part is removed from the equation, then this was but one thing: A kill mission.