ABC News: Emails Show White House LIED About Benghazi Story "Revisions"

Well, since the media seems OK with editing out content they don't deem favorable to Obama or Hillary, It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. But I'm not optimist they'll "honestly" report this. They haven't so far. Why would they change now?

 

IF the progressive Fourth Estate ever gets around to really sinking their teeth into this laughably corrupt affair...their mia culpa will include claims they were "duped"

just as progressive elites and their devout sycophants fallaciously claimed they were "duped" into supporting Bush's wars...

to wit, all will be forgiven and soon forgotten.



their salaciously exploited "victim / oppressor" dichotomy will reveal itself. don't doubt me.

 

OK, so where's the cover up?

The facts didn't change.

Ansar Al Sharia was not responsible for the attack.

The information about the other attacks prior to this one were available to anyone who could read a newspaper (although largely outside the US, since Americans don't seem to be interested in world news unless there is a domestic agenda to be served).

The fact that Ansar Al Sharia was first identified by the Libyan government was also reported.

Its hard to cover up what's already out there on the news.

 

Tom, I showed you several videos in the other thread were the admin blamed the videotape for causing protests leading to the Benghazi attack indirectly and directly. That is the cover up.

There were no protests and they knew it that night. I'm waiting for the drone video footage myself.

 

I have an idea. Why not READ THE OP?

When it became clear last fall that the CIA's now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.


White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carneysaid about the talking points in November.

"Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC's best assessments of what they thought had happened," Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012. "The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word 'consulate' to 'diplomatic facility' because 'consulate' was inaccurate."


Summaries of White House and State Department emails - some of which were first published by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard - show that the State Department had extensive input into the editing of the talking points.











See the GLARING lies? Probably not,as your vision is clearly impaired.

Hurry back and bring up "Iraq".

 

How about this truth? Probably around the time Obama was putting his suit on to go watch Beyonce, our Ambassador to Libya was probably getting raped and beaten. How is this ok to everyone that we have a leader who is not capable of protecting us in this war torn world?

 

How about having an admnistration whose OWN SUPPORTORS now just accept the LIES FROM, as a "regular way of doing things"?


NIXON RESIGNED for LESS.

 

Trivia question: Which group of people routinely displays a higher level of integrity, responsibility, and national concern?

(1) Democrats
or
(2) Tweakers​

Methhead tweaker or Democrat voter listening to Obama-voices???

 

Right. Its the "what does it matter" now crowd.

 

As we are learning, our worst fears about the Left are realized....they will accept ANY LEVEL of GLARING CORRUPTION, as long as the Agenda is served.

 

Rules for Fraudocrats
Rule 1 - The end justifies the means.
Rule 2 - No matter what, we're always right. [Corollary: We're better than everyone else.]
Rule 3 - George W. Bush did it.

 

Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday will have a detailed program on this Obama bull(*)(*)(*)(*) lies. Democrats are a pathetic bunch of lying pieces of (*)(*)(*)(*), and hopefully there may emerge a few who can honestly say, what the (*)(*)(*)(*) was Obama thinking? If he would and the rest of his minions would have came right out and say we made errors and we need to fix them, this would have gone away, but no, he chose to lie his ass off.

 

I think you have summarized quite accurately.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm curious at to what the other Talking Heads will cover...or not.

 

Somehow I doubt that you asked that question of George W Bush on 9/12.

I did not.

There is no cover up. No evidence. The Adminstration cited the video because the video had caused riots all over the Middle East.

GOP Congressmen in Issa's hearing on Wednesday kept citing the fact that the Administration did not cite the Libyan government's terrorist claim from the start. That claim turned out to be wrong.

That's your cover up?????

Or , is it you new Vince Foster conspiracly theory. (When Jerome Corsi writes a book about it and hawks it on Noisemax, I'll have my answer).

 

Who ordered the talking points?

Who order the military response to stand down?

Why did it take the FBI 21 days to investigate?

Come on Tommy, answer these questions, I know the truth may hurt, but man up and open your selective ears.

 

I think I'll leave you all to your circle jerk!

 

Nice dodge Tommy, this isn't about George Bush, now man up

 

Almost all the Bush hating lib thundering herd accused Bush of dereliction of duty on 9/12.

But now they want to change the rules of the game for their side.

 

Ooh, the funky chicken dance. Bub bye Tommy, come back when you can answer these questions, fair minded Americans want to know

 

I found it interesting that it was ABC news that came out with this intriguing story; an organization who previously seemed to be flinching from any examination of Benghazigate in horror. Does this mean the mainstream soft liberal media are finally smelling blood in the water and want to join the feeding?

 

Total BULLCRAP. Try the ALREADY KNOWN FACTS:

The Adm. knew that the attack had nothing to do with the "video", BEFORE they ever released that INITIAL LIE;

They also knew that the CIA intell told a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STORY..which the Obama White House and State Dept. BOTH lied about;

They lied CONTINUOUSLY about the now, PROVEN by EMAILS,and STATE DEPT. CABLES, the REPEATED REQUESTS for more security in Benghazi;

The Sec. of State LIED UNDER OATH about just that as well;

They LIED about who sent Rice out with her Liespeak Campaign on FIVE DIFFERENT news shows;

They continue to LIE now.


"No coverup"? Good grief...

- - - Updated - - -

Hopefully...then, maybe, they can claim some semblance of journalistic integrity.

 

We can only hope there are actual journalists out there instead of cheerleaders for Obama

 

Trouble is, the administration was still sighting the video with Rice, weeks after they knew it wasn't the cause. ,

 

What a load of Fitz.I mean,like ... Plop Plop Fitz Fitz Oh what a relief it is
to know how informed you ain't.Now go back on the crapper and bore the sh!t out of a
restroom stall.

 

Aw, Tom.

Don't go away mad.

Just go away.