WH: Benghazi talking-point changes? Don’t look at us…

posted at 6:31 pm on November 18, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Friday’s reports of David Petraeus’ closed-door testimony concerning the 9/11/12 attack in Benghazi suggested that the intelligence community just about immediately determined the distinct possibility of terrorist involvement, but that for some as-yet unknown reason, that likelihood was expunged from the final talking points circulated through the Obama administration — the first-glance implication of which is that somebody high up the line somewhere intentionally omitted that pesky little detail.

But on Saturday, the White House threw some cold water on that hypothesis, claiming that they made only minor adjustments to the talking points with which they prepped Susan Rice prior to her now-infamous round of Sunday talk show appearances, in which she stuck to the narrative of spontaneous protests sparked by outrage over a video. Via the Weekly Standard:

 Now, in terms of — I think the focus of this has often been on the public statements that were made by Susan Rice and other administration officials in that first week after the attack.  Those were informed by unclassified talking points that we — that were provided to the Congress and to the interagency — the rest of the administration by the intelligence community. …

What we also said yesterday, though — because this question came up as to whether the White House had edited Susan Rice’s points and the points that were provided to Congress and the administration — the only edit that was made to those points by the White House, and was also made by the State Department, was to change the word “consulate” to “diplomatic facility” since the facility in Benghazi had not — was not formally a consulate.  Other than that, we worked off of the points that were provided by the intelligence community.  So I can’t speak to any other edits that may have been made within the intelligence community.

Hmm — ’cause why on earth would the White House have done such a thing in the first place, anyways? …John McCain said what we’re all thinking on Sunday, via NJ:

Sen. John McCain continued his criticism of the Obama administration’s handling of a deadly attack on the American Embassy in Benghazi, suggesting the president mislead the American public on the attack to support his story that al-Qaida’s influence is diminishing in the middle east.

“The narrative of the president is ‘I got Bin Laden, and al-Qaida is in the run,’ but al-Qaida is not on the run, and is making a strong comeback all over the Middle East,” McCain said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “This may interfere with that narrative.”

Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Dianne Feinstein, on the other hand, expressed confidence that the high-ups in the White House in fact weren’t behind pushing a wedge between the intelligence and the talking points. She did say that Congress still plans to investigate the matter to figure out where the disconnect did go down — because it’s pretty evident that somebody somewhere messed up bigtime. Via the NYT:

The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Sunday that she planned to investigate why the C.I.A.’s quick determination of a terrorist role in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, was not reflected in the “talking points” used days later on television by Susan E. Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations. …

She said a transcript of testimony given a day after the attack by David H. Petraeus, who was then director of the C.I.A., showed that “Petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack.”

But asked whether President Obama or anyone working for him had deliberately misled the public by characterizing the attack as resulting from a spontaneous protest – to avoid invoking a terrorist threat at a key point in the presidential campaign – she was adamant, saying, “No, no.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…just don’t look!

KOOLAID2 on November 18, 2012 at 6:36 PM

If NOT the White (BISHOP!) House, then who?

Khun Joe on November 18, 2012 at 6:36 PM

She said a transcript of testimony given a day after the attack by David H. Petraeus, who was then director of the C.I.A., showed that “Petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack.”

But asked whether President Obama or anyone working for him had deliberately misled the public by characterizing the attack as resulting from a spontaneous protest – to avoid invoking a terrorist threat at a key point in the presidential campaign – she was adamant, saying, “No, no.”

…Bush did it!

KOOLAID2 on November 18, 2012 at 6:37 PM

My BS meter just blew up. This bunch is unbelivable. How long are they going to try and BS us to death???? McCain has it correct. Plus, why is not the question as to what happened to the order of using everything to help the troops. either jugears gave it and it was not followed or jugears did not give it[most likely he gave the standown orders] and just watched them get killed/murdered and then went to bed figuring all his secrets were safe. Make me vomit.

retiredeagle on November 18, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Be prepared. The distractions thrown by this lying, incompetent administration will be coming more frequently the closer we get to the truth. They are evil, and rotten to the core.

sgtstogie on November 18, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Then why did they not correct her statement after spewing that lie five times on Sunday morning?

fbcmusicman on November 18, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I would bet good money on this: the lady who appears on O’Reilly who reads body language would be all over Rice for lying. Just watch Rice’s eyes each time she says it was a video which caused this debacle. Lying through her whitened teeth.

Meh!

herm2416 on November 18, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Keep digging that hole, till republicans reach pay gravel. The real question is not whether and how the Obama admin lied and let Americans die, but whether the GOP will actually do anything about it once they uncover the truth.

They went through all that trouble to expose Holder, find him in contempt, then basically did nothing (as usual).

Meanwhile, Obama says “So what, who cares, I won! We have the media on our side and you’ll never do anything about it anyway.” Sadly, he’s probably right.

BruthaMan on November 18, 2012 at 6:42 PM

If NOT the White (BISHOP!) House, then who?

Khun Joe on November 18, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Mr Potato Head or Mr. Green?

arnold ziffel on November 18, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Same lies, different day. Nothing new to see here, move along.

Philly on November 18, 2012 at 6:45 PM

This is an administration that has had four years of messianic worship by the corrupt legacy media. Who will stop them?

d1carter on November 18, 2012 at 6:47 PM

she was adamant, saying, “No, no.”

Then a cow is smarter than Sen. Feinstein, or she’s a Liar.

The people of CA deserve their ‘leadership’ in full.

Schadenfreude on November 18, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Forget the “talking points”…

… It’s a distraction.


“This was in the middle of the business day in Washington, so everybody at the White House, CIA, Pentagon, everybody was watching this go down,” Shaffer said on Fox News’ “Justice with Judge Jeanine.” “According to my sources, yes, [Obama] was one of those in the White House Situation Room in real-time watching this.”

Oblahblah has stated that “Once I found out, I gave orders to protect our people!”…

So what were those orders?

Who did you tell them to?

They eventually would have to have been written down, where are they?

Why were three calls for help turned down?

Why over the course of seven hours, regardless of who was attacking the Americans, were no resources offered to help?

Where is General Ham and what does he have to say about all of this?

Where are the other survivors that were flown out on two planes?

No, Oblahblah…

… This is not going away.

Seven Percent Solution on November 18, 2012 at 6:48 PM

This is gonna get ugly as it plays out…

Del Dolemonte on November 18, 2012 at 6:50 PM

We are being overwhelmed with lies and scandals. Problem is we have a House full of Republicans but not a single spine or pair of testicles among them. Do you think the democrats would have been silent had something like this occurred during the Bush administration? We already know the answer to that, the dems gen’d up scandal after scandal when there was no wrongdoing.

Of course when the dems own the media, it makes getting the message out more difficult.

AZfederalist on November 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Susan Rice was a puppet or a mule, if I might use the language of the drug cartel who deploy relatively innocents to smuggle their product, used by this administration to push a lie they wanted us to believe knowing all the while that she would have more credibility than anyone else they could shove out there. I believe that she truly didn’t know that it was a terrorist attack so she would seem legit. Then, when the rest of those who went out and blamed it on the video, they would seem credible.

How soon we seem to have forgotten that we spent $75,000 to air a commercial starring Obam and H. Clinton condemning that same video. And, I might add, the producer of that video is behind bars for an unrelated charge.

PA-Cman on November 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Feinstein will attempt to cover Obama’s butt at all costs. Believe nothing she says.

rplat on November 18, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Of course when the dems own the media, it makes getting the message out more difficult.

AZfederalist on November 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Almost impossible actually.

sentinelrules on November 18, 2012 at 6:55 PM

They lied and everyone knows it. Can we please get to the part of the investigation where they explain why we left our guys to die while they were begging for help?

Or how about the part where they had bunches of attacks and warnings leading up to 9/11 but never fortified the mission? Was that a State Department failure or a CIA failure?

I am so tired of all the posturing. Have the hearings in public so that we can all see and hear the negligence and incompetence in our Federal government.

Common Sense on November 18, 2012 at 6:56 PM

The Republicans need to find something better than constantly sending out Frick and Frack (McCain and Graham) to make their case. I’m not sure anybody even takes those two seriously anymore.

rplat on November 18, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The first clue that this was all BS was that Rice was the face of the whole thing. The UN Amb has absolutely nothing to do with embassises, consulates, etc. She reports directly to jugears,,not hillary or the intel agencies. She was not spokesperson for that subject.

retiredeagle on November 18, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Well maybe this why dp has a high power lawyer so when he goes before hearings, the 5th?

Me thinks this go by the way side as F&F, stall, stall, ingore dc and stall some more?
L

letget on November 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM

She said a transcript…showed that “Petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack.”

But asked whether President Obama or anyone working for him had deliberately misled the public …she was adamant, saying, “No, no.”

Good to see Dear Di is going to conduct an “investigation”. And without any testimony has already eliminated several possible conclusions. Life sure is easy when you walk around with your head up your ass.

GarandFan on November 18, 2012 at 7:01 PM

The back pedaling, smoke blowing, and tap dancing is getting so bad that you could not make a movie of this,,it would not even be believable or funny as a comedy.

retiredeagle on November 18, 2012 at 7:02 PM

The back pedaling, smoke blowing, and tap dancing is getting so bad that you could not make a movie of this,,it would not even be believable or funny as a comedy.

retiredeagle on November 18, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Isn’t that the truth.

Someone have some intestinal fortitude – step forward – and tell the freaking truth.

Good Lord.

gophergirl on November 18, 2012 at 7:06 PM

O/T,
Well it seems that FL recount stalled long enough to go past the recount time and West lost! Can’t get the ballots recounted on time so as to see if/if not West won? Sorry for any here from FL, nothing personal, but this stinks!
L

letget on November 18, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Dick Cheney did it from a building across the street using some binoculars and a joystick.

Mimzey on November 18, 2012 at 7:09 PM

letget on November 18, 2012 at 7:06 PM

So they could count them in a couple days…but couldn’t recount them in a week?

How close did they get?

Mimzey on November 18, 2012 at 7:12 PM

LIAR!

ot: really despising cnn right now….they have wolfie and anderson in gaza but no one reporting from israel…its all about the poor palistinians…

forget about those evil israelis..

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Feinstein will attempt to cover Obama’s butt at all costs. Believe nothing she says.

rplat on November 18, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Feinstein is a “true progressive”- the Cause is everything, and anything else can go to the devil.

As for the rest of them, we see once more that the old Sicilian mob had nothing on the Obama mob in the omerta department.

If Nixon’s minions had been as eager to lie for him as this bunch is for The One, “Watergate” would still be just the name of a fancy hotel in Washington DC.

clear ether

eon

eon on November 18, 2012 at 7:14 PM

The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Sunday that she planned to investigate why the C.I.A.’s quick determination of a terrorist role in the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, was not reflected in the “talking points” used days later on television by Susan E. Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations. …

She said a transcript of testimony given a day after the attack by David H. Petraeus, who was then director of the C.I.A., showed that “Petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack.”

But asked whether President Obama or anyone working for him had deliberately misled the public by characterizing the attack as resulting from a spontaneous protest – to avoid invoking a terrorist threat at a key point in the presidential campaign – she was adamant, saying, “No, no.”

One of the big problems with pinheads like Feinstein is that they go into sich an investigation having already decided some things are not going to be the outcome.

MikeA on November 18, 2012 at 7:15 PM

ot: really despising cnn right now….they have wolfie and anderson in gaza but no one reporting from israel…its all about the poor palistinians…

forget about those evil israelis..

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Somebody needs to tell these tolerant Palestinians that Anderson Cooper is a homo.

sentinelrules on November 18, 2012 at 7:15 PM

and the israelis really think they are going to get their message out with the lsm we have….
israelis=gop in their eyes

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:15 PM

difi is on drugs…everything this administration does is political…cripe…lsm just covering up for them and difi is doing her part

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Nobody in here but us chickens redactors!

profitsbeard on November 18, 2012 at 7:16 PM

But Obama told me the buck stops with him! You don’t think he was… LYING just to get elected, do you?

CanofSand on November 18, 2012 at 7:17 PM

sentinelrules on November 18, 2012 at 7:15 PM

cripe…

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Mimzey on November 18, 2012 at 7:12 PM

This is per Fox on your question. I really don’t know if anything is true?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/18/recount-in-west-race-continues-into-sunday/
L

letget on November 18, 2012 at 7:18 PM

still no one calls out that dear leader boasts it was a terrorist attack during the 2nd debate…and now blames cia for the faulty messaging…

where are the real journalists..

ok, i’ve got to step away…the blood pressure can’t take much more of this crapola that this adminstration is getting away with…

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:19 PM

where are the real journalists..

cmsinaz on November 18, 2012 at 7:19 PM

BWAAAHAAAHHAAAA!!!!

Thanks for the bellylaugh.

I needed that!

profitsbeard on November 18, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Valerie Jarrett. It’s simple really. This is a Chicago operation after all.

bs4948800 on November 18, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Of course when the dems own the media, it makes getting the message out more difficult.

AZfederalist on November 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Almost impossible actually.

sentinelrules on November 18, 2012 at 6:55 PM

…how do we go after the media?

KOOLAID2 on November 18, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Forget the “talking points”…

… It’s a distraction.

“This was in the middle of the business day in Washington, so everybody at the White House, CIA, Pentagon, everybody was watching this go down,” Shaffer said on Fox News’ “Justice with Judge Jeanine.” “According to my sources, yes, [Obama] was one of those in the White House Situation Room in real-time watching this.”

O has stated that “Once I found out, I gave orders to protect our people!”…

So what were those orders?

Who did you tell them to?

They eventually would have to have been written down, where are they?

Why were three calls for help turned down?

Why over the course of seven hours, regardless of who was attacking the Americans, were no resources offered to help?

Where is General Ham and what does he have to say about all of this?

Where are the other survivors
that were flown out on two planes?

… This is not going away.

Seven Percent Solution on November 18, 2012 at 6:48 PM

This^^^^^^^^

ted c on November 18, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I’m not sure anybody even takes those two seriously anymore.

rplat on November 18, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Do we? Why should anybody else? On the other hand, those are two of the democrat main stream media’s (but I repeat myself) best Republican buds, so maybe they do serve some use. After all, if the moderate Republicans are saying something is wrong, the low information voters might start thinking that something is really wrong.

We’ve got to use the coverup as the start and then start pushing who told the armed forces to stand down, or worse, who failed to alert the armed forces who could have saved those people. That’s where the real scandal is.

AZfederalist on November 18, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I think it is just sweet of them to cover for Bush this way.

katy the mean old lady on November 18, 2012 at 7:31 PM

You know, it’s all well and good to find out just why Team Obama went with the dumb talking points, but, really, Congressional Republicans need to move on and focus on the more important issues of why security was denied prior to the attack and why no one was sent to rescue the Americans during the attack, including who gave stand down orders, the latter being even more important.

William Teach on November 18, 2012 at 7:31 PM

She [Feinstein] said a transcript of testimony given a day after the attack by David H. Petraeus, who was then director of the C.I.A., showed that “Petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack.”

Why didn’t Petraeus immediately call a press conference immediately upon first hearing the false talking point perpetrated by the Administration — that the cause was a spontaneous protest caused by a youtube video — and set the record straight?

Oh, I guess that would have required putting love of country, the soldiers who’d served under him, the personnel then serving under him, the American people, and the truth above his job and “loyalty” to satan incarnate …

ShainS on November 18, 2012 at 7:36 PM

…how do we go after the media?

KOOLAID2 on November 18, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Starve the Beast, bankrupt them, take them over, change from the inside, target their investors….all of these.

We can’t have another fatty like Candy Crowley cheer leading for a Democrat 4 years from now.

sentinelrules on November 18, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Where are the other survivors that were flown out on two planes?

Seven Percent Solution on November 18, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Good question.

Ugly on November 18, 2012 at 7:44 PM

The CIA says what they sent over was changed by someone but the White House denies they changed the information they received from the “intelligence community”.

The noise you hear is the old White House bus cranking up again and if I am not mistaken it has James Clapper’s name on it.

Nomas on November 18, 2012 at 7:48 PM

…how do we go after the media?

KOOLAID2 on November 18, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Keep these handy when you find yourself with some extra time on your hands…

Let’s keep the pressure on.

NBC Phone: 212-664-3720

ABC Phone: 212-456-7777

CBS Phone: (212) 975-3247

CNN Phone: (404)827-1500

On Twitter

@ABCWorldNews – Host @DianeSawyer

@CBSEveningNews – Host @ScottPelley

@nbcnightlynews – Host @bwilliams

@CNNSitroom – Host @wolfblitzer

Morning Shows

@GMA – Host @GStephanopoulos @RobinRoberts

@EarlyStartCNN – Host @johnsberman

@Morning_Joe – Hosts @JoeNBC @morningmika

@StartingPtCNN – Host @Soledad_OBrien

@todayshow – Hosts @MLauer @SavannahGuthrie

@CBSThisMorning – Hosts @NorahODonnell @charlierose @GayleKing

Flora Duh on November 1, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Seven Percent Solution on November 18, 2012 at 7:50 PM

We all know the truth. The stand down order was given. You could tell on Obama’s and Hillary’s faces when those bodies came back from Libya. They knew that what happened was going to be questioned and they continued to lie.

The $64,000 question is why. Of course it is a foreign policy failure, but it that the only reason?

BetseyRoss on November 18, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Does anyone outside of the conservative blogs really care about this? I care deeply, but it doesn’t seem like the general public cares at all.

earlgrey133 on November 18, 2012 at 7:59 PM

My dog ate my homework. Then he peed on it. What homework? Who? Where? Huh?

Someone gives a speech, heard by millions, over and over again, and no one knows who wrote it?

Paul-Cincy on November 18, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Does anyone outside of the conservative blogs really care about this? I care deeply, but it doesn’t seem like the general public cares at all.

earlgrey133 on November 18, 2012 at 7:59 PM

Over 5000 Americans have died in Iraq & Afghanistan. Another four that died at the hands of terrorists in that part of the world is not something new. It took a week or two before an accurate picture of the event surfaced – not a big scandal. The scandal surrounding the death of the great American Pat Tillman was a much bigger scandal. What the Bush administration, military, and John McCain did to that hero was shameful.

ZippyZ on November 18, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Did Feinstein go to the Pelosi school of incoherence? Eliana Johnson reports at “The Corner” with a direct quotation from Feinstein:

If that (the squib headline) sounds like a non sequitur, you’d be right. But that’s precisely what Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein told David Gregory earlier today on NBC’s Meet the Press. Asked whether Director Petraeus’s testimony on the Benghazi attack has remained consistent – he has now testified twice – Feinstein said:

We have a transcript of that meeting on that day and Petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack and outlined who he thought might be involved in it…that’s the day after the attack, I think there’s no question about it. What has concerned me about this is really the politicization of a public statement that was put out by the entire intelligence committee [sic], which Susan Rice, on the 16th, was asked to go before the people and use that statement, did. I have read every one of the five statements she did that day. She was within the context of that statement, and for this, she has been pilloried for two months. I don’t understand it, it has to stop. If it continues, it’s going to set up, once again, a partisan divide in the House and the Senate, which Congressman Rogers and I have tried to overcome with some success with respect to the intelligence committee.

So, if Petraeus said it was terrorism, everybody should stop attacking Susan Rice for saying it was the video? As Senator Feinstein might say, “I don’t understand it, it has to stop.”

onlineanalyst on November 18, 2012 at 8:14 PM

I bet it was David “Baghdad Bob” Axlerod…….. after all, he IS included in the security briefings because obumble doesn’t care enough to attend.

ultracon on November 18, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Graham wasn’t pulling any punches though, as reported by NRO’s Eliana Johnson:

In his appearance this morning on Meet the Press, Lindsey Graham said Susan Rice is nothing but a “bit player” in the Benghazi scandal, and proceeded to heap blame on the intelligence community, the State and Defense Departments, and, ultimately, the president, for allowing our consulate there to become a “death trap.” He called for a select committee to look into the intelligence failures that led to the attack. Prompted by David Gregory, Senator Graham delivered quite a soliloquy:

What about the months before this attack? What about the rise of Al-Qaeda in Benghazi? What about the British ambassador closing the consulate in Benghazi because it was too dangerous for the British? What about the Red Cross leaving? What about all the warnings to come out of Benghazi? Did the CIA tell president that Benghazi is falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda? And I blame the president more than anybody else. Susan Rice is a bit player here. Was he informed of the June attack on our consulate where they blew a hole where over 40 people could go through? Was he aware of the August 15th cable where Stevens was saying we can’t withstand a coordinated al-Qaeda attack, there are ten militia groups all over Benghazi? I blame the president for making this a death trap. I blame the president for not having assets available to help these people for eight hours. We need a select committee not only to look at intelligence failures, but how could the Department of Defense not help these poor people for over eight hours, and why did the Department of State for over eight months ignore pleas for help?

onlineanalyst on November 18, 2012 at 8:21 PM

We are being overwhelmed with lies and scandals. Problem is we have a House full of Republicans but not a single spine or pair of testicles among them. Do you think the democrats would have been silent had something like this occurred during the Bush administration? We already know the answer to that, the dems gen’d up scandal after scandal when there was no wrongdoing.

Of course when the dems own the media, it makes getting the message out more difficult.

AZfederalist on November 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Ever hear of Trey Gowdy from SC?

Rep. Trey Gowdy Explodes At Libya Hearing: ‘I Want To Know Why We Were Lied To’

Flora Duh on November 18, 2012 at 8:21 PM

onlineanalyst on November 18, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Feinstein’s talking out of both sides of her mouth.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, said on NBC, “I don’t know who we were protecting” by removing references to terrorism from the talking points.

“I do know that the answer given to us is we didn’t want to name a group until we had some certainty,” Feinstein, a Democrat, continued. “Well, where this went awry is, anybody that brings weapons and mortars and RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades) and breaks into an asset of the United States is a terrorist in my view.”

Flora Duh on November 18, 2012 at 8:28 PM

This whole deal was a two-fer. We get to make an attack on Free Speech and cover up a failed policyin the mideast[not to mention gun running to rebels for Syria. I guess that makes it a three-fer.

retiredeagle on November 18, 2012 at 8:28 PM

This is all about muddying the waters until people are tired and start blaming republicans for being partisan. AND they will.

tomas on November 18, 2012 at 8:30 PM

That is what I am thinking too.

earlgrey133 on November 18, 2012 at 8:40 PM

OK, so they lied.
But why? If the attack ruined their narrative that AQ was on the run – is that really worthy of a cover-up? I think we’d all agree that it’s not. In fact, with our complicit media, it would be water under the bridge in no time at all. So what are they hiding? Why was Ambassador Stevens in such a vulnerable location on September 11th? Why did earlier requests for security get turned down? Why wasn’t there any action taken that night to provide assistance? Why were orders issued to stand-down and not assist? Things just don’t add up.

Hill60 on November 18, 2012 at 8:41 PM

… This is not going away.

Seven Percent Solution on November 18, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Oh, yes, it will. Heard about Fast & Furious lately?

Boehner is more concerned about his tan. Otherwise, anyone with at least one ball would have already dealt with both F&F and Benghazi by shutting down the government until we get to the bottom of “he said, she said”. And the press would be forced to cover why the government is shut down.

riddick on November 18, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Over 5000 Americans have died in Iraq & Afghanistan. Another four that died at the hands of terrorists in that part of the world is not something new. It took a week or two before an accurate picture of the event surfaced – not a big scandal. The scandal surrounding the death of the great American Pat Tillman was a much bigger scandal. What the Bush administration, military, and John McCain did to that hero was shameful.

ZippyZ on November 18, 2012 at 8:14 PM

First, Libya is in Africa.

Second, Intervention in Libya was pursued by Obama not Bush.

You have to really give up a lot of brain cells to try to tie the Libyan catastrophe to Afghanistan (not located on African continent) and Iraq (not located on African continent).

Basically what you did is just throw up a laundry list that has been dragged through the media endlessly to deftlect away from a dead ambassador who may very well have been abandoned by our President.

Liberal idealogy is one thing, but completely abandoning humanity and independent thinking for the likes of Barack Obama is just sad.

earlgrey133 on November 18, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Why hasn’t Susan Rice been subpoenaed to testify before the Committee investigating this thing? Wouldn’t it be nice to see Trey Gowdy and Peter King question her under oath? I’m sure she could clear all this up. Either that, or she’s going to come up with lies that are even more ridiculous than what we’ve already been told. Put Rice under oath!!

I still have a lot of leftover popcorn to pop.

Harbingeing on November 18, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Just buy ammo. As much as you can get.

wolly4321 on November 18, 2012 at 8:54 PM

This is more than pathetic.

Are there no grown-ups in this administration ?

State, Defense are part of this administration. If Obama can’t control his own administration, then he is useless.

J_Crater on November 18, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Ruger makes fine arms. Cheap.

wolly4321 on November 18, 2012 at 9:00 PM

A .22lr will do a lot. Cheap ammo. If you don’t have one, get one. Now.

wolly4321 on November 18, 2012 at 9:05 PM

WH: Benghazi talking-point changes? Don’t look at us…

Okay…should we look at the campaign people in Chicago?

lynncgb on November 18, 2012 at 9:12 PM

People died. Obama lied.

stefano1 on November 18, 2012 at 11:07 PM

There is a difference between being a cool operator in the face of an attack…

And being dead inside and feeling no outrage, at all, over having the man you picked for a situation to be killed in an act of war that is an affront to the President, personally, and the Nation as a whole.

The enemy has chosen war.

The President chose the FBI.

That is not the act of an outraged man, a compassionate man, a man who has been personally degraded by having his own, hand-picked representative slaughtered, nor is it the act of a man who even understands what an act of war actually is.

A cool operator has a cool hand.

What we see is the cold fish of a President who doesn’t care about his personal image, the Nation or even about those he appoints to high positions. Why would ANYONE show this man one shred of loyalty after having his own hand-chosen and hand-picked representative killed in an act of war and the response being: lies and doing nothing.

ajacksonian on November 19, 2012 at 6:59 AM

This story is on the way out the back door right now. In a week it will be forgotten and another sordid chapter of dear leader’s foreign policies wonderful misadventures will be totally out of the picture, off the TV shows and front pages. The media will have won the let’s don’t tell the public the truth game once again. Has anyone mentioned F&F lately? Didn’t think so.

Kissmygrits on November 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM

I read somewhere linked by Drudge that “officials” were saying that the reason the memo had references to aQ deleted was for “national security”, but yet they had not figured out who did it.

So one is left to wonder: How do they know the motives for the removal when they don’t know who did it? Whom did they ask to explain why it was done?

mr.blacksheep on November 19, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Feinstein is going to investigate.

How much more do we need to know about that, to know that we are going to get a fresh pile of manure served up?

Freelancer on November 19, 2012 at 12:19 PM