ABC: Benghazi talking points went through 12 revisions, scrubbed of terror reference; Update: Video added

posted at 8:01 am on May 10, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Following on the heels of blockbuster testimony from three whistleblowers regarding the Benghazi terrorist attack, ABC’s Jonathan Karl did some digging into the evolution of the talking points used afterward to paint the attack as a spontaneous demonstration gone wild.  The White House claims that the talking points reflected the CIA’s assessment of the situation, but Karl reports that ABC has found twelve revisions made by the Obama administration from the CIA original, culminating in the whitewashed version Susan Rice parroted on September 16th:

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 Carney said 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.”

Stephen Hayes at the Weekly Standard first came up with the e-mails, which Karl links in his piece.  Hayes explained the provenance of the e-mails, and what they mean for the White House explanation:

The White House provided the emails to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees for a limited time and with the stipulation that the documents were available for review only and would not be turned over to the committees. The White House and committee leadership agreed to that arrangement as part of a deal that would keep Republican senators from blocking the confirmation of John Brennan, the president’s choice to run the CIA. If the House report provides an accurate and complete depiction of the emails, it is clear that senior administration officials engaged in a wholesale rewriting of intelligence assessments about Benghazi in order to mislead the public. The Weekly Standard sought comment  from officials at the White House, the State Department, and the CIA, but received none by press time. Within hours of the initial attack on the U.S. facility, the State Department Operations Center sent out two alerts. The first, at 4:05 p.m. (all times are Eastern Daylight Time), indicated that the compound was under attack; the second, at 6:08 p.m., indicated that Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda-linked terrorist group operating in Libya, had claimed credit for the attack. According to the House report, these alerts were circulated widely inside the government, including at the highest levels. The fighting in Benghazi continued for another several hours, so top Obama administration officials were told even as the fighting was taking place that U.S. diplomats and intelligence operatives were likely being attacked by al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. A cable sent the following day, September 12, by the CIA station chief in Libya, reported that eyewitnesses confirmed the participation of Islamic militants and made clear that U.S. facilities in Benghazi had come under terrorist attack. It was this fact, along with several others, that top Obama officials would work so hard to obscure.

The Wall Street Journal argues that these revelations should prompt John Boehner to form a select committee to investigate the Benghazi attack and the White House cover-up:

Congressman Frank Wolf of Virginia has written House Speaker John Boehner, requesting the creation of a bipartisan Select Committee to investigate the Benghazi terror debacle. It is an excellent idea. A Select Committee is the only means available now for the U.S. political system to extricate itself from the labyrinth called Benghazi. …

There are strong reasons for doing so, starting with the murdered U.S. ambassador, Christopher Stevens. Across this country’s history, the murder of an American ambassador, the nation’s representative, has been taken as not merely a tragedy but an attack on U.S. interests that demands an official accounting to the American people.

Nothing about Benghazi, including the Accountability Review Board report, has reflected that U.S. tradition. It has instead represented the more recent impulse in our politics to sweep uncomfortable events out of the news, move forward in the Twitter news cycle, or grind it down into no more than partisan pettiness.

Has partisanship been in play here? Yes, as always in Washington. But the terrorist assault on a U.S. mission abroad deserves not to be quashed by partisanship.

It may be that a bipartisan Select Committee would validate the Obama Administration’s version of events. So be it. And if so, the Administration officials on duty then should not fear it. But after the Hicks testimony, the idea that the American political system should move on from the murder of a U.S. ambassador in a distant land doesn’t sit right.

Perhaps the media would be more inclined to cover that probe than they’ve been to cover the scandal up to now.  Let’s end on a lighter note, as Andrew Klavan makes a guest appearance in Steven Crowder’s weekly video to explain to those whom the media have poorly served just what’s going on here:

Addendum: Per Jim Geraghty, another big takeaway here will be that Jay Carney either knowingly lied or was deceived into making that statement.  If it’s the latter, Carney’s resignation should follow relatively quickly.  If it doesn’t, then we can at least suspect that it’s the former.

Update: Karl presented the story on GMA this morning:

That’s going to leave a mark.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Hillary won’t go down alone. I think Skippy just crossed a line. Hillary and Bill, if they are as shrewd as everyone says, will get out ahead of Zero and THROW HIM UNDER THE BUS.

In any case her 2016 ambitions are in the waste bin.

dogsoldier on May 10, 2013 at 9:02 AM

From your typing fingers to God’s ears.

Fallon on May 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM

What was the source of these emails? ABC acknowledges that some had been published by Stephen Hayes. But are they being leaked? By whom?

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 9:13 AM

The White House provided the emails to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees for a limited time and with the stipulation that the documents were available for review only and would not be turned over to the committees. The White House and committee leadership agreed to that arrangement as part of a deal that would keep Republican senators from blocking the confirmation of John Brennan, the president’s choice to run the CIA.

esr1951 on May 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM

I am telling y’all Jay Carney and Rachel Maddow are the same person.

Tilly on May 10, 2013 at 9:22 AM

Awwwright! The ice is broken at ABC. And CBS already has Sharyl on its back.

Some might call that progress, meager though it is.

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 8:32 AM

Fortunately, human nature being what it is, some reporter will mentally note the coming demise of dinosaur media and grab this story and run with it (all the presidents men -like).

When that occurs, I will again be proud of my country.

socalcon on May 10, 2013 at 9:22 AM

But after the Hicks testimony, the idea that the American political system should move on from the murder of a U.S. ambassador in a distant land doesn’t sit right.

But it happened so long ago, and according to even our erstwhile liberal protectors of freedom here at HotGas this entire event is a nothing burger, gay marriage is far more important.

If the criminals now ruling this nation can gloss over the deaths of an ambassador, his aide, and 2 U.S. Navy SEAL’s then they can surely write off any one of us at any time in the name of political expediency. These thugs have shiite on the Constitution and every rule of law we have; they aren’t a duly-elected administration anymore, they’re a regime.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:22 AM

“Petraeus expressed frustration” according to Drudge link. Gues now we know why they took him down.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:23 AM

But, but… the talking points *did* ‘originate from the intelligence community’… they just got 12 coats of whitewash before anyone was allowed to talk about them. lol

It depends on where the meaning of the word ‘originate’ originates…

Midas on May 10, 2013 at 9:23 AM

I don’t think the arms deal went bad. I think the coverup of the arms deal went bad.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:16 AM

Or, maybe a combo platter. The arms deal went bad AND the coverup of the arms deal, that went bad, went bad.

Fallon on May 10, 2013 at 9:24 AM

I’ve given this some thought, and it’s nice that ABC and CBS are both doing a little digging here, but I’ll believe that we’ve actually made some real traction when I see the siren on Drudge. Still haven’t seen that.

Chris of Rights on May 10, 2013 at 9:14 AM

I’ll believe in traction when Carney ends up running from the podium in tears because of the questions coming from White House Press Corps.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 9:25 AM

Hillary won’t go down alone. I think Skippy just crossed a line. Hillary and Bill, if they are as shrewd as everyone says, will get out ahead of Zero and THROW HIM UNDER THE BUS.

In any case her 2016 ambitions are in the waste bin.

dogsoldier on May 10, 2013 at 9:02 AM

From your typing fingers to God’s ears.

Fallon on May 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM

AMEN.

Midas on May 10, 2013 at 9:26 AM

The main thin that has gone bad, is the protection of our nation, from enemies foreign and domestic, under this bunch of clueless, malevolent, Marxist, Liberal Dhimmis.

In fact, this Administration is our “Domestic Enemy”.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Petraeus now concurring the final product was NOTHING similar to his final draft…so much for the IC being blamed Mr. Carney.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Or, maybe a combo platter. The arms deal went bad AND the coverup of the arms deal, that went bad, went bad.

Fallon on May 10, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Sounds like today there will be a coverup of the coverers that covered the coverup of the coverup.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:29 AM

In today’s installment of “Stylistic changes”

We see the words “Ambassador Stevens is being Sodomised”

Restyled to “The locals bowing to Mecca”.

ToddPA on May 10, 2013 at 9:29 AM

My facebook liberal friends have scrubbed their pages of all their media matters propaganda from yesterday- true story!

Obviously actual facts make strawmen arguments look pathetic. Happy Friday!

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 9:30 AM

esr1951 on May 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM

Yes, the White House provided the emails to members of the House and Senate intelligence committees for review under WH supervision, but they did not allow the docs to be taken out of the room nor copies made.

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 9:31 AM

The President could deflect all the blame onto Secretary Clinton, to the benefit or his friend and David Axelrod’s friend Gov. Deval Patrick of MA. The story is sounding like it is her fault and no one asks where was the president that night, or who gave the stand down order, which seems to have no controlling legal authority and seems to be up for editing like so many Sunday show talking points.

Mrs. Clinton HAS taken responsibility. I think we should list for her what it is she has taken responsibility for. In her testimony repeated here on ABC, she says it is either some people walking at night who decide to kill some Americans or some people protesting a video and she says it doesn’t matter. The “some People” walking at night, she knows at the time of her testimony to be Ansar Al Sharia. But she obfuscates, still pretending in front of Congress to think it was an arbitrary attack.

Deval Patrick wants to be the candidate, although he is not really the kind to work for it, he would like it handed to him. He does very little in MA except avert his eyes. Turns out that five days before the Boston Marathon Terrorist Attack, that he had a warning that the runners or the finish line might be the target of terrorists. It makes you appreciate the old Bush Administration color level warnings, although people made fun, at least we were told there was a non descript threat. Maybe you might not take children…Maybe you might be a little more aware.

Why didn’t Deval investigate that threat? He, like other elites, thought that once the elite runners went thru, and the celebrities left the grandstand, the threat was over. It’s all about them, obviously.

I think Congress needs to ask to have back the color warnings so the public is not completely in the dark. Here in liberal MA, Boston and Cambridge they believed that Osama was dead and Alqueda had run away.

Fleuries on May 10, 2013 at 9:32 AM

NBC now weighing in…wow: “NBC’s Lisa Myers said this morning on TV that Democrats have been calling her to attempt to undermine the testimony of Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks”….via Weekly Standard.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

In fact, this Administration is our “Domestic Enemy”.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 9:28 AM

I’ve said that for the past few years.

Here’s the thing. As entertaining as it is to see these cockroaches run around making excuses, where is the accountability.

State Department’s Victoria Nuland sent an e-mail talking about removing CIA warnings prior to the attack because that would give Congress something to beat up State Department with. That’s poltics above all else. IT’S 9:30, WHY HASN’T KERRY ASKED FOR HER RESIGNATION YET? Along with that of Susan Rice.

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 9:35 AM

So bottom line is the weapons deal. And when that comes out the press will just scream Iran-Contra, claiming it’s the same thing, and we didn’t need to know about the rest because the whole operation was still going down at the time of the unfortunate Benghazi incident.

And the Republicans will buy it, then sign on to immigration, gun control and gay marriage.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:35 AM

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 9:31 AM

During Wednesday’s hearing, I think Trey Gowdy was waving, and quoting from, one of those paper emails asking that the admin. make these available to the public, as they are not classified.

esr1951 on May 10, 2013 at 9:35 AM

NBC now weighing in…wow: “NBC’s Lisa Myers said this morning on TV that Democrats have been calling her to attempt to undermine the testimony of Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks”….via Weekly Standard.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

WOW is right. This is an entire administration and political party running scared as the dam begins to spring leaks everywhere, they’re desperately trying to plug the holes yet new ones begin spurting somewhere else.

There’s one person out there who can really blow this open, there’s that one guy or gal who knows a key piece; let’s just hope they have the courage to step forward even if it’s only to protect their own hide.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM

There’s one person out there who can really blow this open, there’s that one guy or gal who knows a key piece; let’s just hope they have the courage to step forward even if it’s only to protect their own hide.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM

It is gonna take one of those 30 people, on the ground that night in Benghazi, to get on national TV and tell the story of that horrific night, and then cry real tears over the lives lost. Then the low info voters will understand.

esr1951 on May 10, 2013 at 9:40 AM

So now the awhile House is leaking documents, in order (presumably) to get ahead of the story with some spin on it up front.

That’s a good thing, since the implication is that the latent journalistic instincts of even ABC toadies like Karl are starting to kick in. The White House must be worried that their poll numbers are going to take a hit. The half od the country getting news from Bret Baier is growing.

There’s obviously no hope NBC will ever publish a Benghazi story (other than a whining “who cares!” story), and CBS has already told us they want nothing to do with their own outstanding reporter Sharyl Attkisson and her “advocacy journalism”, so seeing ABC tentatively stick in an oar is very good news. We need the passive propaganda mainstream press to be less a DNC talking robot and instead to start acting like “the press”. Start helping get to the truth!

MTF on May 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM

In today’s installment of “Stylistic changes”

We see the words “Ambassador Stevens is being Sodomised”

Restyled to “The locals bowing to Mecca”.

ToddPA on May 10, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Your eye for detail is commendable.

They also changed “Coordinated terrorist attack against United States Embassy” to “Libyan balloon vendors show mild displeasure toward foreign citizens”.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM

NBC now weighing in…wow: “NBC’s Lisa Myers said this morning on TV that Democrats have been calling her to attempt to undermine the testimony of Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks”….via Weekly Standard.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

NBC now currently re-negotiating Lisa Myers’ contract.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:42 AM

They also changed “Coordinated terrorist attack against United States Embassy” to “Libyan balloon vendors show mild displeasure toward foreign citizens”.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Clever, creative and sarcastic. Kudos. I admire your work.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:44 AM

There’s one person out there who can really blow this open, there’s that one guy or gal who knows a key piece; let’s just hope they have the courage to step forward even if it’s only to protect their own hide.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM

3 opened up the door on Wed, time for the person who knows who ordered the Stand Downs to come forward, you are correct.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Hillsoftx…. desperate methinks

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 9:44 AM

the Accountability Review Board report

I did a quick read of the publicly available ARB report yesterday.

Maybe someone is blamed by name, but I didn’t see it. Instead unnamed high level people in the State Department were blamed for not doing a better job providing security and for not having some contingency in place. And unnamed people in the intelligence community were blamed for not anticipating the attacks.

But no one was derelict in their duty, of course.

Just do a better job next time guys, whoever you are.

And of course it did not address the fact the American people were deliberately misled by the WH and the SoS. That was not within the purview of the ARB investigation and report. Nor was it in the purview of the ARB report to investigate the post-terrorist attack investigation by the FBI, CIA, the Defense Department, etc.

Considering the fact it was clearly and undeniably a terrorist attack and that many “mistakes were made”, the ARB report is as close to a bureaucratic whitewash as you can find. Captain Obvious would easily produce an identical report.

At a minimum Pickering and Mullins need to be questioned under oath before a House committee. They need to name some names and explain why they did not interview, or only briefly interviewed, the whistleblowers who are beginning to come forward — people who were actually there that night. And why they didn’t they interview HRC under oath.

From the first sentence in the report…

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton convened an Accountability Review Board (ARB) for Benghazi to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding the September 11-12, 2012,

The ARB report itself, and its investigative process, needs to be investigated and questioned.

farsighted on May 10, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Hey, I just noticed there are no digital lice crawling across my screen. Where are the leftists on this thread?

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:45 AM

NBC now weighing in…wow: “NBC’s Lisa Myers said this morning on TV that Democrats have been calling her to attempt to undermine the testimony of Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks”….via Weekly Standard.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Here’s the video. Pretty casual about the behind the scenes arm twisting she’s getting from the Regime’s goons. Sometimes I think the panels on MSNBC forget they are on TV.

forest on May 10, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Cummings started the whistleblower s changed testimony meme on morning joe

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 9:46 AM

On Twitter,Libs are attacking Conservative Pundits like David Limbaugh over this, claiming that we aremaking a “mountain out of a molehill”.

Today’s new Talking Points Catch Phrase. Watch for our Trolls to use it.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Known lying liar caught lying?

Who could have seen that one coming!

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 10, 2013 at 9:47 AM

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Can’t find that … linky, please ?
Awesome !

pambi on May 10, 2013 at 9:48 AM

We need the passive propaganda mainstream press to be less a DNC talking robot and instead to start acting like “the press”. Start helping get to the truth!

MTF on May 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM

…how can we give them a push?

KOOLAID2 on May 10, 2013 at 9:48 AM

Oh, thanks, forest on May 10, 2013 at 9:46 AM

pambi on May 10, 2013 at 9:49 AM

They also changed “Coordinated terrorist attack against United States Embassy” to “Libyan balloon vendors show mild displeasure toward foreign citizens”.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Yeah well come on! We all know those EVIL Americans had
secretly filled those balloons with HELIUM!!!!!

ToddPA on May 10, 2013 at 9:50 AM

Lisa Myers: “No big deal. It happens all the time that I get calls from Democrats to manipulate the news, especially testimonies in front of Congress.”

And then the other dolts just look away and say nothing.

Link

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:52 AM

For pambi:
hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Here’s the video. Pretty casual about the behind the scenes arm twisting she’s getting from the Regime’s goons. Sometimes I think the panels on MSNBC forget they are on TV.

forest on May 10, 2013 at 9:46 AM

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:52 AM

I expect the trolls who have been at hard work the past three days to crawl back under the bridge today. It was fun watching you twist into knots making excuses for the liars at the top.

Bensonofben on May 10, 2013 at 8:09 AM

I admire your optimism!

But I can’t say I share it.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 10, 2013 at 9:53 AM

ABC, oh my oh my. Drudge has a similar article from NBC. The backstops are crumbling, Journolist is failing, the White House has to be frantic. What to do to distract?

slickwillie2001 on May 10, 2013 at 9:55 AM

Politico finally reporting this

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 9:56 AM

NBC now weighing in…wow: “NBC’s Lisa Myers said this morning on TV that Democrats have been calling her to attempt to undermine the testimony of Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks”….via Weekly Standard.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM

The fact that this got out signals the beginning of Zero’s swan song. An ocean of scandal is a hard thing to contain. The dam is crumbling.

dogsoldier on May 10, 2013 at 9:56 AM

This is an entire administration and political party running scared as the dam begins to spring leaks everywhere, they’re desperately trying to plug the holes yet new ones begin spurting somewhere else.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM

I’m wondering if we’ve seen the tipping point where the MSM risks looking irrelevant if they don’t start reporting the truth. Of course, what difference will the truth make at this point?

Happy Nomad on May 10, 2013 at 9:57 AM

Hey, I just noticed there are no digital lice crawling across my screen. Where are the leftists on this thread?

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:45 AM

This one’s so good, I’ve actually written it down.

To be used at a future time and place on some
unsuspecting Leftist Azzwipe. ..

speaking of DBear.

ToddPA on May 10, 2013 at 9:57 AM

And then the other dolts just look away and say nothing.

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:52 AM

Of course they do, they’re cut from the same mold as those Germans who silently watched the Jews being herded at gunpoint onto the trains. Just turn away and pretend you didn’t see anything, I suppose it’s all you have left when you’ve sold your morals and ethics to a political party.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 10:00 AM

I can get why they are lying so desperately to cover this up and make it go away. An Al-Qaida attack that kills four Americans, including our Ambassador, with what were probably weapons WE gave them, is something they want to make disappear. Disgusting, but when you have slimeballs like Obama, Valerie Jarrett, and the Clintons, it is always going to be ugly, and of course the media is Team D all the way.

But for me, the thing I will never forgive or forget, is that our Commander in Chief, knowing full well what was going on, and knowing full well that no help was going to arrive for those folks (and knowing the death toll would/should have been 30+ because he wasn’t counting on the SEALS)… This despicable excuse for a leader WENT. TO. BED. He abandoned them not just physically by not sending help, but also as a leader. He went to bed. As an Army wife and mom, he physically sickens me. His people were dying and he went to bed.

Boudica on May 10, 2013 at 10:02 AM

Who ordered the stand down?
That’s all I want to know.

gasmeterguy on May 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

I’ve said it before so again,THERE IS A PULITZER JUST WAITING for some savvy reporter.A book,movie,talk shows,and the money that goes with it.

docflash on May 10, 2013 at 10:10 AM

esr1951 on May 10, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Wonder whether the WH released them, or just leaked them.

My bet’s on the leak. Fournier suggests that too.

Looks to me like dogsoldier nailed it.

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Lisa Myers: “No big deal. It happens all the time that I get calls from Democrats to manipulate the news, especially testimonies in front of Congress.”

And then the other dolts just look away and say nothing.

Link

oldroy on May 10, 2013 at 9:52 AM

She forgot to add, “and I say okay and do just as they ask. Every time. No biggie.”

totherightofthem on May 10, 2013 at 10:12 AM

But after the Hicks testimony, the idea that the American political system should move on from the murder of a U.S. ambassador in a distant land doesn’t sit right.

Doesn’t sit right?? That is incredibly weak sauce from WSJ.

Apparently they are part and parcel to the very thing their article complains about – a tendency to sweep uncomfortable events under the rug.

While it’s not a “sweep” they just watered down their entire point to make zero impact even though, according to their own description of events, everyone should be outraged.

LetsBfrank on May 10, 2013 at 10:12 AM

‘Bout damn time…

Now…let’s start asking serious questions…and demand complete answers…a major media subpoena duces tecum if you will.

The tree has been notched…now let’s make it fall.

Keep hammering!

coldwarrior on May 10, 2013 at 10:12 AM

NBC now weighing in…wow: “NBC’s Lisa Myers said this morning on TV that Democrats have been calling her to attempt to undermine the testimony of Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks”….via Weekly Standard.

hillsoftx on May 10, 2013 at 9:34 AM
WOW is right. This is an entire administration and political party running scared as the dam begins to spring leaks everywhere, they’re desperately trying to plug the holes yet new ones begin spurting somewhere else.

There’s one person out there who can really blow this open, there’s that one guy or gal who knows a key piece; let’s just hope they have the courage to step forward even if it’s only to protect their own hide.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM

When you’ve even got NBC talking about this you know this thing is about to blow open…I mean NBC!? Wow!!!

neyney on May 10, 2013 at 10:12 AM

It’s time to start that select committee and subpoena Clinton, Rice, Nuland, Carney and the rest of the freak show. I’m hoping for another laughable Hillary temper tantrum. Derail the train now, Repubs. Balls in.

RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:13 AM

When was the Petraeus personal scandal revealed..?

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:15 AM

When was the Petraeus personal scandal revealed..?

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Not very long after 9/11/2012.

The Chicago Gang acted quickly to shut Petraeus up.

farsighted on May 10, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Drudge:

FOURNIER: WH throwing Hillary ‘under the bus?’

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 10:02 AM

Don’t blink, or you’ll miss the caption under the photo at the top of that link:

With no trace of irony, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney is accusing the GOP of politicizing the Benghazi “talking points.”

That “no trace of irony” part sounds veeeery familiar from troll comments in the past.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Addendum: Per Jim Geraghty, another big takeaway here will be that Jay Carney either knowingly lied or was deceived into making that statement. If it’s the latter, Carney’s resignation should follow relatively quickly. If it doesn’t, then we can at least suspect that it’s the former.

Carney is a political animal, so I don’t expect much from him on this point.

Patraeus, on the other hand, was, and is, not. He sat by while the White House and State put words into (or taken words out of) the mouths of those in his agency, and thus turning a honest, accurate and candid assessment of the events, into an blatantly dishonest political document in an effort to mislead the public. He should have either held firm on the original assessment and not allow changes if that view had not changed, or he should have resigned.

By not acting in either of those manners, he gave the doctored talking points his imprimatur. That was disgraceful and is unforgivable.

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Looks to me like dogsoldier nailed it.

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 10:10 AM

If knocking Hillary out of running in 2016 (a virtual 3rd Obama term)is the eventual political fallout then that’s a win. B*tch is already losing weight and getting ready for prime time, smilin’ with no care in the world. Take the Clinton out. Let’s get her into super-defensive flailing hysteria tryin’ to save her political hide mode–it’s great entertainment.

RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Petraeus objected–then his sugar momma scandal got outed.

ADM Gaouette and GEN Ham ? did they object too? Didn’t they get fired as well???

So, 3 flag officers down in the wake of this, right?

ted c on May 10, 2013 at 10:22 AM

Anybody discussing the “secret” CIA mission in Benghazi..? At the time it was reported that Benghazi was essentially nothing more than a CIA operation…

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:22 AM

At least Petraeus didn’t end up at Fort Marcy Park…

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM

I don’t know if Jay Carney lied or if he was deceived, but based on the credibility of those around him as far as the truth goes, I’d say he was probably deceived. And if he was, he’s not going to be happy about it. If he just went along with their lies then he’s just as liable for them as they are. But then, it’s not like anything will happen to any of them anyway, so

what difference does it make now

scalleywag on May 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM

RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

You’re right. If Scooter tries to throw Hil under the bus, all He!! could break loose, and it will be quite enjoyable.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM

Not very long after 9/11/2012.

The Chicago Gang acted quickly to shut Petraeus up.

[farsighted on May 10, 2013 at 10:20 AM]

Two months later. Patraeus resigned on November 9.

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:24 AM

When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were complete and utter bovine effluent flawed

Even a report about the cover up contains a cover up.

Akzed on May 10, 2013 at 10:24 AM

On MJoe this morning they were even talking about it (Mika seemed to be off today so I guess it was safe to discuss). They seemed to think it was pretty bad ……………except, god forbid, it would help the GOP if the story is pushed.

Tater Salad on May 10, 2013 at 10:24 AM

D’oh, quote, not strike. (But you knew that, right?)

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:25 AM

On Twitter,Libs are attacking Conservative Pundits like David Limbaugh over this, claiming that we aremaking a “mountain out of a molehill”.

That molehill looks like a grave. Four of them, in fact.

Don Michael Bitsconi on May 10, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

And in doing so he crapped all over the two SEAL’s who were his fellow service members. Those men were abandoned and left to die and all Petraeus could do was muster a bit of outrage and then throw up his hands with an “oh well I tried”.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

I think the Obama aministrations excuse is down to “we had to lie because of those pesky Republicans”.

Tater Salad on May 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

Take the Clinton out. Let’s get her into super-defensive flailing hysteria …

RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I am soooo looking forward to another of her screaming fits.

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

By not acting in either of those manners, he gave the doctored talking points his imprimatur. That was disgraceful and is unforgivable.

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I completely agree. Guy above nailed it–Petraeus had a lot to hide. He got dead fished by the Chicago boys. They did the same to Dinesh D’Souza shortly after he released his controversial 2016: Obama’s America.

But it still doesn’t change the fact that we’ve got wimps to the left of me and p*ssies to the right. And that many of these powerful people have much to hide from the public and don’t rock the boat for fear of exposure.

RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:28 AM

There’s one person out there who can really blow this open, there’s that one guy or gal who knows a key piece; let’s just hope they have the courage to step forward even if it’s only to protect their own hide.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM

That’s what usually breaks something like this open. The one person who either gets totally disgusted with what s/he sees happening, or, more often, the person who realizes belatedly that s/he’s being set up to take the fall, and wants no part of that action.

Chris of Rights on May 10, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Will the Sunday shows discuss this any further? Other than to dismiss it as uneventful? Does the story resonate into next with the MSM? Don’t count on it.

A significant player within the chain of command at State and/or the CIA is going to have to come forward. A “Deep Throat” kind of player.

And at the end of that all we might have is gross incompetance and calculated lie’s to the American people.

Don’t expect the majority of American’s to give a crap about that. Other than to justify that Obama has good reason at times not to tell the American people what they don’t need to know.

Assuming that, as Steven Crowder has illustrated to the negative, most American’s are even following this story.

Carnac on May 10, 2013 at 10:34 AM

This whole mess began as a turf war between State and CIA. After the overthrow, State should have been the lead agency. But instead we got split responsibility’s. Either DCIA Petreaeus and SoS Clinton could not agree on the next phase, or more likely, they could not get a decision from the President, which left no policy in place. It would help a great deal, if we could see the PDD that authorizes the Libya operation to clear that point up. Well, in any case it looks a tipping point has been reach. Things are going to happen very quickly now. I do not think that President Obama understands just how much political danger he is in. If cooler heads do not prevail, we could be looking at a real live constitutional crisis. (By the way, great comments in this thread.)

flackcatcher on May 10, 2013 at 10:35 AM

I wonder if anyone spoke to Petraeus about his personal problems during the drafting of these revisions…shame if anything happened to a stellar career…

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Jay Carney either knowingly lied or was deceived into making that statement.

Well, let’s look at Obama’s want ad for the job…

“Wanted: Press Secretary. Must be able to maintain poker face while telling the most outrageous lies.”

The Rogue Tomato on May 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Two months later. Patraeus resigned on November 9.

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:24 AM

They had him wait until after the election to resign.

You can bet the Chicago Gang was talking to Patraeus about his “problem” well before that.

farsighted on May 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

I’ve said it before so again, THERE IS A PULITZER JUST WAITING for some savvy reporter. A book, movie, talk shows, and the money that goes with it.

docflash on May 10, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Never happen. Pulitzer and all the other award bodies are controlled by far-left democratics. You attack a Republican and it’s Pulitzer-worthy. You attack a democratic and your employer accuses you of advocacy journalism.

Look at the awards that MoDo has been given for the swill she turns out.

slickwillie2001 on May 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

I’m going to need a big tub of buttered popcorn and a Route 66 sized soda, because when the fight between the Clintonistas and Obamanots starts over who will take the fall, it’s going to be fun.

Tater Salad on May 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

What exactly was the CIA mission in Benghazi…?

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:39 AM

Hey, I just noticed there are no digital lice crawling across my screen. Where are the leftists on this thread?
Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 9:45 AM

There’s a software glitch at HQ.

Akzed on May 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM

You’re right. If Scooter tries to throw Hil under the bus, all He!! could break loose, and it will be quite enjoyable.

kingsjester on May 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM

Right now, all Hillary’s looking at and is focused on is her frontrunner polling for the Dem nomination in 2016. She knows she can rely on the media and the stupidity of the average American voter to clinch presidential victory sham wow style.

And while we’re at it, it would be kinda nice if the dead heroes who lost their lives under her outrageous incompetence could get some sort of justice, and make us all feel warm and cozy like their really are serious, career-destroying consequences for high-level gov officials under this WH who tarnish the public’s trust, absent a dutiful media.

RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Switched back to msdnc…. crickets chirping

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 10:44 AM

Well, in any case it looks a tipping point has been reach. Things are going to happen very quickly now. I do not think that President Obama understands just how much political danger he is in. If cooler heads do not prevail, we could be looking at a real live constitutional crisis. (By the way, great comments in this thread.)

flackcatcher on May 10, 2013 at 10:35 AM

While I agree that there will be political fallout, I don’t see this becoming a constitutional crisis. Nothing here rises to an impeachable offense. It shows incompetence and dishonesty, but I don’t think it shows anything illegal.

I honestly don’t even think the political fallout will be that bad for Obama/Hillary. First, the media will not push it very far. They will be forced to cover it, but they will cover it lightly and then let it die. Someone from the Administration and someone from State will take the fall, and Obama and Hillary will claim to have had nothing to do with it and the press will let them get away with that.

As much as I would love to see this really impact Obama/Hillary, I just don’t believe it will.

Monkeytoe on May 10, 2013 at 10:49 AM

[Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM]

You’re right, Bishop, and an excellent point that is overshadowed by the more obvious one of some two-bit lying to the public by dishonest political hacks only interested in their own political careers.

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 10:49 AM

And in doing so he crapped all over the two SEAL’s who were his fellow service members. Those men were abandoned and left to die and all Petraeus could do was muster a bit of outrage and then throw up his hands with an “oh well I tried”.

Bishop on May 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM

Most generals get to that point because they are more politician than soldier.

Monkeytoe on May 10, 2013 at 10:50 AM

I wonder if anyone spoke to Petraeus about his personal problems during the drafting of these revisions…shame if anything happened to a stellar career…

d1carter on May 10, 2013 at 10:35 AM

A shame if some kind of honey trap stuff got out.

petefrt on May 10, 2013 at 10:53 AM

That’s what usually breaks something like this open. The one person who either gets totally disgusted with what s/he sees happening, or, more often, the person who realizes belatedly that s/he’s being set up to take the fall, and wants no part of that action.

Chris of Rights on May 10, 2013 at 10:30 AM

I predict a Clinton response soon… Hillary has one chance for 2016 and it’s a slim one. She will have to come out and lay this on Zero in such a way that he cannot slime out from under it.

Switched back to msdnc…. crickets chirping

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 10:44 AM

They are scrambling to deal with disaster. Only one problem. This scandal has broken the dam.

dogsoldier on May 10, 2013 at 10:54 AM

Sorry, but I don’t think anyone is going down for this except some lower echelon scape goat….

sandee on May 10, 2013 at 10:56 AM

I’m going to need a big tub of buttered popcorn and a Route 66 sized soda, because when the fight between the Clintonistas and Obamanots starts over who will take the fall, it’s going to be fun.

Tater Salad on May 10, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Yep. A planet-sized ego like that of the REB’s will force him to protect his legacy, such as it is, even though he won’t be running again. That’s even though he needs someone like her to maintain his programs and continue the ‘fundamental transformation’ of America.

Strictly speaking, for the advancement of The Cause, he should take the fall after the election of 2014, but he won’t. His legacy is far more important to him than the democratic party.

slickwillie2001 on May 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM

But it still doesn’t change the fact that we’ve got wimps to the left of me and p*ssies to the right. And that many of these powerful people have much to hide from the public and don’t rock the boat for fear of exposure.

[RepubChica on May 10, 2013 at 10:28 AM]

True, but a lot of good not rocking the boat did Patraeus, huh? They took him down, anyway. That they guessed right in thinking that Patraeus might be their biggest problem and needed to be delegitimized doesn’t absolve him from his failure to do the right thing.

It’s kind of ironic that the head of the CIA didn’t see this covert action coming. I guess he wasn’t a good choice for CIA after all.

Dusty on May 10, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Yepper dog soldier must be waiting for Valerie’s email

cmsinaz on May 10, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4