Reply With Quote
"stand down" what? What evidence do you have about an order to "stand down"? Could I see it? Link?
LOL you in denial.
"stand down" what? What evidence do you have about an order to "stand down"? Could I see it? Link?
Stand down = pull it. lol
That isn't really an answer. I will ask because it seems pretty important to the OP.
OK, are intelligence assessments often revised before release?
Yes or no -- and back up your answer with linked explanations.
2nd time this is asked.
Wow, people really defending this ? smh
Defending what?
Tell us what you are talking about.
No one can seem to tell us what to be outraged about here.
Glenn Beck and Alex Jones said it!
Credibility squared!
Funny that no one trying to make a big deal out of this can explain it himself.
It would seem so. How people could defend phony outrage pushed by Fox News puzzles me.
Funny sad or funny ha ha?
Benghazi whistle-blower a Democrat, voted for Hillary and Obama twice
A key Benghazi whistle-blower who has allegedly been punished for speaking out against the administration is a registered Democrat who voted for both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
The lawyer of Gregory Hicks, the former U.S. deputy chief of mission in Libya who testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Wednesday, confirmed the information to The Daily Caller on Saturday.
According to the lawyer, Victoria Toensing, Hicks voted for Clinton during the 2008 primary, and for then-Illinois Sen. Obama in the 2008 general election. He again voted for Obama in 2012.
“The fact is he is a registered Democrat in Virginia. The fact is he voted for Hilary in the primary and Obama and then again for Obama,” Toensing said.
Toensing added that she did not know he was a Democrat until the day before the hearing. “I’m not interested in that,” she said. “I’m interested in government not abusing its powers.”
Hicks testified before the House Oversight Committee this week regarding the events that took place on Sept. 11, 2012 in Benghazi and recalled how the State Department told him not to cooperate with the congressional investigation into the events, which led to the deaths of four Americans.
Hicks further testified that he has been demoted since Benghazi.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/11/be...#ixzz2TCsnoX3Z
who please? be specific if you can.
Looks like Boba has run away from his own thread.
Full White House Benghazi Email Undermines GOP’s Cover-Up Claims
CNN has obtained the full email from a White House official on the Benghazi talking points, which undermines claims that the administration acted deliberately to change the intelligence community’s assessment.
Much of the controversy surrounding the Obama administration’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya has focused on a set of unclassified talking points provided to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice. Rice delivered those points five days after the attack, appearing on all five major Sunday news shows. Rice subsequently came under attack for not mentioning Al Qaeda and referencing an anti-Islamic video as the impetus for the attacks, becoming the symbol of the White House’s supposed goal of misleading the American public about what happened.
In recent days, the talking points have come back to the forefront of conservative outrage, as several outlets have released the full edits made to the do ent, along with the original version the CIA drafted. Alongside those edits were emails that these outlets claimed showed the White House engaging in a flurry of activity that would help President Obama gain reelection. One such email from Deputy National Security Director Ben Rhodes allegedly showed the White House insisting that State Department requests that references to terrorism and Al Qaeda be “scrubbed” from the draft be discussed more fully.
CNN’s Jake Tapper, however, obtained the full text of the email Rhodes sent to the email thread of officials across the government providing their input on the do ent. Viewed in full, the do ent shows a distinct lack of intent to maliciously change the narrative compared to paraphrased versions:
All –
Sorry to be late to this discussion. We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.
There is a ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain from Congress and people who are not particularly informed. Insofar as we have firmed up assessments that don’t compromise intel or the investigation, we need to have the
capability to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened mis-impression.
We can take this up tomorrow morning at deputies.
The elevation of the talking points to infamy has seemingly instead helped to undercut the Republican case that a cover-up occurred. In actuality, the only thing to be revealed during this latest round of investigation seems to be a turf war between the CIA and State Department to avoid further blame for the attack, one that played out in the editing process of the talking points. In the end, contrary to Republican claims, the intelligence community did have the last say in what went into the talking points, including that the attacks “were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo,” and immediately preceded by a demonstration.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/20...nghazi-emails/
Turns out the press got played again by Republicans. Jake Tapper has the smoking gun of the original email from the Obama administration which differs significantly from the “leaked emails” ABC ran with. In an exclusive for CNN, Tapper reveals that CNN has the original email sent by a top Obama aide, regarding the administration’s reaction to the Benghazi attacks. Tapper reported, “The actual email differs from how sources characterized it to two different media organizations.”
http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05...enghazi-leaks/“The actual email from then-Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes appears to show that whomever (sic) leaked it did so in a way that made it appear that the White House primarily concerned with the State Department’s desire to remove references and warnings about specific terrorist groups so as to not bring criticism to the department,” Tapper concludes (my bold).
The email was sent on Friday, September 14, 2012, at 9:34 p.m. and was obtained by CNN from a U.S. government source. Ironically, the email points out that there is a “ton of wrong information” coming from Congress and people who are not particularly informed (waving o to Congressional Republicans and Mitt Romney):
http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05...-benghazi-leak“Sorry to be late to this discussion. We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.
“There is a ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain from Congress and people who are not particularly informed. Insofar as we have firmed up assessments that don’t compromise intel or the investigation, we need to have the capability to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened mis-impression.
“We can take this up tomorrow morning at deputies.”
The e-mail suggests that the White House was trying to inform honestly while protecting the investigation being conducted by the FBI. It also hints at interests of the State Department. My guess is that those State Dept. interests may have involved getting cooperation inside Libya in order to find those who committed the act of terror in Benghazi.
The e-mail confirms precisely what I have suspected all along. The only secrets that were withheld from the American public on this one concerned facts we did not need to know or facts that were highly classified because publicizing them would have interfered with the ongoing investigations.
The Republicans are so aggressive about protecting national security -- until a real national security threat arises, and then they want to use the threat (to anyone but a person with a menial IQ like Issa and the folks at Fox News) for their own propaganda purposes and to embarrass the Obama administration when the Obama administration is really trying to balance providing information with wise foreign and security policy.
A recent poll on Republicans showing that 40% do not know where Benghazi is says it all. Ignorance by choice.
Move the on. Give up. This is just like Bush doing all the crap he did in Iraq and Gitmo as president. It's probably illegal but nothing is going to happen. Obama supporters and lovers won't let it happen just like Bush lovers and supporters didn't let it happen. Obama is Bush. We get it. No one cares.
Well, its not really the same because Obama did nothing wrong and Bush had his group of lawyers legally justify international torture and rendition...
Obama has done nothing wrong? People said the same thing when Bush did it. It's pointless to argue. And it's pointless to discuss this . Presidents don't go to jail. President aren't held accountable for the that they do. If they up America, no one holds them accountable. The politicians that destroyed the economy haven't faced any type of punishment or justice. In American politics, there are no consequences for your actions. But seriously, nothing is going to happen or change. Obama isn't going to resign or get impeached. He definitely isn't going to be charged with anything.
Not arguing...just pointing out that it's ....not the same..People said the same thing when Bush did it. It's pointless to argue.
It is the same but you're a koolaid drinker so I'm basically talking to a wall. Obama has killed more people including innocent people with drone attacks than Bush did yet no cares and Obama is still cool and hip. Obama still has not closed Gitmo but he's still cool and hip. Obama was against the troop surge in Iraq and the war in Iraq but he loved the troop surge in Afghanistan and the war over there. Obama and his buddy Biden still support the Patriot Act even though they're so-called liberals. Obama lovers and supporters, are you okay with this ? I have more respect for Obama koolaid drinkers that admit they know Obama sucks or that he does illegal than those who think Obama is awesome and a god.
Nobody is cool and hip with Obama's drone attacks, but we are in a war on Terror...and we can either fight that war with boots on the ground or with drones in the air....the latter, while not perfect is preferable....quit your self righteous belly aching...innocent people die in wars...Obama has killed more people including innocent people with drone attacks than Bush did yet no cares and Obama is still cool and hip
Oh please.....Gitmo would be closed if it wasn't for GOP obstructionism...besides...it's not the hole of the Bush Administration..Obama still has not closed Gitmo but he's still cool and hip
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
