Benghazi memos reportedly revised 12 times

[TeyshaBlue]

pointing out your inability to posit a cogent, original thought does not make one a fake liberal.

[Winehole23]

more flames, smilies and sock puppetry in 5...4...3...2...

[SA210]

So I had to actually make a thread about SA210 with his name in the le, where SA210 owned me royally for the internet addict I am, and that's why I have never been the same since. In fact I am so hurt over how that blew up in my face, that I will follow SA210 around everywhere and I will even refuse to talk about Bengazi in this thread to do it! Watch, I have more to say to make this more about SA210...

[Winehole23]

right on cue

[TeyshaBlue]

Let me save you some time. Just use this.

____________________________


no need to thank me. I'm a giver.

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, you never discussed 9/11 either, SA210. You melted down and never stopped.

I OTOH, discuss all topics rather freely. I'm not afraid like you are.

[TeyshaBlue]

chicken liver.

[SA210]

My favorite word is cogent. I use it all the time

[TeyshaBlue]

__________________________

[ChumpDumper]

To say nothing of poor Lupe.

[SA210]

Mission accomplished by facts the butthurt angry trolls revved up and angry. Circle jerk angry lol

[ChumpDumper]

Well, your mission certainly wasn't discussing Benghazi.

[SA210]

Mission accomplished by facts the butthurt angry trolls revved up and angry. Circle jerk angry lol

[ChumpDumper]

Well, your mission certainly wasn't discussing Benghazi.

[TeyshaBlue]

________________________
________________________
________________________

[RandomGuy]

You are still acting like a child, you began that way and you still are. All I did was post facts about Obama and you started insulting like a kid. I can read just fine. When you read the facts I post, it makes you angry, hence your constant insults, whether you agree in part or not. Now back to what we were discussing, Obama is a fraud, a war criminal and Wall Street hack and you should support his impeachment. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would know this. I am all for civil discussion and have always been about that, but it's funny coming from twits who have always constantly tried insulting me bc they hate that I tell the truth about a corrupt Democrat the same as I did a corrupt Republican when Bush was in office.

4-5 years ago when I was hard on Bush, you hypocrites LOVED what I was saying and backed me ALL THE TIME in this forum. How the tables have turned, all because I remained consistent, and now it's YOUR guy, so you don't like it. And after all the childish trolling and insults..now the trolls want civil discussion/posts? (even though that's what I originally did) I'll believe it when I actually see it. (Awaits further insults or explanations)

That is the narrative you have built in you mind, and nothing I could possibly say would dissuade you of it.

For this reason, even when I might be agreeing with you on something, you put on your Noble Crusader For Truth hat and go in guns blazing.

Your ego and self esteem is all tied up on how much smarter and more hip you are than everybody else because you, and you alone, have glommed on to the Truth According to Infowars.

I can't, and won't, argue with that.

You will have to rescue yourself, kid. You want yourself to be the hero in this narrative, and that is far to psychologically appealing to give up willingly even if shown how you are wrong.

[BobaFett1]

Looks like Boba has run away from his own thread.

No Boba has to go to work some days. I love how you libs changed story on this 12 times.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs had these emails months ago, and said nothing.

Because this Repug/Fox fabricated Benghazi scandal is getting no traction with the vast majority of Americans, they Repugs/Fox now trump these months-old emails as scandal-worthing, proving that .... ???? a do ent went through several revison levels??

[BobaFett1]

Repugs had these emails months ago, and said nothing.

Because this Repug/Fox fabricated Benghazi scandal is getting no traction with the vast majority of Americans, they Repugs/Fox now trump these months-old emails as scandal-worthing, proving that .... ???? a do ent went through several revison levels??

Obama hiding truth on Benghazi
DOJ wire tapping ap
IRS being shady on tea party
boutons_deux a euro socialist.
Racheal Madoxx homer

[RandomGuy]

."The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this. But the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and non-substantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from 'consulate' to 'diplomatic facility' and the like," he said.
State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell also said Rice's comments were based on the intelligence community's "best assessment that there was not any evidence of months-long pre-planning or pre-meditation, which remains their assessment."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2Sunr7jml

OK, are intelligence assessments often revised before release?

Yes or no -- and back up your answer with linked explanations.

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.

[BobaFett1]

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.

You do not change a story 12 times.

[George Gervin's Afro]

First on CNN: Pickering, Mullen challenge Issa to let them testify in public
By CNN's Jake Tapper and Alison Harding

In a letter to Rep. Darrell Issa exclusively obtained by CNN, the co-chairmen behind an independent review of September's deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, expressed irritation over the House Oversight Committee chairman's portrayal of their work and requested he call a public hearing at which they can testify.

"The public deserves to hear your questions and our answers," wrote former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, co-chairmen of the Accountability Review Board that was convened to investigate the September 11th attack.

READ THE LETTER HERE

Eight months after their report cited "systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies" at the State Department," Issa continues to be a leading critic of the accountability board, calling its review "a failure" and asking for further investigations into the Obama administration's response during the attack and its aftermath.

The dispute between Issa and the co-chairmen came to a head after neither Pickering nor Mullen attended a May 8 House Oversight Committee hearing on the attacks, sparking a heated back and forth about who was invited and when. The rhetoric intensified Sunday during a highly contentious joint appearance with Issa and Pickering on NBC's "Meet the Press" in which Issa maintained the two "refused to come before our committee." Pickering insisted that he was not invited despite expressing a willingness to testify.


"Chairman Issa sent word back that he might want to take me up some time in the future" Pickering said.

Issa also suggested on the program that Pickering and Mullen meet with the committee behind closed doors so as not to create "some sort of stage show." But the two assert in their letter that a public hearing is a "more appropriate forum" and accuse Issa of changing his "position on the terms of our appearance."

"Having taken liberal license to call into question the Board's work, it is surprising that you now maintain that members of the committee need a closed-door proceeding before being able to ask "informed questions" at a public hearing," they write in the letter.
Pickering and Mullen assert that since they are not witnesses, but rather officials asked to serve on a review board, they should be permitted to testify in public.

"While we understand and respect that your committee has the authority and responsibility to review the Benghazi attacks, we ask that you similarly understand and respect that the Accountability Review Board bore its own authority and responsibility to review Benghazi," they write.

"What the Committee is now proposing is highly unusual in the context of senior officials who are not fact witnesses but instead are reporting their own independent review."

Last year’s attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Pickering and Mullen have proposed May 28 or June 3 for a public hearing.

Poor Issa.. now what?

[George Gervin's Afro]

You do not change a story 12 times.

how many times is appropriate?

[Winehole23]

You do not change a story 12 times.

Why not? Is that not the usual procedure?

[RandomGuy]

."The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this. But the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and non-substantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from 'consulate' to 'diplomatic facility' and the like," he said.
State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell also said Rice's comments were based on the intelligence community's "best assessment that there was not any evidence of months-long pre-planning or pre-meditation, which remains their assessment."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2Sunr7jml

OK, are intelligence assessments often revised before release?

Yes or no -- and back up your answer with linked explanations.

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.

You do not change a story 12 times.

That isn't really an answer to that question.

Simple yes or no is all that is required.

3rd time:
OK, are intelligence assessments often revised before release?
Please back up your answer with linked explanations, so we can see for ourselves if your answer holds up.