Benghazi memo edits show State, White House involvement

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 10 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Well what do you know?!?


A top State Department official pressed the CIA and the White House to delete any mention of terrorism in public statements on the Benghazi terror attack to prevent critics from blaming lax security at the consulate, according to documents obtained by ABC News. The information "goes right to the heart of what the White House continues to deny," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told USA TODAY. "For eight months they denied there's any manipulation, but this continues to shed light on something that was never true."


www.usatoday.com...




posted on May, 10 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 




Benghazi memo edits show State, White House involvement,


I don't think this will wind up being a Watergate or a Monicagate. Not because it perhaps doesn't deserve the attention, but because the last two administrations have been pretty much out of reach from both media and public,.

Just as Bush got away with so much, Obama seems destined to the same soft landing. It may be that those in the hidden folds of power simply won't allow it or because there is always a patsy ready to fall upon their sword for the emperor. In this case, Hilary seems a likely candidate for that self-sacrifice.

Kind of odd... there's no love lost between the Clintons and Obamas but... in politics, that doesn't matter.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by redoubt
 

I totaly agree with you.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by nighthawk1954
Well what do you know?!?


A top State Department official pressed the CIA and the White House to delete any mention of terrorism in public statements on the Benghazi terror attack to prevent critics from blaming lax security at the consulate, according to documents obtained by ABC News. The information "goes right to the heart of what the White House continues to deny," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told USA TODAY. "For eight months they denied there's any manipulation, but this continues to shed light on something that was never true."


www.usatoday.com...


Republicans: "Duuh, hello we've been pointing this out for a long time now!"
Democrats: "Huh, er, what? *sigh* This Benghazi stuff is old news, nothing to see here. Hey did you see that Jodi Arias was convicted the other day?"



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Well l hope other people in our great goverment go down!
edit on 10-5-2013 by nighthawk1954 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Thanks for posting! I just got to ATS today and I can't believe this Benghazi thing is not huge!

How about that press conference just now? Carney was so nervous and kept talking in circles and evading the real questions!

It's about time all the press started covering this.

S and F!



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Ok, I just have to say, what has happened to ATS???

Go to recent posts and this is the only thread on Benghazi?

Pathetic! Is this subject being censored here too, or are there no patriots left here?



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee
Ok, I just have to say, what has happened to ATS???

Go to recent posts and this is the only thread on Benghazi?

Pathetic! Is this subject being censored here too, or are there no patriots left here?


We've seen some supporters of the president try to diffuse the situation here.

It ended in failure.

This is a big story. The government lied. People died. (to coin an oft used phrase)



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by SunnyDee
Ok, I just have to say, what has happened to ATS???

Go to recent posts and this is the only thread on Benghazi?

Pathetic! Is this subject being censored here too, or are there no patriots left here?


We've seen some supporters of the president try to diffuse the situation here.

It ended in failure.

This is a big story. The government lied. People died. (to coin an oft used phrase)


I know and I agree, BIG! So what is the reply count here so far? I'm doing my best to bump this thread, but I can't stay!

Horray! Finally the MSM is being forced to do it's job! ABC news asking hard questions, yeah!



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee
Ok, I just have to say, what has happened to ATS???

Go to recent posts and this is the only thread on Benghazi?

Pathetic! Is this subject being censored here too, or are there no patriots left here?


Here's what "happened"..

The fellow at 1600 Pennsylvania is not a Republican.

Can anyone research and get back to me on how many threads/posts there was dealing with Valarie Plame?



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by nighthawk1954
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Well l hope other people in our great goverment go down!
edit on 10-5-2013 by nighthawk1954 because: (no reason given)


I just hope those guilty are held accountable. Wherever the chips may fall.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Not sure what you're saying. Are you playing the "poor democrat always gets picked on" card?

Look here, Bush 2 should have been impeached, He did the mother of all coverups, but the Dems did $^*$ to take him to task. Now we finally have a group of whistleblowers and congressmen that are coming forward and speaking up and asking hard questions that are LONG overdue!

Let's be glad people are doing their job, and trying to get to the bottom of who is accountable.

Clearly we were manipulated with a lie.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I'll admit, on the surface this doesn't look good. But I still say reserve judgment until all the facts are out - to me, this sounds like knee-jerk reaction without knowing the full context of the edits. For instance (yeah, I know, a left-wing rag):


Moreover, an update the ABC report undermines the notion that Nuland’s motives were campaign related or political:

A source familiar with the White House emails on the Benghazi talking point revisions say that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland was raising two concerns about the CIA’s first version of talking points, which were going to be sent to Congress: 1) The talking points went further than what she was allowed to say about the attack during her state department briefings; and, 2) she believed the CIA was attempting to exonerate itself at the State Department’s expense by suggesting CIA warnings about the security situation were ignored.

In other words, ABC’s “exclusive” reveals a turf battle, not some cover-up. As it turns out, the story is more about how talking points are generated in the interagency process, a point the Hill newspaper took notice of in its headline reporting on ABC’s story:


thinkprogress.org...

So, feel free to make final judgments without knowing all the facts, but I still see a lot less "there" there than many are making out...



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 


I'm not playing any cards. This is a damn tragedy and complete lack of leadership, honor, and integrity. The president should resign over these lies and the coverup like Nixon did. This is monumentally worse than Watergate because four Americans are dead and the lies and changing of the Intel was done to try and preserve a presidential campaign. The rescue team was told to stand down because the president was trying to get reelected.

This is disgusting.
edit on 10-5-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by redtic
 


They knew they were about to be attacked they asked for enforcements. Someone at the top said no. They were rumored to be supplying weopons through this post, so maybe it was time to close the post.-my guess.

Then someone assumed the story would go under the radar, the attack, but it didn't because important people were removed of duty on the spot that couldn't comprehend that no back-up was called in (General Ham). Yeah, a general was fired for wanting to do something to protect our assets.

The whole thing was a clusterfrick so a story needed to be created. Took 4 days for it to be posted, was revised, between CIA and WH until a palatable story was concocted.

there were no protests at Benghazi. To even bring that in as a reason to this remote outpost attack is ridiculous.

After the attack and the story of it spontaneously erupting from a video, guess what? The whole middle east started riots and protesting and you can bet, people suffered in those riots, fueled directly from this "story".
edit on 10-5-2013 by SunnyDee because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Ok, sorry, your post was hard to read, as I said.

Agreed.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Ok, sorry, your post was hard to read, as I said.

Agreed.


I was sorta mocking the Obama drone's hypocrisy.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by redtic
So, feel free to make final judgments without knowing all the facts, but I still see a lot less "there" there than many are making out...


That process would be much easier if the Admin wasn't doing everything in their power to prevent any facts from coming out. They have been beligerant and obfuscatory even with Congress. I'm sorry, but generally the side trying their damndest to hide the facts has a reason to hide them.



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by redtic
So, feel free to make final judgments without knowing all the facts, but I still see a lot less "there" there than many are making out...


That process would be much easier if the Admin wasn't doing everything in their power to prevent any facts from coming out. They have been beligerant and obfuscatory even with Congress. I'm sorry, but generally the side trying their damndest to hide the facts has a reason to hide them.


I understand the frustration, but the bottom line is, however frustrating it is, that no one really knows all the facts yet. To indict an entire administration, or just key people within it, as many here and on the hill want to do, without knowing those facts is premature at best. Things seem to be coming to a head - I hope all of the facts do finally come out - I suspect, in the end, we'll end up moving beyond a distraction, rather than indicting an administration. (And, no, I'm not being dismissive of the fact that people died here - of course that's a bad thing and deserves some closure).



posted on May, 10 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Any administration that would go to these lengths to lie and cover up the truth, and is still attempting to halt any further disclosures on these matters should at least alarm you all.

If they got caught here, just imagine what they have gotten away with that you are still unaware of.






top topics
 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join