Dirty Laundry on Libya

I see the repubs are doing anything they can to get the attention off their latest rape endorsement.

 

You did hear that Romney said he disagrees with him right? You really think this is all an elaborate ploy to get your minds off of what candidate said that 99% of Repugs disagree with?

 

Exactly it does imply gathering, and more than one source. So because the White House relied more on the CIA and their multiple sources of gathered intel rather than the one source which was a tweet, it shouldn't be too hard for you to realize it wasn't a cover up.

The original source of what you've quoted was indeed a tweet.

 

Really? Because here was Hillary Clinton, on Sept 12:


"We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault."

Here was the White House:

"It's too early for us to make that judgment. I think -- I know that this is being investigated, and we're working with the Libyan government to investigate the incident. So I would not want to speculate on that at this time." - Jay Carney

Here was the State Department Spokesperson on Sept 13:

"Well, as we said yesterday when we were on background, we are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, whether it was premeditated, whether they had any external contacts, whether there was any link, until we have a chance to investigate along with the Libyans. So I know that's going to be frustrating for you, but we really want to make sure that we do this right and we don't jump to conclusions. That said, obviously, there are plenty of people around the region citing this disgusting video as something that has been motivating."

Does that sound like a dismissal, or a statement that they are currently still investigating?

Yes, that is exactly what their current best assessment was. It was exactly what the CIA told them the previous day:


“Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

What a horrible position to take! I mean, how conniving of the administration to tell us what the CIA told them was their current assessment, and tell us they are still investigating and will see what more they learn.

 

Except that as noted it was referred to as an act of terror and anytime an ambassador get's killed deliberately that is by definition an act of terror. Anyway anytime an ambassador dies violently that is going to reflect badly on the Admin.. As I said before I don't think the Admin. handled this case well but this is a stretch to accuse them of politicizing it or covering it up when basic incompetence and confusion seems likely.

 

We are clearly reading the same news sources. You just want to comprehend it differently.

 

So you are better able to look at the facts and distinguish the important ones in real time better than the CIA?

Get a job in govt. then. They obviously need you. But even if you can, that doesn't make it a political move, or cover up from the white house. It is what the investigative agency told them was happening.

 

In Benghazi those kind of weapons are readily available. They just fought a bloody civil war and much of Libya including Benghazi is run by heavily armed militias.

 

Yeah, they are. That's how they gather intelligence about things like Embassy bombings.

Of course we can look at the general outrage over the video, what happened in Egypt, and other reasons why they might have believed what they believed. But in the end it doesn't matter. It does, however, show that the administration didn't cover up anything or politicize it.

 

Condi Rice Pours Cold Water On ‘Benghazi-Gate’

Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice broke with the majority of her party last night on Fox News, as she tried to hit the brakes on the right wing’s politicization of the recent attack in Libya.

Host Greta Van Susteren asked Rice directly and repeatedly about a set of emails uncovered by Reuters. In what has been dubbed “Benghazi-Gate,” the conservative media has jumped on the emails as definitive proof that the Obama administration has been lying about what it knew and when in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Rice’s response was likely not what Van Susteren expected:

RICE: But when things are unfolding very, very quickly, it’s not always easy to know what is really going on on the ground. And to my mind, the really important questions here are about how information was collected. Did the various agencies really coordinate and share intelligence in the way that we had hoped, with the reforms that were made after 9/11?

So there’s a big picture to be examined here. But we don’t have all of the pieces, and I think it’s easy to try and jump to conclusions about what might have happened here. It’s probably better to let the relevant bodies do their work.

 

Well, obviously giddyup knows more than her! Duh!

 

I love integrity.

 

This almost makes me think there was a cover up. Condi has been so dishonest for so long, that it's hard to take anything she says as accurate.

 

interview w/ the father of one of the Navy Seals killed in the attack.

clipboard fail.

 

I'm sorry for the gentleman's death, but he accepted that possibility when he enlisted.

Stop trying to politicize the issue