"Republicans finally admit there is no Benghazi scandal"

[Faun]

OS 10337929

NF 10335677

OS 10334819

Show me a report from the intelligence community five days after the attack that still say a protest took place before the attack on our consulate, Notfooled

The White House released CIA talking points emails that are absolute proof that it was the CIA not the WH that ran with the 'protest participation' original assessment at the consulate in Benghazi. The CIA signed off on their version five days after the attack,

Your 24 hour version appears to be a fabrication and myth.

Show me those emails then, Notfooled. You say they that the intelligence community was still saying it was a protest five days after the attack...show me where they do so.

Scroll down to about the fourth email dated September 14. 2012 at 02:52:57 PM in this link:


White House Benghazi Emails

You will see the CIA expressed phrase "Demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired" remains in the final product sent to Congress and the White House. -


That was on the 14th .... long after your 24 hours OldStyle where you claim - UNPROVEN - that the IC knew there was no protest in Benghazi.

You have not been telling the truth and that is bad.

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community where people like Ben Rhodes and Victoria Nuland are DEMANDING that the intelligence community retain the "protest" aspect for "insulation" and the intelligence community is stating that the attacks were carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists and yet Susan Rice STILL goes out days later and says that to the best of their knowledge it was a protest over the video that was taken over by extremist elements. The only people that haven't been telling the truth throughout this has been the Obama White House! You can see by the email traffic you've provided that the White House is still exerting pressure on the intelligence people to give them the message they want...that this wasn't a failure of policy but was a spontaneous act...that this wasn't Al Queda.

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

 

[Oldstyle]

OS 10337929

NF 10335677

OS 10334819

Show me a report from the intelligence community five days after the attack that still say a protest took place before the attack on our consulate, Notfooled

The White House released CIA talking points emails that are absolute proof that it was the CIA not the WH that ran with the 'protest participation' original assessment at the consulate in Benghazi. The CIA signed off on their version five days after the attack,

Your 24 hour version appears to be a fabrication and myth.

Show me those emails then, Notfooled. You say they that the intelligence community was still saying it was a protest five days after the attack...show me where they do so.

Scroll down to about the fourth email dated September 14. 2012 at 02:52:57 PM in this link:


White House Benghazi Emails

You will see the CIA expressed phrase "Demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired" remains in the final product sent to Congress and the White House. -


That was on the 14th .... long after your 24 hours OldStyle where you claim - UNPROVEN - that the IC knew there was no protest in Benghazi.

You have not been telling the truth and that is bad.

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community where people like Ben Rhodes and Victoria Nuland are DEMANDING that the intelligence community retain the "protest" aspect for "insulation" and the intelligence community is stating that the attacks were carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists and yet Susan Rice STILL goes out days later and says that to the best of their knowledge it was a protest over the video that was taken over by extremist elements. The only people that haven't been telling the truth throughout this has been the Obama White House! You can see by the email traffic you've provided that the White House is still exerting pressure on the intelligence people to give them the message they want...that this wasn't a failure of policy but was a spontaneous act...that this wasn't Al Queda.

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm waiting for DogStyle to work in Roswell aliens on the grassy knoll....

 

[Oldstyle]

You've got the White House and the State Department strong-arming the intelligence community as to what the message should be in their talking points. The White House and State demand and get 12 revisions to the original talking points. Any mention of Al Queda is scrubbed. A week goes by and it's become embarrassingly obvious that there never was a protest and Leon Panettta was correct when he said he knew right away it was a terror attack. Only then does the White House start to walk the "protest" narrative back because it's become obvious that story isn't standing up to even a cursory examination by the media. So what does the White House do at that point? Joe Biden comes out and blames the CIA for "misleading" the White House. It takes an incredible level of chutzpah to even go that way because you're making enemies in the intelligence community who just bent over backwards to try and not make you look like the Bozos that you are...but it's been obvious all along that this Administration is pretty much clueless so why would we expect them to be any smarter in regards to this as they have been about anything else?

I'll be waiting for the next time when Barry and Friends need a favor from the CIA. Between trying to throw them under the bus for Benghazi and doing the same thing for "torture"...my guess is that nobody at Langley will even return a call from this White House.

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm waiting for DogStyle to work in Roswell aliens on the grassy knoll....

Were there a "thousand" aliens on that grassy knoll, Joey? Doh!!!

 

[Faun]

OS 10337929

NF 10335677

OS 10334819 The White House released CIA talking points emails that are absolute proof that it was the CIA not the WH that ran with the 'protest participation' original assessment at the consulate in Benghazi. The CIA signed off on their version five days after the attack,

Your 24 hour version appears to be a fabrication and myth.

Show me those emails then, Notfooled. You say they that the intelligence community was still saying it was a protest five days after the attack...show me where they do so.

Scroll down to about the fourth email dated September 14. 2012 at 02:52:57 PM in this link:


White House Benghazi Emails

You will see the CIA expressed phrase "Demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired" remains in the final product sent to Congress and the White House. -


That was on the 14th .... long after your 24 hours OldStyle where you claim - UNPROVEN - that the IC knew there was no protest in Benghazi.

You have not been telling the truth and that is bad.

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community where people like Ben Rhodes and Victoria Nuland are DEMANDING that the intelligence community retain the "protest" aspect for "insulation" and the intelligence community is stating that the attacks were carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists and yet Susan Rice STILL goes out days later and says that to the best of their knowledge it was a protest over the video that was taken over by extremist elements. The only people that haven't been telling the truth throughout this has been the Obama White House! You can see by the email traffic you've provided that the White House is still exerting pressure on the intelligence people to give them the message they want...that this wasn't a failure of policy but was a spontaneous act...that this wasn't Al Queda.

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.

You're still running away from what I posted. In terms of the administration pushing the protest narrative, what difference does it make weather there were protests or not or what the IC first believed? As the report shows, the IC was informing the administration the attack was provoked by the video up until September 24th. Intel comes from the IC, not the administration. Obama, Clinton and Rice were echoing the IC. In terms of the rightwingnutty position that the administration lied about that, It doesn't matter what the IC thought according to you. What matters is what the IC conveyed to the administration. And what they conveyed, up until the 24th, was that the attack was a protest spurred by an anti-Islamic video.

Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.

 

[JoeB131]

I'll be waiting for the next time when Barry and Friends need a favor from the CIA. Between trying to throw them under the bus for Benghazi and doing the same thing for "torture"...my guess is that nobody at Langley will even return a call from this White House.

Then they should all be fired.

As a matter of fact, we really need to go through the CIA with a big hose, and clean that whole rat's nest out.

 

[JoeB131]

Were there a "thousand" aliens on that grassy knoll, Joey? Doh!!!

I'm sure two or three more fat ex Special Forces Washouts could have held them off. Or something.

 

[JoeB131]

Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.

And that's the problem with conspiracy theorists like Dog Style. No matter how many times you prove to them it was a weather balloon, they will still insist it was a flying saucer.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Benghazi conspiracy theory is the result of a rightwing temper-tantrum, where the phony scandal failed to 'get rid' of Obama. It failed as the 'September Surprise' before the 2012 General Election and it has subsequently failed as 'justification' for impeachment, a trial in the Senate, a conviction in the Senate, and the removal of Obama from office.

Today the Benghazi conspiracy theory is kept alive by a tiny minority of hardcore partisan rightists in a futile and moronic effort to adversely effect the Obama legacy.

The Benghazi conspiracy theory might even be amusing if its adherents weren't so pathetic.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community

There was no back and forth on the 'spontaneous demonstration' issue. I posted that direct link to the released CIA talking point emails to debunk your lie that the intelligence community continued to believe that there was a spontaneous demonstration in Benghazi well beyond your made up
story that the knew there was no protest within 24 hours of the attack. That is a lie. They still held that belief at least through the 15th of September,

The emails prove you are wrong Oldstyle. You can't bluff your way out of this by now complaining about a 'back and forth'.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

OS 10340193

It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

Now you are saying the entire IC conspired to lie to Congress in order to help Obama to get re-ekected.

That is a pretty serious charge there Oldstyle. Why hasn't the GOP witchhunt spent millions going after that?

You make less sense as you go on. And you made no sense when you started.

 

[Oldstyle]

OS 10340193

It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

Now you are saying the entire IC conspired to lie to Congress in order to help Obama to get re-ekected.

That is a pretty serious charge there Oldstyle. Why hasn't the GOP witchhunt spent millions going after that?

You make less sense as you go on. And you made no sense when you started.

You know what's amusing...you've got 12 revisions to the original CIA talking points...revisions that were demanded by the State Department and the Obama White House...yet you don't think that there was any "back and forth" between the intelligence community and the Administration? How does THAT make sense to you, Notfooled? It's obvious how this all went down...all you have to do is read the Nuland and Rhodes emails to know what was going on behind the scenes...that's why those emails were hidden from the Congress and the American people until they were forced from the Obama people under a Freedom of Information lawsuit.

 

[Oldstyle]

Were there a "thousand" aliens on that grassy knoll, Joey? Doh!!!

I'm sure two or three more fat ex Special Forces Washouts could have held them off. Or something.

The Clinton State Department took the Libyan security detail from 30 men all the way down to 9 at a time when attacks by extremists against Western targets in Libya were spiking so badly that Great Britain and the Red Cross both pulled their people out. That's not 2 or 3 fat washouts we're talking about...that's 21 highly trained ex-special forces operators that were taken out of the equation. Think 21 of our special forces couldn't have made a difference in Benghazi?

 

[Oldstyle]

OS 10337929

NF 10335677Show me those emails then, Notfooled. You say they that the intelligence community was still saying it was a protest five days after the attack...show me where they do so.

Scroll down to about the fourth email dated September 14. 2012 at 02:52:57 PM in this link:


White House Benghazi Emails

You will see the CIA expressed phrase "Demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired" remains in the final product sent to Congress and the White House. -


That was on the 14th .... long after your 24 hours OldStyle where you claim - UNPROVEN - that the IC knew there was no protest in Benghazi.

You have not been telling the truth and that is bad.

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community where people like Ben Rhodes and Victoria Nuland are DEMANDING that the intelligence community retain the "protest" aspect for "insulation" and the intelligence community is stating that the attacks were carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists and yet Susan Rice STILL goes out days later and says that to the best of their knowledge it was a protest over the video that was taken over by extremist elements. The only people that haven't been telling the truth throughout this has been the Obama White House! You can see by the email traffic you've provided that the White House is still exerting pressure on the intelligence people to give them the message they want...that this wasn't a failure of policy but was a spontaneous act...that this wasn't Al Queda.

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.

You're still running away from what I posted. In terms of the administration pushing the protest narrative, what difference does it make weather there were protests or not or what the IC first believed? As the report shows, the IC was informing the administration the attack was provoked by the video up until September 24th. Intel comes from the IC, not the administration. Obama, Clinton and Rice were echoing the IC. In terms of the rightwingnutty position that the administration lied about that, It doesn't matter what the IC thought according to you. What matters is what the IC conveyed to the administration. And what they conveyed, up until the 24th, was that the attack was a protest spurred by an anti-Islamic video.

Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.

It's obvious that only "approved" intel was being accepted by this Administration, Faun! This isn't a case of the CIA sending the White House it's best estimates of what took place...this was the CIA sending the White House a report stating what they thought took place and the White House saying..."You know what...we like the part about a protest that escalated...but we don't like the part about Al Queda...so take out the Al Queda parts and leave in the protest parts even though it looks like that was wrong to begin with!" Then the White House acts shocked when someone asks if they changed the talking points. "Who us? Gosh no...we only changed one word and that was "stylistic"."

 

[Faun]

OS 10337929 Scroll down to about the fourth email dated September 14. 2012 at 02:52:57 PM in this link:


White House Benghazi Emails

You will see the CIA expressed phrase "Demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired" remains in the final product sent to Congress and the White House. -


That was on the 14th .... long after your 24 hours OldStyle where you claim - UNPROVEN - that the IC knew there was no protest in Benghazi.

You have not been telling the truth and that is bad.

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community where people like Ben Rhodes and Victoria Nuland are DEMANDING that the intelligence community retain the "protest" aspect for "insulation" and the intelligence community is stating that the attacks were carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists and yet Susan Rice STILL goes out days later and says that to the best of their knowledge it was a protest over the video that was taken over by extremist elements. The only people that haven't been telling the truth throughout this has been the Obama White House! You can see by the email traffic you've provided that the White House is still exerting pressure on the intelligence people to give them the message they want...that this wasn't a failure of policy but was a spontaneous act...that this wasn't Al Queda.

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.

You're still running away from what I posted. In terms of the administration pushing the protest narrative, what difference does it make weather there were protests or not or what the IC first believed? As the report shows, the IC was informing the administration the attack was provoked by the video up until September 24th. Intel comes from the IC, not the administration. Obama, Clinton and Rice were echoing the IC. In terms of the rightwingnutty position that the administration lied about that, It doesn't matter what the IC thought according to you. What matters is what the IC conveyed to the administration. And what they conveyed, up until the 24th, was that the attack was a protest spurred by an anti-Islamic video.

Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.

It's obvious that only "approved" intel was being accepted by this Administration, Faun! This isn't a case of the CIA sending the White House it's best estimates of what took place...this was the CIA sending the White House a report stating what they thought took place and the White House saying..."You know what...we like the part about a protest that escalated...but we don't like the part about Al Queda...so take out the Al Queda parts and leave in the protest parts even though it looks like that was wrong to begin with!" Then the White House acts shocked when someone asks if they changed the talking points. "Who us? Gosh no...we only changed one word and that was "stylistic"."

Umm ... your evidence the administration told the CIA to omit Al-Qaeda from their intelligence estimate is ... ?

 

[Antares]

Here you go, FooledbyO

Susan Rice: “What happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, prompted by the video.”

Lets expand on that a bit.

"..our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of-- of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. What we think then transpired in Benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. They came with heavy weapons which unfortunately are readily available in post revolutionary Libya. And it escalated into a much more violent episode. Obviously, that’s-- that’s our best judgment now. We’ll await the results of the investigation. And the president has been very clear--we’ll work with the Libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice.

September 16 Benjamin Netanyahu Susan Rice Keith Ellison Peter King Bob Woodward Jeffrey Goldberg Andrea Mitchell - Meet the Press - Transcripts NBC News

Except that as I've shown there was NO demonstration.

So?

(smile) Your narrative is false.

I know you don't care.

My "narrative" is the official account of what occurred. The result of 7 extensive investigations which pieced together the events which took place. Like Birthers rejected the official birth certificate because they couldn't let go of their beloved conspiracy; Dreamers can't let go of theirs. 20 more investigations can come and go, yet you Dreamers will reject every one if they reach the same conclusions as the first 7.

Yup, your narrative.

No demonstrations in Benghazi, none.

 

[kaz]

Are you kidding me? You show emails going back and forth between the White House and the intelligence community where people like Ben Rhodes and Victoria Nuland are DEMANDING that the intelligence community retain the "protest" aspect for "insulation" and the intelligence community is stating that the attacks were carried out by Al Queda affiliated terrorists and yet Susan Rice STILL goes out days later and says that to the best of their knowledge it was a protest over the video that was taken over by extremist elements. The only people that haven't been telling the truth throughout this has been the Obama White House! You can see by the email traffic you've provided that the White House is still exerting pressure on the intelligence people to give them the message they want...that this wasn't a failure of policy but was a spontaneous act...that this wasn't Al Queda.

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.

You're still running away from what I posted. In terms of the administration pushing the protest narrative, what difference does it make weather there were protests or not or what the IC first believed? As the report shows, the IC was informing the administration the attack was provoked by the video up until September 24th. Intel comes from the IC, not the administration. Obama, Clinton and Rice were echoing the IC. In terms of the rightwingnutty position that the administration lied about that, It doesn't matter what the IC thought according to you. What matters is what the IC conveyed to the administration. And what they conveyed, up until the 24th, was that the attack was a protest spurred by an anti-Islamic video.

Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.

It's obvious that only "approved" intel was being accepted by this Administration, Faun! This isn't a case of the CIA sending the White House it's best estimates of what took place...this was the CIA sending the White House a report stating what they thought took place and the White House saying..."You know what...we like the part about a protest that escalated...but we don't like the part about Al Queda...so take out the Al Queda parts and leave in the protest parts even though it looks like that was wrong to begin with!" Then the White House acts shocked when someone asks if they changed the talking points. "Who us? Gosh no...we only changed one word and that was "stylistic"."

Umm ... your evidence the administration told the CIA to omit Al-Qaeda from their intelligence estimate is ... ?

Here's an interesting fact you didn't know. The CIA works for the White House. You learn something every day, don't you? The White House pointing fingers while being normal for them is still pointing in a mirror when they point it at their subordinates.

 

[Faun]

Lets expand on that a bit.

"..our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of-- of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. What we think then transpired in Benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. They came with heavy weapons which unfortunately are readily available in post revolutionary Libya. And it escalated into a much more violent episode. Obviously, that’s-- that’s our best judgment now. We’ll await the results of the investigation. And the president has been very clear--we’ll work with the Libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice.

September 16 Benjamin Netanyahu Susan Rice Keith Ellison Peter King Bob Woodward Jeffrey Goldberg Andrea Mitchell - Meet the Press - Transcripts NBC News

Except that as I've shown there was NO demonstration.

So?

(smile) Your narrative is false.

I know you don't care.

My "narrative" is the official account of what occurred. The result of 7 extensive investigations which pieced together the events which took place. Like Birthers rejected the official birth certificate because they couldn't let go of their beloved conspiracy; Dreamers can't let go of theirs. 20 more investigations can come and go, yet you Dreamers will reject every one if they reach the same conclusions as the first 7.

Yup, your narrative.

No demonstrations in Benghazi, none.

So?

 

[Faun]

I don't see how you can deny this ...

In addition, there were intelligence reports in the days following the Benghazi attacks that al-Qa'ida-associated terrorists hoped to take advantage of global protests for further attacks. As a result of evidence from closed circuit videos and other reports, the IC changed its assessment about a protest in classified intelligence reports on September 24, 2012, to state there were no demonstrations or protests at the Temporary Mission Facility prior to the attacks. This slow change in the official assessment affected the public statements of government officials, who continued to state in press interviews that there were protests outside the Mission compound.

Senate Intelligence Committee report on Benghazi attack - Washington Post​

Hell, Faun...the intelligence community knew that DAY that there was no demonstrations or protests prior to the attacks. It's the White House and the State Department that insisted on keeping that original incorrect assessment LONG after it was clear to everyone involved that there was no protest in Benghazi!

An hour and a half before the attack started, Ambassador Stevens walked the Turkish diplomat he'd been meeting with to the front gates of the Consulate. Don't you think he would have mentioned a "protest" if there was one going on? The streets were empty. There was no protest. So why is Susan Rice still making that case a week later? That isn't something the intelligence community is pushing...that's something that the White House and the State Department are pushing because they are DESPERATE to deflect criticism of their policy failures.

You're still running away from what I posted. In terms of the administration pushing the protest narrative, what difference does it make weather there were protests or not or what the IC first believed? As the report shows, the IC was informing the administration the attack was provoked by the video up until September 24th. Intel comes from the IC, not the administration. Obama, Clinton and Rice were echoing the IC. In terms of the rightwingnutty position that the administration lied about that, It doesn't matter what the IC thought according to you. What matters is what the IC conveyed to the administration. And what they conveyed, up until the 24th, was that the attack was a protest spurred by an anti-Islamic video.

Seven investigations into this have exonerated the administration of lying because their narrative of a protest came from the IC. But you Dreamers can't let go of your conspiracy theory. You're too invested.

It's obvious that only "approved" intel was being accepted by this Administration, Faun! This isn't a case of the CIA sending the White House it's best estimates of what took place...this was the CIA sending the White House a report stating what they thought took place and the White House saying..."You know what...we like the part about a protest that escalated...but we don't like the part about Al Queda...so take out the Al Queda parts and leave in the protest parts even though it looks like that was wrong to begin with!" Then the White House acts shocked when someone asks if they changed the talking points. "Who us? Gosh no...we only changed one word and that was "stylistic"."

Umm ... your evidence the administration told the CIA to omit Al-Qaeda from their intelligence estimate is ... ?

Here's an interesting fact you didn't know. The CIA works for the White House. You learn something every day, don't you? The White House pointing fingers while being normal for them is still pointing in a mirror when they point it at their subordinates.

I still see no evidence the administration dictated to the CIA to remove Al-Qaeda references from their intelligence estimate. And again, you're stuck with 7 investigations confirming the administration got their information from the CIA, not the other way around; and you're stuck with 7 investigations confirming the administration did not lie about the protest narrative because they got that information from the CIA, who, according to the 7th investigation, pushed that narrative until 9.24.2012.

Sucks for you Dreamers, but it is what it is ... another rightwingnut conspiracy debunked. You're now relegated to the heap pile with Truthers and Birthers.