Who Changed The Talking Points?

[Vel]

For those that don't want to rely on the FoxNews story, I also included a link to a government media source.
********************************************************

Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says
Published November 16, 2012
FoxNews.com

Former CIA Director David Petraeus testified in a closed-door hearing Friday morning that his agency determined immediately after the Sept. 11 Libya attack that "Al Qaeda involvement" was suspected -- but the line was taken out in the final version circulated to administration officials, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.

Read more: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says | Fox News
***************************************************
Rep. King: CIA story on Benghazi changed

Former CIA Director David Petraeus told the House Intelligence Committee today that it's unclear why the Obama administration's original talking points on the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, don't match the CIA's original talking points.

House Intel chair: CIA story on Benghazi changed - CBS News

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Well well well.. the truth is coming out.. An overt and desperate COVER UP at the WH. Gee, like anyone is surprised? Before this is over, Obama will be impeached.. He's lied over and over and the result is dead Americans.

 

[blastoff]

As long as the lefty media continues to show no interest in the truth Barry's as snug as a bug in a rug.

 

[francoHFW]

The CIA gained more info as time went on. No lies, no conspiracy, brainwashed morons.

 

[healthmyths]

For those that don't want to rely on the FoxNews story, I also included a link to a government media source.
********************************************************

Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says
Published November 16, 2012
FoxNews.com

Former CIA Director David Petraeus testified in a closed-door hearing Friday morning that his agency determined immediately after the Sept. 11 Libya attack that "Al Qaeda involvement" was suspected -- but the line was taken out in the final version circulated to administration officials, according to a top lawmaker who was briefed.

Read more: Petraeus testifies CIA's Libya talking points were changed, lawmaker says | Fox News
***************************************************
Rep. King: CIA story on Benghazi changed

Former CIA Director David Petraeus told the House Intelligence Committee today that it's unclear why the Obama administration's original talking points on the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, don't match the CIA's original talking points.

House Intel chair: CIA story on Benghazi changed - CBS News

Remember.. Nixon resigned because at some point the Senate would bring impeachment. The house starts the process but the Senate actually manages.
Remember in 2014 there are 10 democrat seats up with right now Dems at 53 Seats and GOP 45 BUT if Senate goes GOP by Dems losing 10 seats.. IMPEACHMENT!

 

[liarintheWH]

The CIA gained more info as time went on. No lies, no conspiracy, brainwashed morons.

hahahahahahaha

Fucks like you defending this guy are brainwashed. Makes me sick.

 

[emptystep]

Vel, when you say 'Obama administration's original talking points' what you mean are the final talking points. Who has the original talking points and where they differ from the final talking points is the whole issue here, now isn't it?

An unrelated fact:
Reprentative Peter King, chairman of the House homeland security committee, emerged just after 9am to say the hearing before his committee was over. He said there were discrepancies between what Petraeus had previously told the committee about the Benghazi attack and what he said on Friday.
Petraeus testimony on Benghazi contradicts previous House statement | World news | guardian.co.uk

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

King: Petraeus Said CIA's Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down Terrorism | MRCTV

King: Petraeus Said CIA's Talking Points Were Edited to Play Down Terrorism

Here's the video.. Someone doctored the CIA's release.. CAN YOU SAY IMPEACHMENT

 

[beretta304]

The CIA gained more info as time went on. No lies, no conspiracy, brainwashed morons.

Look, this is a message board so don't talk about yourself..discuss the topics.

 

[emptystep]

By all means righties, keep bashing on this issue.....

 

[Claudette]

Jesus H. Christ. Like Petraeus wouldn't know a terrorist attack when he saw one??

The guy spent how much time in Iraq and Astan doing his best not to get killed in one?

He knew it was a terrorist attack and so did that fuck and the rest of those dopes he surrounds himself with.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Claudette.. Libruls know they're busted.. They know their Supreme State Leader lied.. They will do whatever they have to cover it all up.. That's the bottom line.. THIS IS ALL ABOUT A COVER UP..His willing Zombies and the State run media.. we shall see if Republicans have the ballz to see this thru..

 

[WillowTree]

By all means righties, keep bashing on this issue.....

Thanks, that's just what we needed, your permission.

 

[beretta304]

Claudette.. Libruls know they're busted.. They know their Supreme State Leader lied.. They will do whatever they have to cover it all up.. That's the bottom line.. THIS IS ALL ABOUT A COVER UP..His willing Zombies and the State run media.. we shall see if Republicans have the ballz to see this thru..

Sadly instead of getting to the bottom of things, they will cave for the sake of political correctness.

The one bright spot is that the lamestream media seems at least so far, willing to report on it.

 

[The Rabbi]

So the question is why the WH would put out a story that it was a spontaneous demonstration of a 5 yr old video on YouTube when they knew better.
Could it be they were scared that a terrorist attack close to election day would indicate what a failure Obama was?

 

[beretta304]

By all means righties, keep bashing on this issue.....

Yeah right, the "righties" are bashing... not looking for the truth. Change your name to emptyhead. It's more indicative of your thinking.

 

[beretta304]

So the question is why the WH would put out a story that it was a spontaneous demonstration of a 5 yr old video on YouTube when they knew better.
Could it be they were scared that a terrorist attack close to election day would indicate what a failure Obama was?

They probably figured it would never become an issue. Just another unfortunate, ME killing and no one would give it a second thought. See terrorism is not something that our "hoops star" President is concerned with. "Celebrity" is his forte. Beyonce advided him to just, "fuck it", let's get on with the party.

 

[emptystep]

So the question is why the WH would put out a story that it was a spontaneous demonstration of a 5 yr old video on YouTube when they knew better.
Could it be they were scared that a terrorist attack close to election day would indicate what a failure Obama was?

Well, gee, that is a good question. Why would the WH do something that was clearly bashing them in the polls? Heck the only one who was benefiting from the 'WH misinformation' was the other candidate and everyone knows the other candidate was going to slash defense spending drastically so none of this makes any sense at all.

 

[The Rabbi]

So the question is why the WH would put out a story that it was a spontaneous demonstration of a 5 yr old video on YouTube when they knew better.
Could it be they were scared that a terrorist attack close to election day would indicate what a failure Obama was?

Well, gee, that is a good question. Why would the WH do something that was clearly bashing them in the polls? Heck the only one who was benefiting from the 'WH misinformation' was the other candidate and everyone knows the other candidate was going to slash defense spending drastically so none of this makes any sense at all.

Your post didnt make any sense at all. Can I get a translation into English?

 

[emptystep]

So the question is why the WH would put out a story that it was a spontaneous demonstration of a 5 yr old video on YouTube when they knew better.
Could it be they were scared that a terrorist attack close to election day would indicate what a failure Obama was?

Well, gee, that is a good question. Why would the WH do something that was clearly bashing them in the polls? Heck the only one who was benefiting from the 'WH misinformation' was the other candidate and everyone knows the other candidate was going to slash defense spending drastically so none of this makes any sense at all.

Your post didnt make any sense at all. Can I get a translation into English?

My point exactly!