Who Started The Benghazi "Real-Time" Video Falsehood?

[Lakhota]

By Simon Maloy

Washington Post media writer Erik Wemple has been working doggedly to correct one of Sean Hannity's favorite false claims about the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi: that State Department officials watched "real-time" video of the assault from an office in Washington, DC. Wemple's efforts got an assist from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on January 23: "There was no monitor, there was no real time." As Wemple's debunking of the falsehood makes clear, Hannity has been the primary driver of this claim by repeating on a near-daily basis. But the "real-time" video falsehood did not start with the Fox News host. In fact, one of the first mentions -- perhaps the first -- of the spurious Benghazi video was on Jennifer Rubin's Washington Post blog.

The whole story starts with an October 10, 2012, hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. At that hearing, Charlene Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary of state for international programs, had this exchange with Rep. James Lankford (R-OK), describing how she followed via telephone the developments in the Benghazi attack as they were happening:

DETAILS: Who Started The Benghazi "Real-Time" Video Falsehood? | Blog | Media Matters for America

Fox News and Benghazi video: For real? - Erik Wemple - The Washington Post

 

[Two Thumbs]

he got away with it already.

Don't worry, justice will not prevail

 

[OODA_Loop]

What difference does it make ?

 

[blackhawk]

 

[healthmyths]

What difference does it make ?

Because American voters were told Obama had terrorism on the run!
Osama was dead .. GM is alive" actual campaign slogan and talking heads Democrats all passed on that the War on Terror is over .. it is NOW a legal effort!
BUT when 9/11/12 Benghazi occurred that was a terrorist act.. so why did Rice go on TV and saying these exact words:

"based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy –sparked by this hateful video.
But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that– in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent."
Actually, yes, Susan Rice did say the Benghazi attacks were spontaneous | WashingtonExaminer.com


THEN HILLARY told this to a parent of one of the 4 dead Americans:

Hillary Clinton’s comments to Woods raise even more questions about the White House’s official story on the Benghazi attack, which has already been extremely inconsistent.
After apologizing for his loss, Woods said Clinton told him that the U.S. would “make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.”

WHY would it be so important to make sure the videographer was arrested and prosecuted???

That's the difference! By DEFLECTING to the video.. Americans would vote for Obama because after all it wasn't a terrorist attack but spontaneous reaction the that
awful video!!!

 

[S.J.]

The embassy staff called for help and our president and sec. of state ignored them. Now they're dead. Liberals are ok with this. Kinda shows everyone where they're coming from. Politics trumps human life.

 

[OKTexas]

They say there were drones overhead, if that was indeed the case, then there is real time video.

Watch this video with Chris Wallace and Dem Senator Udall.

Dem Senator Udall Balks ? Won?t Say If Benghazi Drones Were Armed (Video) | The Gateway Pundit

 

[Lakhota]

 

[jwoodie]

Real time video = red herring designed to divert attention from disastrous foreign policy.

 

[healthmyths]

The POINT is Benghazi was a planned 9/11/12 TERRORIST ATTACK!!!

NOT caused by a video which was the story Obama people put out so and this is the real reason..
SO voters would NOT have any questions as to Obama's terrorism prowess!
REMEMBER "OSAMA IS DEAD... GM IS ALIVE" slogan pounded by the MSM for ever!
If Osama was dead that meant Terrorism was dead!
But Benghazi attack if NOT BLAMED on the video would refute Obama's terrorism fighting credentials!
HENCE THE VIDEO!
THAT's the point probably worth million two million votes for Romney and against Obama if people were told the truth.. it wasn't the VIDEO!

 

[AmericanFirst]

Point is, libtards hate the truth and obamaturd and hillary lied and failed our personnel.

 

[Freewill]

actually here is where the story really started:

White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn't Respond - Forbes

The truth is that there was at least one hour of real time feed from a predator drone that arrived on the scene in hour 6. Which is interesting that it took that long, if what they are saying is true. Also there was one woman who was monitoring the audio at the compound.

Or maybe it started with this report:

'Real-time' video shows Benghazi drama, but questions remain

Real time just means it was taken from surveillance cameras, which apparently were not being watched by anyone.

 

[Clementine]

They say there were drones overhead, if that was indeed the case, then there is real time video.

Watch this video with Chris Wallace and Dem Senator Udall.

Dem Senator Udall Balks ? Won?t Say If Benghazi Drones Were Armed (Video) | The Gateway Pundit

You are correct.

People on the ground reported seeing the drones. One Marine painted a target thinking that the drones would strike. When they didn't, the Marine was dead because he had given his position away by painting the target. The drones were there and, therefore, video was available.

It amazes me that from the get-go, the Obama administration made claims of a protest gone wrong because of a video. Funny how quickly they had false information to pass on. That tells me they knew the truth and were deliberately lying to get themselves off the hook. There is no other explanation as to why they pushed a made-up story for so long.

There were reports prior to the 9/11 attack of terrorist attacks in the area, including one at the embassy where a hole was blown in the surrounding wall. There was also a death threat posted online, showing a picture of Stevens. This was all known by the administration at the time that requests for additional security came in. It was bad enough to deny that, but to remove security from the embassy just prior to the attack is really telling.

It all supports a General's claims that the entire kidnapping of Stevens was staged so that he could be traded for the Blind Sheik. Obama had to be compliant with the plan, as did Hillary and other top officials. When the Marines disobeyed orders to stand down, the terrorists thought they were double-crossed and then killed the ambassador and the others.

The fact that orders came to stand down is another strong indication that the administration and top officials knew exactly what was happening and yet told those on the ground not to engage. A General was arrested for trying to help. The man who arrested him was later appointed by Obama to replace him. I'm sure his loyalty to the administration to sit idle while our ambassador was being kidnapped impressed Obama.

If anyone really believes that some mysterious person told them that it was just protesters mad at a video, they need to have their heads examined. Why would they run with something we now know is false unless this is an effort to conceal the truth? You can't give orders to stand down after people on the ground inform you of what is happening and that they are prepared to act unless you know exactly what is happening.

Otherwise, what were they being told to stand down from? Someone knew exactly what they were doing.

Are we to believe that the administration didn't want them stopping protesters from killing our people? No matter who was doing the killing, our people should have stepped in. Those on the ground saw what was going on, so I guess the left believes that all radio communications were down and there was no contact whatsoever between those in the know and the administration. Orders to arrest the General who wanted to fight back had to come from the top.

It's clear some in the administration were well aware of what was happening or they could not have demanded the arrest of the General or issued any orders to the people on the ground.

How much bullshit are people willing to eat just to stay loyal to Obama?

 

[tjvh]

Liberals honestly believe that truth, and facts take a distant second to the furthering of whatever progressive agenda holds their short attention span at any given moment. They don't care about the truth as long as their utopian dream can be realized... No matter who gets killed along the way. If you aren't on board with their irrational fantasy, they view you as an enemy who must be destroyed... Funny isn't it? They irrationally profess Peace at all costs, and they simply don't care if they have to step over a few bodies to edge closer to their ideological dream. Simply put, Liberals are control freaks... Control freaks who believed it was better to lie to the American people then admit Benghazi was a terrorist attack, because in their twisted minds the lie was justified because it contributed to what they see as the greater good... The re-election of a Liberal icon, who was in way over his head to begin with... And still is.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What difference does it make ?

like the fake live feed video bullshit, you use Hillary's statement out of context and even in context purposefully or worse ignorantly, misrepresent it.
\


and you act like you've added something of substance to a thread

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Watch it end up there was a live video of some sort to people on the ground or in Libya...

The right would declare victory and march away without ever apologizing to those they smeared with attacks.

then again, it is better if there is no video because they can live in blissful ignorance of facts

 

[deltex1]

Hillary was clearly out of the loop...clueless...so she may well not have seen the real time video from the armed drone that was over the site of the consulate as the attackers gathered for the assault. This will be the disgrace of the decade and only underlines what a deceitful prick we have for a President.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

This is exactly what the WSJ editorial page's John Fund and others did with the Vince Foster tragedy

Who Started The Benghazi "Real-Time" Video Falsehood? | Blog | Media Matters for America

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Hillary was clearly out of the loop...clueless...so she may well not have seen the real time video from the armed drone that was over the site of the consulate as the attackers gathered for the assault.

what real time video?

 

[deltex1]

Hillary was clearly out of the loop...clueless...so she may well not have seen the real time video from the armed drone that was over the site of the consulate as the attackers gathered for the assault.

what real time video?

The one classified top secret by the administration.