No, Those Emails Weren't About

[WelfareQueen]

The facts are now irrefutable. There is a direct link to the White House documenting a clearly false narrative in an attempt to win an election and deceive the American People. As Obama would say....the debate is over. Give it up.

 

[Edgetho]

This is one of the e-mails the lying ********** in chief's office refused to release because they said it was 'explicitly NOT about Benghazi'

Anybody in here want to help us understand what B E N G H A Z I spells?

dimocraps are lying scum. Top to bottom, inside out, the long the tall...etc, etc.

Even the ones that come in here and LIE to protect their masters, they're the worst liars of all

Meanwhile, Sharyl Atkisson, who was fired by the organization headed by DAVID RHODES, brother of BEN RHODES (CBS) for trying to bring actual news to a corrupt and disgusting propaganda organization (CBS) is still working without pay on bringing Americans actual news. Because the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM won't...

New Benghazi Docs April 29, 2014

Relatively few documents have been provided that shed light on White House involvement in the post-Benghazi narrative. Previously, emails showed that then-deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough, on Rhodes' behalf, assigned Hillary Clinton-aide Jake Sullivan to work with Deputy Director of the C.I.A. Mike Morell to edit the talking points on Benghazi.

As the various agencies worked to edit and approve the talking points on Sept. 14, Rhodes emailed that there would be a Deputies meeting the next morning to work out the issues. "That's polite code for let's not debate this on e-mail for 18 hours," one official involved told me last year.

Multiple government officials including those in the military, State Department and C.I.A. have stated in documents or under questioning that they immediately believed the attacks, using heavy weaponry and mortar shells, were the work of terrorists. Prior to the attacks, there had been multiple warnings of al Qaeda threats in Libya and, specifically, in Benghazi.

In fact, in an early version of the government’s “talking points,” the C.I.A. stated that it had “produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya,” and that “These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador's convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks." The administration later removed these C.I.A. disclosures about the advance warning of a threat.

Morell testified to Congress earlier this month that he, and not the White House, was responsible for making some of the most controversial revisions to the talking points, including removing the language about the advance warnings.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth, people.

In the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM, in academia, in Hollywood, in here... They're scum.

They're not the 'loyal' opposition, they are the enemy of freedom, America and Americans.

You better wake up and smell the roses.

 

[bedowin62]

finally; PROOF of White House lying and cover-up


now you know why the loony Left has been so unhinged at Republicans dogged efforts to get to the truth here

 

[The T]

This is one of the e-mails the lying ********** in chief's office refused to release because they said it was 'explicitly NOT about Benghazi'

Anybody in here want to help us understand what B E N G H A Z I spells?

dimocraps are lying scum. Top to bottom, inside out, the long the tall...etc, etc.

Even the ones that come in here and LIE to protect their masters, they're the worst liars of all

Meanwhile, Sharyl Atkisson, who was fired by the organization headed by DAVID RHODES, brother of BEN RHODES (CBS) for trying to bring actual news to a corrupt and disgusting propaganda organization (CBS) is still working without pay on bringing Americans actual news. Because the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM won't...

New Benghazi Docs April 29, 2014

Relatively few documents have been provided that shed light on White House involvement in the post-Benghazi narrative. Previously, emails showed that then-deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough, on Rhodes' behalf, assigned Hillary Clinton-aide Jake Sullivan to work with Deputy Director of the C.I.A. Mike Morell to edit the talking points on Benghazi.

As the various agencies worked to edit and approve the talking points on Sept. 14, Rhodes emailed that there would be a Deputies meeting the next morning to work out the issues. "That's polite code for let's not debate this on e-mail for 18 hours," one official involved told me last year.

Multiple government officials including those in the military, State Department and C.I.A. have stated in documents or under questioning that they immediately believed the attacks, using heavy weaponry and mortar shells, were the work of terrorists. Prior to the attacks, there had been multiple warnings of al Qaeda threats in Libya and, specifically, in Benghazi.

In fact, in an early version of the government’s “talking points,” the C.I.A. stated that it had “produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya,” and that “These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador's convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks." The administration later removed these C.I.A. disclosures about the advance warning of a threat.

Morell testified to Congress earlier this month that he, and not the White House, was responsible for making some of the most controversial revisions to the talking points, including removing the language about the advance warnings.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth, people.

In the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM, in academia, in Hollywood, in here... They're scum.

They're not the 'loyal' opposition, they are the enemy of freedom, America and Americans.

You better wake up and smell the roses.

Smell the roses? I smell stink weed.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I love the "Those responsible will be brought to justice." Why when anyone ever be brought to justice. Then the facts would have to come out.

 

[bedowin62]

ABC's Jonathan Karl And The Proof The White House Memo Wasn't Just About Benghazi | Blog | Media Matters for America

Hmmm...another TemplarKormac LIE. WHAT AN IGNORANT TROLL

ABC's Jonathan Karl, who was previously burned when he pushed falsehoods about CIA talking points generated in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi attacks, is now adopting the conservative distortion of a separate set of talking points authored by the White House*for media appearances by then U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice.

On September 16, 2012, Rice appeared on the Sunday political talk shows and suggested that the Benghazi terror attacks had grown out of spontaneous protests like those that were occurring worldwide in response to an anti-Muslim video. Conservatives*have claimed that Rice's comments on the Sunday shows were part of a deliberate effort to deceive the American people about the cause of the terror attacks, to bolster President Obama's re-election campaign. This effort has often involved distorting the CIA-approved talking points that Rice used to prepare for the interviews.

Karl*came under fire*in May 2013 after reporting that the network had "reviewed" emails from administration officials regarding the creation and editing of those CIA-generated talking points. While nothing Karl reported undermined assertions from the CIA that the intelligence community had approved those talking points, Karl suggested that the emails bolstered the conservative critique of the administration's response.

In fact, Karl had never seen the emails in question -- his story was*based*on "summaries" of the emails and "detailed notes" from a source who, it turned out, had*misrepresented*what the documents actually said. After media observers*slammed*Karl's "sloppy" reporting, ABC News*issued a statement*saying that the network "should have been more precise in its sourcing of those quotes, attributing them to handwritten copies of the emails taken by a Congressional source. We regret that error." Karl himself*apologized*in a statement to CNN.

More at the link so TemplarKormac doesn't pull a Yurt and go crying to a certain mod.

there is NOTHING in your quote that proves the e-mail in question wasnt about Benghazi and just about Benghazi.. that means your whole post is an excercise in left-wing stupidity

 

[bedowin62]

from the OPs own source:

Now Karl is returning to the subject of talking points used to prepare Rice for those September 16, 2012, interviews, seizing on a separate email authored by Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes that was released yesterday. The email details "Goals" and "Top-lines" for Rice's interviews and provides sample questions and answers.

Conservatives have fixated on one of Rhodes' recommendations for the interviews, detailing one of the goals as "To underscore that these protests are rooted in an internet video and not a broader failure of policy." Conservatives claim this is evidence the White House was seeking to deliberately mislead the public by blaming Benghazi on the anti-Muslim video rather than terrorism in the region.
==============================================================

so this states that the Administration WANTED TO MAKE IT ABOUT A BROADER discussion of violence in the ME. it DOESNT prove the White House original memo wasnt about Benghazi; it doesnt disprove obama wasnt deliberately trying to mislead. in fact it tends to make the case this administration WAS trying to mislead; since it offers NOTHING to prove ANY demonstrations were because of the video; just attempts to link ongoing violence in other regions to a video; and link all of that too Benghazi; when in fact there is A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE BENGHAZI WAS A COORDINATED TERRORIST ATTACK



libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[natstew]

Media Matters? Seriously?

Indeed, those White House mouthpieces will stand there before the media and lie their asses off.

"Most transparent administration" in history. Yeah, just as transparent as Hitler's was, no doubt.

Yep, Jay Carney was just doing that, said the Republicans are making it all up. Remember thee CIA guy who said nothing about a video was ever in the CIA report? Well Jay said that's where the video thing came from, same old tired worn out talking points.

Jay Carney is a craven liar!

 

[natstew]

Media Matters? Seriously?

No. It was MM relaying what ABC did.

ABC? really? ABC?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Theynstiol believe this was the video, my left ball is smarter than these people

 

[Jarhead]

ABC's Jonathan Karl And The Proof The White House Memo Wasn't Just About Benghazi | Blog | Media Matters for America

Hmmm...another TemplarKormac LIE. WHAT AN IGNORANT TROLL

ABC's Jonathan Karl, who was previously burned when he pushed falsehoods about CIA talking points generated in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi attacks, is now adopting the conservative distortion of a separate set of talking points authored by the White House*for media appearances by then U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice.

On September 16, 2012, Rice appeared on the Sunday political talk shows and suggested that the Benghazi terror attacks had grown out of spontaneous protests like those that were occurring worldwide in response to an anti-Muslim video. Conservatives*have claimed that Rice's comments on the Sunday shows were part of a deliberate effort to deceive the American people about the cause of the terror attacks, to bolster President Obama's re-election campaign. This effort has often involved distorting the CIA-approved talking points that Rice used to prepare for the interviews.

Karl*came under fire*in May 2013 after reporting that the network had "reviewed" emails from administration officials regarding the creation and editing of those CIA-generated talking points. While nothing Karl reported undermined assertions from the CIA that the intelligence community had approved those talking points, Karl suggested that the emails bolstered the conservative critique of the administration's response.

In fact, Karl had never seen the emails in question -- his story was*based*on "summaries" of the emails and "detailed notes" from a source who, it turned out, had*misrepresented*what the documents actually said. After media observers*slammed*Karl's "sloppy" reporting, ABC News*issued a statement*saying that the network "should have been more precise in its sourcing of those quotes, attributing them to handwritten copies of the emails taken by a Congressional source. We regret that error." Karl himself*apologized*in a statement to CNN.

More at the link so TemplarKormac doesn't pull a Yurt and go crying to a certain mod.

there is NOTHING in your quote that proves the e-mail in question wasnt about Benghazi and just about Benghazi.. that means your whole post is an excercise in left-wing stupidity

Redundant

 

[Jarhead]

finally; PROOF of White House lying and cover-up


now you know why the loony Left has been so unhinged at Republicans dogged efforts to get to the truth here

Redundant

 

[Lovebears65]

Media Matters the mouth piece of George Soros.. OK

ABC's Jonathan Karl And The Proof The White House Memo Wasn't Just About Benghazi | Blog | Media Matters for America

Hmmm...another TemplarKormac LIE. WHAT AN IGNORANT TROLL

ABC's Jonathan Karl, who was previously burned when he pushed falsehoods about CIA talking points generated in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi attacks, is now adopting the conservative distortion of a separate set of talking points authored by the White House*for media appearances by then U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice.

On September 16, 2012, Rice appeared on the Sunday political talk shows and suggested that the Benghazi terror attacks had grown out of spontaneous protests like those that were occurring worldwide in response to an anti-Muslim video. Conservatives*have claimed that Rice's comments on the Sunday shows were part of a deliberate effort to deceive the American people about the cause of the terror attacks, to bolster President Obama's re-election campaign. This effort has often involved distorting the CIA-approved talking points that Rice used to prepare for the interviews.

Karl*came under fire*in May 2013 after reporting that the network had "reviewed" emails from administration officials regarding the creation and editing of those CIA-generated talking points. While nothing Karl reported undermined assertions from the CIA that the intelligence community had approved those talking points, Karl suggested that the emails bolstered the conservative critique of the administration's response.

In fact, Karl had never seen the emails in question -- his story was*based*on "summaries" of the emails and "detailed notes" from a source who, it turned out, had*misrepresented*what the documents actually said. After media observers*slammed*Karl's "sloppy" reporting, ABC News*issued a statement*saying that the network "should have been more precise in its sourcing of those quotes, attributing them to handwritten copies of the emails taken by a Congressional source. We regret that error." Karl himself*apologized*in a statement to CNN.

More at the link so TemplarKormac doesn't pull a Yurt and go crying to a certain mod.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

ABC's Jonathan Karl And The Proof The White House Memo Wasn't Just About Benghazi | Blog | Media Matters for America

Hmmm...another TemplarKormac LIE. WHAT AN IGNORANT TROLL

ABC's Jonathan Karl, who was previously burned when he pushed falsehoods about CIA talking points generated in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi attacks, is now adopting the conservative distortion of a separate set of talking points authored by the White House*for media appearances by then U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice.

On September 16, 2012, Rice appeared on the Sunday political talk shows and suggested that the Benghazi terror attacks had grown out of spontaneous protests like those that were occurring worldwide in response to an anti-Muslim video. Conservatives*have claimed that Rice's comments on the Sunday shows were part of a deliberate effort to deceive the American people about the cause of the terror attacks, to bolster President Obama's re-election campaign. This effort has often involved distorting the CIA-approved talking points that Rice used to prepare for the interviews.

Karl*came under fire*in May 2013 after reporting that the network had "reviewed" emails from administration officials regarding the creation and editing of those CIA-generated talking points. While nothing Karl reported undermined assertions from the CIA that the intelligence community had approved those talking points, Karl suggested that the emails bolstered the conservative critique of the administration's response.

In fact, Karl had never seen the emails in question -- his story was*based*on "summaries" of the emails and "detailed notes" from a source who, it turned out, had*misrepresented*what the documents actually said. After media observers*slammed*Karl's "sloppy" reporting, ABC News*issued a statement*saying that the network "should have been more precise in its sourcing of those quotes, attributing them to handwritten copies of the emails taken by a Congressional source. We regret that error." Karl himself*apologized*in a statement to CNN.

More at the link so TemplarKormac doesn't pull a Yurt and go crying to a certain mod.

In other words, this email doesn't say what it says, right?

Not only does the e-mail say what it says, but it goes ON to suggest a talking point type "response" to then expected questions about Benghazi:

She was advised to CLAIM that "we" were supposedly not aware of any "actionable" intelligence that the attack was pre-planned. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1919_production-4-17-14.pdf#page=14 (See page 2 of the document.)

Horseshit.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Media Matters? Seriously?

No. It was MM relaying what ABC did.

Like that is better? ABC is obamaturd butt kissing all the time.

 

[Meathead]

ABC's Jonathan Karl And The Proof The White House Memo Wasn't Just About Benghazi | Blog | Media Matters for America

Hmmm...another TemplarKormac LIE. WHAT AN IGNORANT TROLL

ABC's Jonathan Karl, who was previously burned when he pushed falsehoods about CIA talking points generated in the wake of the 2012 Benghazi attacks, is now adopting the conservative distortion of a separate set of talking points authored by the White House*for media appearances by then U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice.

On September 16, 2012, Rice appeared on the Sunday political talk shows and suggested that the Benghazi terror attacks had grown out of spontaneous protests like those that were occurring worldwide in response to an anti-Muslim video. Conservatives*have claimed that Rice's comments on the Sunday shows were part of a deliberate effort to deceive the American people about the cause of the terror attacks, to bolster President Obama's re-election campaign. This effort has often involved distorting the CIA-approved talking points that Rice used to prepare for the interviews.

Karl*came under fire*in May 2013 after reporting that the network had "reviewed" emails from administration officials regarding the creation and editing of those CIA-generated talking points. While nothing Karl reported undermined assertions from the CIA that the intelligence community had approved those talking points, Karl suggested that the emails bolstered the conservative critique of the administration's response.

In fact, Karl had never seen the emails in question -- his story was*based*on "summaries" of the emails and "detailed notes" from a source who, it turned out, had*misrepresented*what the documents actually said. After media observers*slammed*Karl's "sloppy" reporting, ABC News*issued a statement*saying that the network "should have been more precise in its sourcing of those quotes, attributing them to handwritten copies of the emails taken by a Congressional source. We regret that error." Karl himself*apologized*in a statement to CNN.

More at the link so TemplarKormac doesn't pull a Yurt and go crying to a certain mod.

Very desperate stuff. Ya gotta feel sorry for carney.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Howey, it appears your thread has failed. Citing Media Matters was your first mistake. Calling me out was your second.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Media Matters? Seriously?

No. It was MM relaying what ABC did.

And there's a difference?