Three Big Developments in the Benghazi Investigation

Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
And now, perhaps the most intriguing section of today’s Morning Jolt:

Suddenly, Three Big Developments in the Investigation Into the Benghazi Attack

This news cycle has three new developments related to the Benghazi attack you must see and keep handy for the next time you hear a White House press secretary say it was “a long time ago” or a Secretary of State ask “what difference does it make?” whether it was a preplanned terrorist attack or a spontaneous demonstration.

DEVELOPMENT ONE, courtesy CNN’s Paul Cruickshank, Tim Lister, Nic Robertson, and Fran Townsend:

Several Yemeni men belonging to al Qaeda took part in the terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi last September, according to several sources who have spoken with CNN.

One senior U.S. law enforcement official told CNN that “three or four members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula,” or AQAP, took part in the attack.

Another source briefed on the Benghazi investigation said Western intelligence services suspect the men may have been sent by the group specifically to carry out the attack. But it’s not been ruled out that they were already in the city and participated as the opportunity arose.

So, unless these multiple sources are wrong, this can accurately be described as an al-Qaeda attack, either preplanned or a target of opportunity.


read on:


Three Big Developments in the Benghazi Investigation | National Review Online
 
H

Highball

Council Member
Jan 28, 2010
1,170
1
38
The White House keeps trying to sweep this topic under the carpet abd it will not go away. BUT... they say it is "Old news." Try that on a surviving family member.
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
The Benghazi Talking Points

And how they were changed to obscure the truth



Even as the White House strove last week to move beyond questions about the Benghazi attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2012, fresh evidence emerged that senior Obama administration officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days following the assaults. The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.



more


The Benghazi Talking Points | The Weekly Standard
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
via Zip:

Carney Spins Furiously: Editing Terrorism Out Of Benghazi Talking Points Was For “Stylistic” Purposes…

How friggen stupid does he think we are?
Via Washington Examiner:
Any White House edits made to talking points about the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya were merely “stylistic,” Obama spokesman Jay Carney insisted on Wednesday amid congressional hearings about the Sept. 11 strike that killed four Americans.

“The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this,” Carney said. “Edits made by anyone at the White House were stylistic and not substantive. They corrected the description of the building… from consulate to diplomatic facility. Ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to congressional investigators. The attempt to politicize the talking points again is part of an effort to chase after what isn’t the substance here.”

The White House has been hammered for initially blaming the violence on a spontaneous protest to an anti-Islam YouTube video and a Sunday show appearance in which former United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice trumpeted that false narrative.

Keep reading…






​
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
T

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36


Star Witnesses Debunk Right-Wing Benghazi Conspiracy Theories



F-16s could have been sent to Benghazi

Part of the prevailing theory surrounding the events the night of the Benghazi attacks is that the Obama administration did not do enough militarily to respond to the crisis. Gregory Hicks — a Foreign Service Officer and the former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya — claimed during his pre-hearing testimony that fighter jets could have been flown over Benghazi, preventing the second wave of the attack from occurring.

Ranking Member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) questioned that statement, asking Hicks whether he disagreed with Gen Martin Dempsey’s assessment that no air assets were in range the night of the attack. Hicks didn’t disagree, saying he was “speaking from [his] perspective” and what “veteran Libyan revolutionaries” told him, rather than Pentagon assessments.


Hillary Clinton signed cables denying additional security to Benghazi


Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) used her time to take issue with this claim, asking all three witnesses about standard protocol for cables leaving the State Department. All three agreed with Maloney, that the Secretary of State’s name is placed at the bottom of all outgoing cables and telegrams from Foggy Bottom, whether the Secretary has viewed them or not.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/05/08/1982151/witnesses-debunk-benghazi/




13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush’s Watch Without a Peep from Fox News



13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush’s Watch Without a Peep from Fox News | The Daily Banter




Fox Provides Double Airtime To GOP During Benghazi Hearing



Fox Provides Double Airtime To GOP During Benghazi Hearing | Blog | Media Matters for America
 
petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,866
14,425
113
Low Earth Orbit



Is this anything like getting America hooked on cocaine to fund buying guns from Israel to give to Iran?

How are the Afghani heroin sales coming along?
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
'Twas the Night before Benghazi'...and all through the Whitehouse...not a bamster was stirring, that cowardly louse...

via Zip:

Susan Rice Honored With “Great American” Award Night Before Benghazi Hearing…


Apparently helping to coverup a terror attack makes you a “great American.”
Via Debra Heine:
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice was honored Tuesday night with the 2013 Louis E. Martin Great American Award.

The annual award, presented by The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, is given to “an exemplar of change, progress and willingness to take one for the team if circumstances require. (I may have made that last part up.)

Specifically, the organization is honoring Rice for ”her work in advancing U.S. interests, strengthening the world’s common security and prosperity, and promoting respect for human rights,” another press release states.

The evening gala and awards ceremony, which included Vice President Joe Biden, came the day before State Department whistleblowers testified at the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on the terrorist attack that took place at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last year.

Keep reading…




​
 
Tecumsehsbones

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,453
9,590
113
Washington DC
The real lesson of Benghazi
Posted by Jonathan Bernstein on May 9, 2013 at 4:46 pm

What’s the real lesson of Benghazi? It’s that the party-aligned press works so well for Republicans that they’ve become too lazy to bother explaining their ideas, or doing the hard work of actual oversight.
Look, it’s May, and they’ve been at this since September, and still, no one outside of the conservative information bubble has any idea what the “there” is. Never mind whether the accusations are true; no one has even bothered laying out a set of accusations that makes sense (see Marc Ambinder for more; see also also Andrew Sabl for what a real set of accusations would look like).

Remember, to begin with, Benghazi was a policy disaster: Four people died, and there’s every possibility that it didn’t have to happen. A normal political party could get some mileage out of that (yes, it’s crass, but that’s politics). In fact, the political system depends on the out-party demanding that the president, the White House, and the executive branch in general be held to account when things go wrong.

Instead, we’ve had months of gobbledegook about a set of talking points that supposedly were part of an effort to…you know, I don’t even want to bother. What matters is whether there were mistakes made that caused the disaster, whether people who made those mistakes were held accountable, and whether things have changed to make another disaster less likely. Unfortunately, Republicans don’t seem very interested in any of that.

Part of what’s happening is, as Jamelle Bouie pointed out today, the strong demand within the conservative marketplace for scandal. But there’s more than that; it’s not just a demand for scandal, but how easily the customers accept anything presented to them. The result — and Alex Pareene is very good on this today — is that they don’t bother putting together a “coherent or convincing narrative.”

Pareene usefully contrasts Benghazi and other Obama scandals to the Bill Clinton scandals of the 1990s. One key difference, however, is that there was no Fox News through much of the Clinton presidency — the GOP-aligned network signed on in 1996 and didn’t pass CNN in viewers until 2000. That meant that in order for a story to reach a really mass audience, or at any rate to get beyond Rush Limbaugh, it had to be sold to the neutral press. True, a lot of those Clinton scandals were pretty nutty anyway, but many of them were at least coherent.

With Obama, there’s no need for these scandals to make sense; the conservative press will run with them either way. And there might even be an advantage to incoherence. After all, if the accusations are gibberish, the neutral reporters will tend to ignore them — and then conservatives can go on conservative talk radio and Fox News and charge the rest of the press of ignoring these extremely important charges.
All of which means that Republican politicians have little incentive, and perhaps even some real disincentives, for doing the hard work of government oversight — or even the hard work of first-rate scandal-mongering. No wonder they get lazy!

Unfortunately, that leaves us with hyped-up accusations, but no real government oversight — no one really probing for real mistakes, or even real malfeasance, from the Obama Administration. There’s just no reason to bother. And that leaves everyone worse off — except perhaps those reaping profits in the conservative marketplace.

The real lesson of Benghazi
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
Tecumsehsbones said:
blahblahblah
Click to expand...



however...

CBS News Bosses Irked by Correspondent's Thorough Benghazi Reporting

The biggest Benghazi-related story that took place outside of the House Oversight Committee's hearing room today is this item in Politico, regarding CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson. She's the reporter who famously drew White House officials' profane ire over her unapologetic pursuit of the Fast & Furious scandal story; now she's apparently facing searing criticism from another source: Her own bosses. Why? Because she's been covering the Benghazi story too aggressively. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you media bias:

Report: CBS News Bosses Irked by Correspondent's Thorough Benghazi Reporting - Guy Benson
 
Tecumsehsbones

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,453
9,590
113
Washington DC
Or, more accurately, "already have my mind made up based on my terror of Obama and refuse to read anything that might disagree."

Classic dittohead.
 
Locutus

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
via pjm:

"For going on eight months now, we’ve pointed to one of our own posts as evidence that the Obama administration never should have believed that a YouTube movie had anything to do with the terrorist attack in Benghazi. That post, by Ray Ibrahim, pointed to a report in the Egyptian media published on September 10, 2012, that demonstrators would be converging on the US embassy in Cairo not to protest a movie, but to apply pressure and demand the release of Islamist terrorists who have been tried in American courts and/or are held in American prisons. Chief among them is Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman, mastermind of the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. Rahman is currently in federal prison in North Carolina, for his role in that first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York.

The September 10 post, republished in its entirety here, was a warning regarding riots that would take place the following day in Cairo, Egypt."
Jihadi groups in Egypt, including Islamic Jihad, the Sunni Group, and Al Gamaa Al Islamiyya have issued a statement threatening to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to the ground.

According to El Fagr, they are calling for the immediate release of the Islamic jihadis who are imprisonment and in detention centers in the U.S. including Guantanamo Bay: “The group, which consists of many members from al-Qaeda, called [especially] for the quick release of the jihadi [mujahid] sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman [the "Blind Sheikh"], whom they described as a scholar and jihadi who sacrificed his life for the Egyptian Umma, who was ignored by the Mubarak regime, and [President] Morsi is refusing to intervene on his behalf and release him, despite promising that he would. The Islamic Group has threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo with those in it, and taking hostage those who remain [alive], unless the Blind Sheikh is immediately released.”


more


The PJ Tatler » Benghazi: A Smoking Gun


​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom