In another effort to deflect, confuse and obfuscate, the ever-changing Benghazi story has been changed by the administration AGAIN. The administration is now saying that James Clapper’s office was responsible for the changes in the talking points.
We still don’t have an admission from Clapper that he did it, it could have been one of his flunkies if one reads the statement carefully.
DNI (Director of National Intelligence) took out the words, “al-Qaeda” and “terrorism.”
This latest tale comes to us courtesy a DNI spokesman, Shawn Turner, who spoke to CBS News.
As Senator McCain said today, James Clapper originally said he did not know who changed the talking points. In fact, everyone who testified said they didn’t know who changed the talking points.
Mike Rogers, speaking for the House committee said:
“Chairman Rogers looks forward to discussing this new explanation with Director Clapper as soon as possible to understand how the DNI reached this conclusion and why leaders of the Intelligence Community testified late last week that they were unaware of who changed the talking points.”
We still don’t know who invented story about the video but it was obviously false from the beginning because the administration knew what happened in real time.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton repeated the false tale of the video when the four dead Americans arrived at Andrews Air Force base. They said it in a TV ad that ran in Pakistan. The President said it in the Rose Garden, at the UN, and on numerous entertainment shows.
The spokesperson told CBS that they didn’t trust the person who was giving them the information:
However, an intelligence source tells CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan the links to al Qaeda were deemed too “tenuous” to make public, because there was not strong confidence in the person providing the intelligence. CIA Director David Petraeus, however, told Congress he agreed to release the information — the reference to al Qaeda — in an early draft of the talking points, which were also distributed to select lawmakers. …
Who would that be and why weren’t the mortars, RPG’s and Ansara al-Sharia’h trucks a dead giveaway? They didn’t trust the source but they could have trusted the video, audio, and reports.
The latest spokesman said the talking points were done with the approval of the CIA and FBI. It allegedly went from the CIA to DNI and then to the FBI and changes were made first by the DNI and then the FBI.
I don’t doubt Eric Holder would approve this or even orchestrate it but General Petraeus has already said that intelligence did not approve those talking points. Of course that was after he said the video caused the protest.
It is not about the talking points, it is about the false video narrative.
This latest tale does nothing to change the fact that Susan Rice enthusiastically bloviated about the video on all the Sunday news shows and had to have known the truth. Mr. Turner said, “The intelligence community assessed from the very beginning that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.” If that is so, Susan Rice would have known this when she went out to do the news shows.
The DNI statement does not answer the question as to who came up with the video story.
The White House and State Department are claiming they did not make the changes and they didn’t know they were changed. Good grief!.
The White House is trying to reduce the lies about Benghazi to a difference in semantics. CBS reports that, “Another source, a senior U.S. official familiar with the drafting of the talking points, tells CBS News the “controversy this word choice has caused came as a surprise.”
There was nothing political of course and they didn’t mean to deceive either:
“Most people understand that saying ‘extremists’ were involved in a direct assault on the mission isn’t shying away from the idea of terrorist involvement,” added the official. “Because of the various elements involved in the attack, the term extremist was meant to capture the range of participants.”
The spokesperson said it is perfectly clear that it wasn’t political but rather it was because they were protecting classified information. [It is definitely not perfectly clear]
The CBS report claims that because there were several terrorist groups involved, they couldn’t be certain as to who was responsible and they thought “extremist” would cover it. [There were so many terrorist groups, I guess they decided the video story was easier to tell]
The administration is just throwing out whatever they can, with the help of the Communist Broadcasting System, and hoping something sticks. The story is still “evolving” according to them. That’s for sure.
The reality is that with this White House, politics trumps all else, even the security of our nation.