Posted on 05/16/2013 4:51:15 PM PDT by raptor22
Scandal In Libya: A new email dump shows that the White House, contrary to public statements, was heavily involved in editing the Benghazi talking points to remove all references to it being a terrorist attack.
The limited, heavily redacted package of emails released by the administration Wednesday is noteworthy for what the emails don't say and reflect a concerted effort by the White House and State Department not to get at the truth but to put something together to help President Obama in an election two months out.
The email package begins some 67 hours after the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi. It does not discuss the infamous YouTube video that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice would refer to in her Sept. 16 foray on five Sunday talk shows or that President Obama would refer to six times in a Sept. 26 speech before the United Nations.
The video is mentioned only briefly in the subject line of emails coming out of an important meeting where further revisions were made.
The emails do show that Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor were alerted that the intelligence community was drafting talking points that as late as 3:04 p.m. on Friday, Sept. 14, still included references to extremists tied to al-Qaida and an "attack."
The terms "al-Qaida" and "attack" were stripped out by 4:42 p.m., and shortly afterward Vietor thanked colleagues for revisions and said they would be vetted "here," as in the White House.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
I agree. It’s of interest to me as well. But obama would just lie and say he was in constant touch and monitoring the situation. You won’t catch him on that question. Its too easy to dodge. We need to find orders or actions by obama that expose him.
I’m going to round up the usual low-level bullshiiters Rick.
He was monitoring the situation - and did nothing? That's as damning as saying he was sleeping. That's my point. Nothing was done to help those people. Was he monitoring and doing nothing, or was he otherwise occupied? It focuses everyone's mind on his most important failure, and on Hillary's most important failure. The famous commercial about the 3 AM phone call comes to mind when you think about the hours during which the diplomatic outpost was actually under attack.
Obama and Hillary had their chance to show what they were made of. An attack went on for hours, and they did nothing.
Yes it is awful to do nothing. But not impeachable.
I guess I’m more concerned about putting blame where it should be - on Obama and Hillary (our next President?) - than impeaching Obama. He can’t blame Benghazi on underlings, and Hillary can’t point to others. They were both in this one up to their ears.
Black with bling!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.