The disturbing thing here is that the security briefers went to the trouble to knowingly insert false information into intelligence reports to the President of the United States in order to make them conform to the White House’s “It’s all the video” narrative. Instead of telling the President the truth, they told the President what he wanted to hear for political convenience. The President contends that he relied on these reports to amplify his “video” narrative. As a result, the security apparatus fed him even more information supporitng this view.
In engineering, we call this a feed-back loop, where an error causes a greater error, and so forth, until the system is so far from reality, it breaks down.
If the intelligence community is intentionally feeding the President bad information, then our security policy is being dictated by the Democrat Talking Point of the Day, and we are going to be constantly doing the wrong thing.
This is a failure of leadership. The problem is that the President rewards the people who tell him what he wants to hear, and punishes those who tell him the truth.
The President should tell his advisers, in no uncertain terms, that he wants the clear, unvarnished truth, as near as they can determine. He should then make a big deal over firing advisers who “shine him on”, until he is convinced that everybody is doing his job.
I think Hillary and zero were actually trying to gin up unreset and cause riots all over the middle east. They got on TV repeatedly and even took out ads on Pakistani TV describing how horrible this video was! If I was a Pakistani I would seek out the video to watch it after seeing them talk about how horrible and deaming the video was.
If they really thought the video was the cause of the attack and wanted to calm people down, you don’t talk about the video in detail and shine a light on it!
If Petraeus knowingly went along with this, his reputation will go straight down the toilet, as it should.