Posted on 04/30/2014 12:07:31 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
April 30, 2014, 02:39 pm Carney: Email was not about Benghazi
By Justin Sink
Press secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that a newly-revealed email showing a White House official preparing then-U.S. ambassador Susan Rice for television interviews was not explicitly in reference to the terror attack in Benghazi.
"The email and the talking points were not about Benghazi," Carney said. "They were about the general situation in the Muslim world."
A set of documents obtained by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act request included an email from deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes to other senior White House and administration officials outlining “goals” for Rice’s Sunday talk show appearances following the attack.
In the email, Rhodes says Rice should “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."
Rhodes also wrote the White House hoped the appearance would “reinforce the president and administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges."
Republicans have seized on the document to argue that the White House was responsible Rice's comments during the interviews. On the Sunday shows, Rice suggested that the violence in Benghazi grew spontaneously out of protests over an anti-Islam YouTube video. The administration later said intelligence indicated the Benghazi attack was deliberate and organized.
On Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called the documents a "smoking gun."
"It shows political operatives in the White House working to create a political narrative at odds with the facts," Graham said. "Their goal was not to tell the truth about what actually happened. They did not want to provide the best information available. Instead, we were provided the most beneficial political story for President Obama."
But Carney maintained Wednesday that the email highlighting the anti-Islam video only sought to explain the general unrest in the region, and not the Benghazi attack.
"It was explicitly not about Benghazi," Carney said. "It was about the overall situation in the region, the Muslim world, where you saw protests outside of embassy facilities across the region, including in Cairo, Sanaa, Khartoum and Tunis. And the so-called talking points around Benghazi, as you know because it's been substantially reported on, were prepared by the CIA."
Carney went on to say that the email was merely evidence the White House was preparing Rice to discuss "the overall issue of unrest in the Muslim world." He read network promotions that aired ahead of Rice's interviews to demonstrate that the other protests were of interest.
"This was part of our effort to explain our views, both as a matter of policy and as a matter of what was happening on the ground with regards to the protests that were underway around the region," Carney said.
The White House spokesman also maintained the Rhodes email had not been turned over to congressional investigators sooner because it was not directly related to Benghazi.
A representative for House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) accused the State Department of “hiding this email and other documents” requested by the committee in a statement Wednesday to The Daily Beast.
“It is disturbing that this highly important email showing a White House role in pushing a false narrative was only turned over after it was discovered by the Department’s FOIA office in response to a specific request. While he had promised cooperation, by hiding subpoenaed documents from Congress, Secretary [John] Kerry is failing to meet his legal obligations,” said committee staff director Frederick Hill.
The White House also defended Rhodes' role in preparing Rice for the appearance, despite Republican criticism that the email demonstrates the administration was concerned about the political fallout.
“As is the case for every Sunday… when other administration officials go out, documents are prepared that anticipate questions from the press and provide answers based on our policy and our best understanding of what's happening at the time," Carney said. "That's standard operating procedure."
Hmmmmm ..??
These emails were received as the result of a LAWSUIT. I would presume that the lawsuit was specific in it’s request for emails REGARDING BENGHAZI ..?? And, not just a blanket request for emails.
Since I believe that’s true .. then, as usual, Carney is lying to protect the President and Hillary.
Tom Hinnton from Judicial Watch just stated that. We asked for all emails regarding Benghazi.
Look at the Subject Header of the Email.
Subject: Benghazi
Prissy little Jay-Jay dons his tutu and dances gayly on the head of a pin in defense of fag-boy-in-thief.
The documents Judicial Watch obtained also include a September 12, 2012, email from former DeputySpokesman at U.S. Mission to the United Nations Payton Knopf to Susan Rice, noting that at a press briefing earlier that day, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland explicitly stated that the attack on the consulate had been well planned. The email sent by Knopf to Rice at 5:42 pm said:
Responding to a question about whether it was an organized terror attack, Toria said that she couldn’t speak to the identity of the perpetrators but that it was clearly a complex attack.
The documents obtained by Judicial Watch also contain numerous emails sent during the assault on the Benghazi diplomatic facility. The contemporaneous and dramatic emails describe the assault as an “attack”:
•September 11, 2012, 6:41 PM – Senior Advisor Eric Pelofsky, to Susan Rice:
As reported, the Benghazi compound came under attack and it took a bit of time for the ‘Annex’ colleagues and Libyan February 17 brigade to secure it. One of our colleagues was killed – IMO Sean Smith. Amb Chris Stevens, who was visiting Benghazi this week is missing. U.S. and Libyan colleagues are looking for him…
At 8:51 pm, Pelofsky tells Rice and others that “Post received a call from a person using an [sic] RSO phone that Chris was given saying the caller was with a person matching Chris’s description at a hospital and that he was alive and well. Of course, if the he were alive and well, one could ask why he didn’t make the call himself.”
Later that evening, Pelofsky emailed Rice that he was “very, very worried. In particular that he [Stevens] is either dead or this was a concerted effort to kidnap him.” Rice replied, “God forbid.”
•September 11, 2012, 4:49 PM – State Department press officer John Fogarty reporting on “Libya update from Beth Jones”:
Beth Jones [Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs] just spoke with DCM Tripoli Greg Hicks, who advised a Libyan militia (we now know this is the 17th Feb brigade, as requested by Emb office) is responding to the attackon the diplomatic mission in Benghazi.”
Material is blacked out (or redacted) in many emails.
In similar news, the tape stating, “Houston, the Eagle has landed.” has been revealed to have been a CB broadcast between two birdwatchers in Kansas — one of them named Houston — talking about an eagle sighting.
I think the ‘BS Meter’ needs a new level...simply ‘Carney’, kinda like the amps in Spinal Tap that went to ‘11’.
There are too many perhaps in that argument. I already stated that obstruction or illegal arms dealings (U.S law violations) may perhaps be in order, but I don’t believe that a charge of treason is possible since there are more applicable High crimes and misdemeanors, such as:
Malfeasance, Misfeasance and Nonfeasance. Now Malfeasance would certainly have a meaningful “treasonous” intent to it, but at this point any charge of treason, imho, would be nothing more than Misfeasance.
So far nobody has speculated openly that this may have been a cause of perfidy — I.E the administration negotiated a deal that went awry because of perfidious activity from the other party to the deal.
I’m not making excuses for Obama. His decisions and after incident actions were pretty cowardly and unbecoming. Just don’t be so cavalier with the charge of treason. Keep the crime believable.
..but I don’t believe that a charge of treason is possible since there are more applicable High crimes and misdemeanors, such as:
There are so may possible criminal charges just from Benghazi it’s hard to choose just one.
A very reasonable case for treason could be made.
Too funny
A glass of warm milk and a reassuring glimpse at the commie posters on his kitchen walls.
These people actually expect the libtard media to swallow this... and they probably will.
Hillary Clinton is going to be residing with the Devil for eternity, along with America destroyer, POTUS Barack Hussein Obama!!!
Indeed. I can’t wait for the time our country is set free from this POS POTUS.
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.