Clearly Hillary Got to Them...

[WFFaithful]

 

[WFFaithful]

 

[WFFaithful]

 

[EatLeadCommie]

Reading threads like this just reinforces my opinion that Arlington is either Hillary's secret lover or angling for a post in the Hillary administration. She can do no wrong.


----------
Tapatalk.

 

[WakeandBake]

 

[KickballDeac]

 

[jhmd2000]

Well you clearly didn't make it beyond page one. It's funny that you think the report absolves the State Department. And attacking the integrity of those committee members based on nothing but political hate, without having even read their work, is intellectually useless. Most of what you just asked me is included in their work, and I won't summarize it again, or repeat myself (this is the third major Benghazi thread this board has hosted, for pete's sake). But mainly, you've become really unpleasant to talk to. So, yeah, I'll walk away from your "challenges." Read into that whatever you like. Cheers.

About that....

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/lawmakers-cia-2-lied-us-about-benghazi_782724.html

When U.S. intelligence officials testified behind closed doors two weeks ago, they were asked point blank whether they had altered the talking points on which U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice based her comments about the Benghazi attacks that have turned into a political firestorm,” read a Reuters story on November 28. “Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, acting CIA Director Michael Morell and National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen each said no, according to two congressional sources who spoke on condition of anonymity.”

For two weeks, the official public position of the intelligence community was that no one knew who had made the changes. In private meetings with lawmakers, on Capitol Hill and at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, Morell denied that he had played any significant role in writing or revising the talking points.

Without any answers, members of the congressional oversight committees pressed the White House to turn over emails and other documents pertaining to the talking points. For months, the administration refused, citing the deliberative process inside the executive branch. But when the president decided to nominate John Brennan to run the CIA, Republicans in the Senate finally had some leverage. Several threatened to block Brennan’s nomination unless the administration cooperated more fully on Benghazi. Eventually, the White House made available on a “read-only” basis nearly 100 pages of emails between top intelligence and Obama administration officials.

***

Those emails, which the White House released to reporters in May 2013, made clear that Morell had been a key player in rewriting the talking points. In fact, a September 15 email to Susan Rice described a secure video teleconference in which Morell told others on the call that he had rewritten the talking points and would be happy to revise them further in consultation with top advisers to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton. The email reports: “Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy editing hand to them. He noted that he would be happy to work with Jake Sullivan [State Department] and [Ben] Rhodes [White House] to develop appropriate talking points.”

The messages contradicted claims from Jay Carney and other top administration officials that neither the White House nor the State Department had played any role in revising the substance of the talking points. Among others, top State Department officials expressed concern about the contents of the talking points and, in consultation with “building leadership,” pushed for changes.

---

Say it louder, indeed.

 

[ONW]

About that....

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/lawmakers-cia-2-lied-us-about-benghazi_782724.html

When U.S. intelligence officials testified behind closed doors two weeks ago, they were asked point blank whether they had altered the talking points on which U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice based her comments about the Benghazi attacks that have turned into a political firestorm,” read a Reuters story on November 28. “Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, acting CIA Director Michael Morell and National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen each said no, according to two congressional sources who spoke on condition of anonymity.”

For two weeks, the official public position of the intelligence community was that no one knew who had made the changes. In private meetings with lawmakers, on Capitol Hill and at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, Morell denied that he had played any significant role in writing or revising the talking points.

Without any answers, members of the congressional oversight committees pressed the White House to turn over emails and other documents pertaining to the talking points. For months, the administration refused, citing the deliberative process inside the executive branch. But when the president decided to nominate John Brennan to run the CIA, Republicans in the Senate finally had some leverage. Several threatened to block Brennan’s nomination unless the administration cooperated more fully on Benghazi. Eventually, the White House made available on a “read-only” basis nearly 100 pages of emails between top intelligence and Obama administration officials.

***

Those emails, which the White House released to reporters in May 2013, made clear that Morell had been a key player in rewriting the talking points. In fact, a September 15 email to Susan Rice described a secure video teleconference in which Morell told others on the call that he had rewritten the talking points and would be happy to revise them further in consultation with top advisers to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton. The email reports: “Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy editing hand to them. He noted that he would be happy to work with Jake Sullivan [State Department] and [Ben] Rhodes [White House] to develop appropriate talking points.”

The messages contradicted claims from Jay Carney and other top administration officials that neither the White House nor the State Department had played any role in revising the substance of the talking points. Among others, top State Department officials expressed concern about the contents of the talking points and, in consultation with “building leadership,” pushed for changes.

---

Say it louder, indeed.

Then Morell (CIA) "a key player in REWRITING talking points" committed perjury. He had a "heavy editing hand" on the talking points, and he would be happy to consult with the State Department and White House IN THE FUTURE, which doesn't imply they did anything.

That's pretty much what the administration has always said. What's your point?


"Eventually, the White House made available on a “read-only” basis nearly 100 pages of emails between top intelligence and Obama administration officials."

Now this is fucking funny. They insinuate that the administration and top intelligence hesitantly released classified emails and had the audacity to make them "read-only!" No shit...really...not releasing classified documents with end-user editing enabled...for fuck sake.

 

[RJKarl]

The final changes to Rice's statement were made by Gen. Petreaus.

 

[jhmd2000]

Then Morell (CIA) "a key player in REWRITING talking points" committed perjury. He had a "heavy editing hand" on the talking points, and he would be happy to consult with the State Department and White House IN THE FUTURE, which doesn't imply they did anything.

That's pretty much what the administration has always said. What's your point?

***.

Read my reply to Arlington's "How dare you question the integrity of career professionals...." bit. Arlington made their beyond-reproach reputations for integrity his Alamo.

You mean the one's who probably perjured themselves? Those guys? Gladly.

 

[jhmd2000]

The final changes to Rice's statement were made by Gen. Petreaus.

And two weeks later career ending stories leaked about Gen. Petreaus. Hold on while I put my surprised face on...

And then "building leadership" called in sick to her testimony until after the election. I hate when I get a 2,160 hour bug. Those are the worst. Yes, let's elect this person President. That would be a great idea.