There's lot's of proven "untruths" and misdirection in the Benghazi STORY as presented by the WH and State Dept, bbut I'll just highlight a few of the main ones...
We learned that White House Press Secretary Jay Carney falsely claimed the White House and State Department made no substantive changes to the talking points
Maybe not typing them out Jay, but the influence was there.
The president also said “congressional committees” reviewed emails “several months ago” regarding changes to the talking points, and they “concluded that, in fact, there was nothing afoul in terms of the process that we had used.” There was no such conclusion. Obama was referring to a February closed-door meeting in which senators viewed the emails as part of John Brennan’s confirmation. Some senators were satisfied and some weren’t. Sen. Marco Rubio, in fact, said a review of the emails “raises other questions with regard to process.”
Nope, nothing more needs explaining... move along.
■Obama said he used the term “act of terrorism” a day after the attack. Not exactly. He said “acts of terror” and “act of terror.” Also that day, the president said he did not use the word “terrorism” because “it’s too early to know exactly how this came about.” Over the next several days, he would repeat that the attack began as a protest of an anti-Muslim video and spiraled out of control.
This is the part his water carriers always forget... maybe Obama was just confused, or maybe he wanted it both ways as usual.
It’s important to note that all the evidence — then and now — shows that the talking points always said that the attack grew out of a spontaneous demonstration in response to the Cairo protests. That was in the original draft of the talking points, and it remained in the final draft. There has been no evidence showing an election-year cover-up.
That's true, there is no evidence YET. We don't have all the emails and not all the questions have been asked of all the players. But we do know THIS:
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney repeatedly has said that the White House and State Department changed only one word of the talking points
Oh ya?
That has been proven demonstrably false — first by a May 3 report in the Weekly Standard and later by a more detailed May 10 report by ABC News. Both news reports show the CIA made many deletions and alterations in response to State Department comments, including removing references to other recent attacks on “foreign interests” in Benghazi and a reference to the al Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Sharia group as possibly being involved.[/u]
I looked for some info about the one altered email (which was a bad quote with very little change to substance).... maybe someone else could find the details on that one, but I think it matters not. I believe Obama had a strong motive to change to story in order to keep his job... call it whatever you want, but to me, it's obvious what was done... time will tell all.
http://factcheck.org/2013/05/benghazi-attack-revisited/
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
