Ace quizzes Victoria Nuland, State Dept. on bogus Benghazi talking points
http://twitter.com/#!/drawandstrike/status/330439115172630528
Just this week the FBI issued surveillance photos of some of the “protesters” outside the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, last Sept. 11. That, of course, was the protest that never was, inspired by that despicable and hateful YouTube video that practically no one had seen. We’ve heard more than a few people say that investigators should just “let it go” — the terrorist attack that killed four Americans “happened a long time ago” and, besides, the election is over and Obama won. What difference, at this point, does it make?
Excellent reporting & analysis by @stephenfhayes on how infamous Benghazi “talking points” were created. weeklystandard.com/articles/bengh…
— Brit Hume (@brithume) May 3, 2013
Some of the more curious out there just can’t help but wonder, though, just where all of that YouTube video business came from. Ace of Spades has posted a great analysis of the situation, based on a piece by the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes, but just in case the State Department misses it there, Ace posted the highlights to Twitter. Who knows? Maybe someone in the news business will chance upon some of these questions and look into them.
Holy shit: Names are Named in #Benghazi Talking Points Lie ace.mu.nu/archives/33967…
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
More: Video of Victoria Nuland claiming the Talking Points represented the government’s “initial assessment” of the attack…
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
…yet Victoria Nuland personally changed the initial assessment to one that better suited her “superiors” youtube.com/watch?v=YyAUxa…
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
She did this personally.She asked for the changes to the “initial assessment” herself, but then claims the TP were the initial assessment
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Further, the YouTube video was NEVER part of the Talking Points, even in their politicized, softened form.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
This appears to be a fiction created entirely by the political-image people at State.And yet there’s Victoria Nuland affirming it’s…
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
…part of the CIA/Intelligence Community’s actual intelligence on Benghazi.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
If Hillary wants to know “What difference does it make?,” she should ask her flackNuland, who made the changes to placate “superiors”
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Maybe her own employee/spokeswoman Victoria Nuland can explain to her “what difference it makes”
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Because Nuland was apparently under the impression the REAL intelligence made her ‘superiors” look negiigent.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
If it made no difference, why did Hillary have her spokeswoman work so hard to obscure the truth of #Benghazi?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
.@statedept Can you comment on the email that expressly asks for intelligence product to be altered to spare State Dept heads criticism?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
.@statedept Is intel product routinely changed to avoid political criticism or was this an extraordinary measure?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
.@statedept as the “YouTube video” was not mentioned by any draft of any intel report, who exactly cooked that idea up?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
.@statedepart Given that the YouTube video was NEVER a part of an intel assessment, why did State insist that had come from the CIA?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
minx.cc/?blog=86&post=… “Don’t worry, Hillary told the families of the victims. We got the guy who made that video.”
— Grumpier Than Thou (@drawandstrike) May 3, 2013
.@statedept why was a man hounded for making a YouTube that NO intelligence linked to the attack? Who ordered this?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
.@statedept feel free to ignore all relevant questions from an American citizen, by the way.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Gee I wonder why Hillary Clinton and her spokeswoman would be so afraid they’d be accused of overlooking warnings. #maybebecausetheydid
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
When a guy’s first thought is “I’m worried I might be accused of stealing,” I usually look at his pockets.He has more info than I do.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
If he’s worried about being accused of theft, I have to wonder why he’s concerned about that. I have to assume he knows his business.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
“@aceofspadeshq: .@statedept why was a man hounded for making a YouTube…” What, at this point, does it matter?
— Liberal Tolerance (@libtolerance) May 3, 2013
Obama/State: Delete that intelligence that suggests we overlooked warnings in #BenghaziLeftist Media: I don’t see where the scandal is.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Obama/State: Put out this false intelligence to fend off criticism we overlooked warnings that led to deaths.Leftist Media: I don’t get it
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Obama/State: We’re going to falsify intel to hide our deadly mistakes from the public.Leftist Media: I see nothing of interest here.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Obama/State: Maybe we kind of created a fiction and threw a man in jail for political cover.Leftist Media: I don’t see the problem here.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
The media is against easy scapegoats and wild witchhunts… unless the scapegoat/witchhunt is a Hilary! Production.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
The media’s Playing Dumb on #benghazi– “I don’t understand what the scandal is” — reminds me of their playing dumb on @anthonyweiner
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
If you remember, back then, many in the media said they didn’t understand why a dude would send pictures to a coed over the cyber-machine.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
They just couldn’t figure out why a dude would do that, ergo, he must have been #hacked.
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Does anyone believe these people are that innocent? Or is a case of the Dumb playing Even Dumber to avoid difficult questions?
— DepressiveBlogger69 (@AceofSpadesHQ) May 3, 2013
Benghazi’s not going away, at least not this weekend.
Planning to be on Fox News Sunday #benghazi
— Jason Chaffetz (@jasoninthehouse) May 3, 2013
State Dept’s Victoria Nuland has a lot of explaining to do.#Benghazi not just worse than Watergate.Way worse! weeklystandard.com/articles/bengh…
— Roger Simon (@rogerlsimon) May 3, 2013
