The odd thing to me is the lie doesn’t make sense ... it was too easily and quickly found out. So even from the point of view of lying effectively, the Obama admin failed.
Just as soon as it was known that it was a multi-hour sustained attack ... random spontaeous rioters would not have had that much ammo on them ... the admin’s story was not tenable.
So why did they go with such a lame story in the first place and why did they stick to it so adamantly?
Good points. I would want to ask the question of this administration, what unbeknownst operation (to the public) was this Administration running that watching 4 Americans be slaughtered was preferable than exposure of the program?
Because they really aren't that smart and they really are that used to the media covering for them.
Maybe an ongoing situation (hostage or other) where the Libyan terrorists are pulling the strings and ordering the officials to do what they tell them “or else...”. This explains the ad apology aired in Libya, the arrest of the film maker, the loud condemnation Obama gave of the video at the U.N., and even, possibly, Romney’s reluctance to comment much at the debate? Otherwise, nothing makes sense. A cover up is not done in such a large way and Hillary has VAST experience at how cover ups are done.
It worked didn't it? It hardly mattered what they were saying as long as they put it off. Now it's only the wonks that even care about it any more.
Have a beer.
I think it’s because it is covering up something much, much bigger. Like gunrunning in the ME.
Plus, they had an election to consider. 0bama’s entire record was based on his “strength” shown by getting bin Laden. He was claiming to be a master of foreign policy and that he had AQ on the run. Now it was all unraveling and he needed it to not be his fault.