Skip to comments.A Benghazi Scandal Thatís Already Been Revealed: The CIA Believed A Media Mistake
Posted on 05/08/2014 4:52:33 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Heres an unsolicited tip for Rep. Trey Gowdy: A smoking gun explanation for the Obama Administrations use of false talking points has already been found. And the culprit is not a White House adviser or State Department bureaucrat. Its the intelligence communitys reliance on the media.
Its tucked inside the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on Benghazi, which reveals a key source of the bad intelligence that made it into Ambassador Susan Rices famous talking points: the media incorrectly reported that before the attack on Sept. 11, 2012 there were protests outside the U.S. facilities in Benghazi when there werent.
And the CIA believed those reports, resulting in talking points that were delivered to Ambassador Susan Rice
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
this is the media callin a turd, Cheerios.
Creative writing exercise
Grasping for straws. They are desperate!!!
Time apparently has given up even trying to do any reporting. Just saying whatever.
Ya know, when the CIA gets thrown under the bus,
they aren’t going to like it or stand for it for
Since the CIA had men on the ground in Benghazi and Tripoli, and knew that the attacks were not the result of any video or protest, and TIME APPARENTLY DID NOT HAVE ANY REPORTERS AT THE SCENE, I’d go with Hickson’s congressional testimony.
TIME has been a disinformation magazine for decades.
They’re ‘concern trolling’, again.
Time doing the bidding of the White House. What is beyond incest? The media IS part of the Obama administration.
When I was a young man I looked up to Time and Newsweek. S long ago.
Most of the decisions made in Washington are media driven.
That doesn't pass the smell test.
Those with access to real intel are not going to use the media as a source.
The spooks have embeds at all media sources so it is more likely that the media whoredom reported what they were told to report by the CIA embeds. The lying continues unabated and the media is shoveling it deeper.
“And the CIA believed those reports, resulting in talking points that were delivered to Ambassador Susan Rice”
Which she didn’t use and instead went on 5 talk shows and said it was a video.
I read somewhere that the NY Times have someone on the scene.
And they are so honest and believable!!!
Well...you can fool some of the people some of the time!
Anyone giving these liars and tools of the state a single dime for what they're peddling is a total fool.
If this is BS (and it is) the CIA will make sure the talking point is refuted.
They can’t arrest the people identified as participating in the murder because if they get asked about the video they would have no idea what to say.
The CIA might have gotten it from the Media but the Media got it from Queen Putt the Sissy-Boy
Nice Try A**holes...Not flying here!
IIRC, they did. But not at the CIA Weapons Exchange Facility where the Ambassador died.
They also had PROTESTS.
But not at that facility.
The protests were cover for the attack on the CIA facility.
The protests were going on in several locations in the Middle East, based on the video created and placed on the Internet by the State Department's CIA (not the normal CIA). They had a local imam stirring up the people by spreading word of this 'video'. It was all part of a plan, and all was going well until...
a couple of American Heroes decided to try and get the Ambassador and staff to safety by heading to the CIA facility. This put them into conflict with the terrorist group that was planning to decimate the CIA facility.
Hillary's CIA was selling to one group of terrorists, Obama was selling to the other (by selling I mean trading weapons for opium and heroin). When Hillary's crew got in trouble, he merely avoided giving CROSS BORDER APPROVAL. His side won. She had to resign.
You know the rest.
And the media got that story from... The White House of course. So the CIA believed the lies the media got from the Obama Admin and that they already knew were a pack of lies. Sounds about right.
Not only circling the wagons but throwing the alphabets under the bus to protect Barry.
You don’t want to pick a fight with your own intel orgs by making them look bad..........
Here’s an unsolicited tip for Massimo. Aiding and abetting traitors makes you an accessory to treason. That Democrat money won’t mean much when the prison door clangs shut behind you.
Not even a good try. Nor is this the "show trial" Dana Milbank declared it. Four dead men demand answers.
Except the intelligence agencies never said it was a video.
...”Four dead men demand answers”...
Massimo Calabresi got the long knives out for Trey Gowdy... What Massimo afraid of?
Let Republicanprofessor know if you want on or off this ping list.
Totally B.S. from Time’s spin-doctors. Amb. Stevens said good by to his Turk colleague outside the so called Consulate and saw no demonstration just before it and he was attacked by terrorists. Hicks testified, under OATH, which Killary didn’t, about real time what really happened on the side, and he was demoted, hello!!!
White House, media, it's all the same thing.
They have decided to target the CIA in this because in the very first set of CIA-prepared talking points for Congress there was reference to the fact that the CIA had given an advanced warning of the attacks. They do not want anyone to remember that and want to discredit the warnings if they do remember.