White House Contacted YouTube During Benghazi Attack, Darrell Issa Says

ABC News ^ | Thursday, May 22, 2014 | Jonathan Karl

[kristinn]

A still-classified State Department e-mail says that one of the first responses from the White House to the Benghazi attack was to contact YouTube to warn of the “ramifications” of allowing the posting of an anti-Islamic video, according to Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The memo suggests that even as the attack was still underway — and before the CIA began the process of compiling talking points on its analysis of what happened — the White House believed it was in retaliation for a controversial video.

The subject line of the e-mail, which was sent at 9:11 p.m. Eastern Time on the night of the attack, is “Update on Response to actions – Libya.” The was written hours before the attack was over.

Issa has asked the White House to declassify and release the document. In the meantime he has inserted a sentence from the e-mail in the Congressional Record.

“White House is reaching out to U-Tube [sic] to advice ramification of the posting of the Pastor Jon video,” the e-mail reads, according to Issa.

Issa’s full statement can be read here.

Asked about the document, a senior White House official told ABC News it demonstrates that the White House genuinely believed the video sparked the attack all along, a belief that turned out to be incorrect.

[uncitizen]

I call total BS on this.

[no-to-illegals]

Thank You. Your info is a Great start.

[savedbygrace]

This makes it clear for anyone with eyes to see that Obama & Co are not merely arrogant and tyrannical, but satanically and unrepentantly evil.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

Thanks. :)

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

No probs! :)

[DAC21]

To: TexasCajun

Metadata pulled from the avatar seems to suggest the gubmint MADE the vid to cover their a** on Benghazi.

Thank you for posting this—this Montagraph video says a great deal.

Busted Once and For All:
______________________________

I don't believe that is correct, the video had been on Youtube for a month or two, But under different titles. The last time the title was changed which was a bit more offending, appears from the meta data to have been done by a Defense contractor at or about the time of the attacks. Devastating if true, but the Gubermint didn't make the video.

[TigersEye]

From one of Montagraph's links...

Was Nakoula Basseley Nakoula an FBI Informant and the “Innocence” Film a Honeypot Trap? Sept. 14, 2012

People were on to this connection immediately. Just not our distinguished national press.

[holden]

I believe this was the first anti-Islamic video (see Shoebat.com) in which Hillary and Barry colluded (with their minions, no doubt) as part of an effort to cover-up the various Islamic outreach campaigns they planned:

1) giving AQ a) weaponry, b) political support, c) money;
2) giving AQ control of Libya, as they supported giving Egypt to AQ.
3) the failed attempt at giving AQ Syria,
4) getting back Egypt's MB's blind sheik,
5) and the continued attempt at alienating US foreign relations from Israel. 6) as well as other subversions inherent in their support for "Arab Spring."

All this was coordinated with the many AQ/MB operatives that have infiltrated into our government, closest (really close!) being Huma Abedin.

HF

[holden]

I believe Barry and Hillary had already conspired not to engage in any armed response to whatever would happen in Egypt or Libya, intending all along that the "heat" and blame would go onto the video, with which they had everything to do.

The disposition of the 30+ CIA members in Benghazi, I'm sure, depended on a non-response using US forces, whether pre-planned or later black-mailed into effect.

The fact that Woods and Doherty seemed not to be informed about non-responsiveness, leads me to think there was a contemporaneous threat about our government's not counter-attacking, which might have translated into not bringing any lethal action onto those other CIA personnel.

HF

[holden]

"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet"

In clever-by-half fashion, Hillary crafted a mendacious statement that was true only in that her conspirators in our government sought to justify all that on the basis of the video.

HF

[peeps36]

They were scheming for a cover story while the ambassador was being sodomized in the street. Rescue never entered their minds, unless it had to do with rescuing their careers.

[rfp1234]

It looks like they were conflating the Koran-burning Pastor, Terry Jones, with the authors of the YouTube video.

[Zeneta]

In the earlier morning (EST) following the 9-11-2012 attack in Libya I found the YouTube video and it had about 350 views.

I found an AP story from the previous day that blamed the protests in Cairo on the video.

There was an official press release on the US Dept of State’s website around 10pm est, on Sept. 10th condemning the video as it was tied to the protests in Cairo.

That’s what I saw.

My question.

Was Amb. Stevens taken to a Libyan hospital ?

By whom ?

I recall reports of this happening and think it changes everything.

Was their intention to kidnap him ?

[wiggen]

Obama has never had a problem saying he didn’t know. It’s his number one defense for everything. As other posters have said clearly the video in question isn’t the first a muzzie would find offensive. This begs the question why exactly this one?
The scent of prearranged cover story is all over this.

[hoosiermama]

There were several stories coming out in the initial ( maybe intentially created )!confusion. Including that the ambassador was alive but was sodimized and beaten on his way to the hospital. Remember looking for or hearing rumors of ties between he -0- and Chicago bathhouse group but could never substantiate it.
At the time the story of David sending one to his death for his own benefit came to mind.
It and the comment that 0 had guests or was sleeping stuck in my mind. They were certainly spinning from the beginning and maybe adding to the confusion from the gitgo to cover what was actually happening
Why did The ambassador meet with the Turk?!Did money change hands? Why was he even in Bengauzi ? Why were CIA there? ( initially it sounded like they were there to protect the outPost. But that’s questionable congress needs to question those agents

So many questions. So few answers

[TigersEye]

Was Amb. Stevens taken to a Libyan hospital ?

Yes.

By whom ?

By locals who found him barely alive several hours after the attack.

[Zeneta]

Personally, I think there was a “Kidnap”/”Rescue” plan so zero could be seen as the hero.

[Delta Dawn]

Interesting how they were more concerned with saving their own hides than the four Americans that were killed that night.

Does the Congress need a better reason than this to remove this non-American from power?

[Blood of Tyrants]

Spontaneous protesters don’t bring machine guns and RPGs.

[hoosiermama]

Possible but why the Turk? What was his purpose ?