So the issue has moved from the President not sending US Armed Forces to help out the embassy, to them not saying immediately that it was a terrorist attack?
So has the right wing dropped the whole President killed the Ambassador by withholding troops charge, or is that still around? On the other hand, It's a fact now that the Republicans altered the contents of the emails to make them appear to be more damning. Where's the outrage over that level of gross misinformation and ...it sounds almost criminal to alter evidence and then call for the President's impeachment. AFAIK , at least what I saw on BBC, the White House came out and admitted that it was a terrorist attack. So we have: 1) White House did not immediately state it was a Terrorist Attack, tried to deflect attention until a few days later. (Possibly True) 2) Republicans stated that the President withheld troops and assistance to Embassy staff, and allowed them to die (False. Based on hearings and knowledge of altered emails, see 3) 3) Republicans altered the contents of emails and used them in a campaign against the White House and the President, using this false information to call for his impeachment (Apparently True). Now which one of these accusations and facts are more damning? On 17 May 2013 10:49, C. Hatton Humphrey <chumph...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If it's true then no, it's not okay... however the cynic in me immediately > thought, "so the liars are calling liars liars?" > > But let's look at the story for a moment... > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-spokesman-accuses-republicans-of-leaking-falsified-benghazi-e-mail/2013/05/14/5ab73d2c-bcde-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html > (bold > emphasis in quotes is mine). > > There appears to be one email, "New revelations about *the e-mail* in > question appeared to give the administration a modest offensive weapon > during a week of defensive crouching..." which was altered. There were 99 > pages of emails. > > A simple search turned up these emails at > http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/white-house-benghazi-emails.pdf and > > http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/interactive/2013/05/politics/white-house-benghazi-emails/white-house-benghazi-emails.pdf > Reading through them, even without any potential edits by anyone, reveals > that what was trotted out to the American public by Susan Rice is not what > what was originally known. Indeed, it was chopped, diced and spun quite a > bit. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:363576 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
