◼ Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference - ABC
◼ E-Mails Show State Department Made 12 Revisions to Benghazi Talking Points, Deleted CIA Warning and References to al-Qaeda - Viral Read
E-mails show that Nuland objected to the paragraph because she was “concerned” that it might “feed” criticism from Congress who would “beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings.”◼ You know who ‘forced’ the admin to create lying Benghazi talking points? The GOP, says ex-NSC spokesman - Twitchy
◼ The Benghazi Scandal Grows - Stephen F. Hayes/Weekly Standard
The original CIA talking points had been blunt: The assault on U.S. facilities in Benghazi was a terrorist attack conducted by a large group of Islamic extremists, including some with ties to al Qaeda.◼ Caught playing politics with tragedy, what's next for the Obama administration and GOP investigators? - Ron Fournier/National Journal
These were strong claims. The CIA usually qualifies its assessments, providing policymakers a sense of whether the conclusions of its analysis are offered with “high confidence,” “moderate confidence,” or “low confidence.” That first draft signaled confidence, even certainty: “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda participated in the attack.”
Throw Hillary under the bus? In a statement to ABC, Carney notably insulates the West Wing and not the State Department by saying “the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive.” And, with no apparent regard to hypocrisy, Carney criticized the GOP for attempting to “politicize the talking points.”Media in full spin...
Drip, drip, drip: There is almost certainly more to come. While Karl and Hayes did not disclose their sources, a hallmark of congressional investigations is to leak selected evidence to embarrass the sitting administration. It’s a safe bet that these emails, produced voluntarily for Congress by the State Department, were summarized and leaked by Republicans. The Obama White House might want to borrow a page from the scandal-ridden Clinton playbook: Release all Benghazi documents at a time and manner of their choosing, before the GOP does so.
◼ REPORTER: Democrats Actively Working to Undermine Testimony... - Daniel Halper/Weekly Standard
◼ NBC's Lisa Meyers: Benghazi Hearing "Reopens" Case Against Hillary Clinton - Real Clear Politics with a Hardball segment
LISA MYERS, NBC NEWS arSENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: First of all, in her Congressional testimony, which is her only sustained questioning on this subject -- in her Congressional testimony she basically tried to slam the door on any further questions by saying, remember the dramatic statement, 'what difference does it make?'Families of SEALs killed in Afghan mission deem probe a cover-up...
This reopens, I think, the questions. I don't think we know yet to what extent this does or might damage Hillary Clinton. I think the administration's biggest vulnerability here is -- first of all, how do you send diplomats into this dangerous area to facilities that do not even meet minimum security standards? How do you then reduce their level of security by taking away some of the military personnel that they had? And then, how do you, when you know these people are in trouble, not find someway to move heaven and earth to at least get help there. (Hardball, May 9, 2013)
◼ RAND PAUL: The moment of responsibility for Hillary Clinton - By Sen. Rand Paul/Washington Times
My office is currently seeking out the witnesses and survivors of Benghazi to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. To date, the Obama administration has refused to let them testify.
Too many questions remain unanswered. Now, there are too many new questions. The evidence we had in January already suggested that Mrs. Clinton ignored repeated requests for more security in Benghazi. The new evidence we have today — and that continues to mount — suggests that at the very least, Mrs. Clinton should never hold high office again.
