As Twitchy reported earlier, Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte left their meeting with U.N. ambassador and presumptive Secretary of State nominee Susan Rice even more disturbed and concerned than before. The seemingly simple question at hand: what or who prompted Rice to tell the nation that a YouTube video was to blame for the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11?

The mainstream news networks took their time covering the story, but CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson is making up for lost time by compiling today’s events in a series of tweets. It’s been difficult following the ball as it has been passed back and forth among the White House, State Department, CIA and FBI, but Attkisson’s tweets are a good primer.

This might be a good time to interject: White House Press Secretary Jay Carney today said “there are no unanswered questions” about the talking points Rice delivered on Sept. 16.

Yes. Yes, it does — as does the president’s unwillingness to make a definitive statement in favor of macho posturing. Which reminds us: is Hillary Clinton back from that wine tasting trip to Australia yet?

  • LoriGirl

    Remember after 9/11/2001 Homeland Security was created to make sure all these alphabet agencies knew what each other was doing? Exactly when and where did that plan ever work?

  • waltermitty2012

    Are we still talking about this? So what if references to Al Qaeda and terrorism were removed. So what if Ambassador Rice went on 5 Sunday talk shows and blamed a video for the attack. So what if it took hours for Secretary of Defense Panetta hours before issuing orders for a military response. So what if 4 Americans died that night, I’m sure Obama will eventually get to the bottom of all this. It might take 4 years, but it will be worth the wait.

    Let’s face facts, Obama won another term, which means four more years of economic misery. I can’t wait for Recovery Summer IV. It will be the best one yet!

    • yahneverknow


    • GaryTheBrave

      Yes, we’re still talking about this because SQUIRREL!!!!

      My question is why was there no one sent to help those 40 people? What does Obama gain by not ordering a response?

      Head of AFRICOM was removed within a minute of disregarding a stand-down order. For those not familiar with the UCMJ it is a criminal offense to obey an order that is unlawful. Since all military members take an oath to defend the country from all enemies, and embassies and consulates are American lands, Gen. Ham likely surmised the stand-down order as illegal.

      • waltermitty2012

        I agree with you. The military response is an aspect that hasn’t been fully explained. At the least, we could have sent some F-16’s from Aviano, Italy to eyeball the situation. If they couldn’t have attack directly, they could have low, fast and loud and try to scare off the attackers.

      • JustLikeAnimals

        Your assertion that members must obey an unlawful order is not true.


        As much as members are held accountable for not following lawful orders, they are equally accountable personally for obeying orders which are unlawful. this accountability was established as far back at 1799, reaffirmed during the Vietnam War, and is still being used to prosecute military members today.

        There may be ample room for debate as to whether not a stand-down order was unlawful or immoral. But in questions of duty to obey or not, UCMJ Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the UCMJ are quite clear.

        Do your research before you make such uninformed comments.

        Semper Fi

        • truebeliever101

          I believe Gary said it is illegal TO follow an unlawful order.

    • walterc

      In my opinion, intentionally leaving Americans to die without helping, and then covering it up, is an impeachable offense at a minimum and treason subject tot eh death penalty at worse. This is much worse than watching the economy crash. The next American left to die at the hands of criminals may be you.

  • GoSellCrazySomeplaceElse

    Well, Obama had to approve the talking points since he was out there shoveling the same crap. #ShovelReadyJobs Everyone is covering for the WH, the most corrupt administration ever.

    • TwitWit

      Obama just receives talking points himself. He is only the face of this regime.

      • Emjay Grakykat

        Agreed. We’ll eventually find out David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett were the ones who crafted the final message.

    • Frustrated Teacher

      Has anyone checked whether Media Matters had their hands in this pie at any time? Their hands were ALL OVER the campaign!

  • dwsmokin

    Obama said as soon as he was told, he ordered that everything that could be done should be done. Obviously that order wasn’t carried out. You’d think that-as CIC-he would want the head of the person who decided not to follow this order. Instead, he seems unconcerned. Now, how many Presidents would stand for violation of a direct Presidential order? Unless of course, there was no order given to ignore.

    • walterc

      And the person that chose to not follow a direct order for the Commander In Chief had to have been a General. No one below that grade would fail to follow an order like that. Particularly when American lives are at stake. Under no circumstances can I see any General not following that order.

      Obama is lying. And I’m guessing this is all the result of potus in fact V. Jarrett.

  • FFlintstone

    Am I seeing things?!!?! Is someone from the mainstream media actually doing their job? This is like news porn. I haven’t see a non-conservative journalist seek the truth since 2007. Sharyl Attkinsson is Fox Mulder.

    • Kate

      She’ll probably get fired soon for not being a mindless Obama sheep.

    • Kevin Krom

      She’s the same one who actually tried to get Fast & Furious into the mainstream media. I think it’s more than a random act of journalism, but rather an MSM reporter who cares more about reporting the story than acting as a DNC flunkie.

    • WisconsinPatriot

      She will be taken out and “re-educated” very soon. Jake Tapper was doing a somewhat decent job a while back…..anyone heard from Jake lately? They got him back in line quick. As we speak, I see Sharyl in a walk in cooler with a single light bulb, tied to a chair, eyelids taped open. Every so often they throw a bucket of icewater on her, when her answers are not “appropriate”. She will not last long…..

      • Emjay Grakykat

        I recently saw Jake on Hannity attempting to walk the tightrope in the middle making some “logical” excuses for Rice and the administration. He was mainly promoting his book Outpost.

  • John Scotus

    Instead of untangling the twisted trail of deceit, why not just cut the Gordian knot and acknowledge that everything they said was a lie?

  • TocksNedlog

    What should NOT be lost in this is that Obama already admitted that the White House told her what to say. He admitted it when he told Sens McCain & Graham to come after him if they had a problem with Rice.

  • SpinMeNot

    I feel like I’m watching the scene from Fantasia where Mickey is trying to use to magic to clean up the sorcerer’s tower …

  • TomJB

    Enough about “talking points”! Ugh. That term and “narrative” are so in the face disrespectful to the listening public I can’t understand why people don’t see it. “Talking points” is kids getting their stories straight before dad comes home and sees the broken window. How about some straight talk for once and just answer the damn questions truthfully? These people really take “Wag the Dog” as gospel of how things work and unfortunately, too many of us (95% of present company excluded) are willing to just sit back and be wagged.

  • orringtonmom (D)

    it’s not like their trying to figure out who keeps stealing lunches from the staff kitchen refrigerator… people died and lies were told about it. seriously, this “i dunno… wasn’t me… ask them… “

  • denbren52

    Aside from the omission of the al Qaeda references in the talking points, I still want to know how the idea of a “protest against a Youtube video” was inserted into the talking points. What evidence, if any existed that there was a protest? Who inserted that story into the talking points? Why, with so little evidence, did that become the main talking point?


    The witch hunt has brought the Trolls back to life.The Gop been a bit flaccid since the election.Welcome back, ignorati.

    • Lisa Dean

      There is no witch hunt. If this was Bush you’d be the one saying “oh, we need to know what, when, where, how and why”. “Bush’s head, Chaney’s head, Condi Rice’s head and many more are going to roll for this incident”. There’s nothing wrong in finding out who screwed the pooch on this one. Don’t be a hater all your life…


        How many attacks on embassies were there during Bush the Second’s reign? Come on baggers–hazard a guess. Two? Five? Ten? More? Try at least 11:

        Where was the outrage then?

        • Lisa Dean

          You might want to check your math on how many embassies were attacked in Bush’s tenure.

        • Lisa Dean

          Embassies have been attacked under all of the President’s and there is/was outrage because it’s an attack against Americans. The only difference between this situation and other attacks is that there wasn’t lies told after the fact.

        • walterc

          The real question is, how many of them were left to die while the President and Sec Def, Sec State, DNI, etc etc watched in real time and did nothing. And then lied about it the next day.

          • GEORGE_W_TUSH

            The Republicans crying over Libya are the same ones who voted to cut spending on private security contractors
            last year. Including Paul Ryan
            You gotta love this people, or not..

          • walterc

            The fact that they voted to cut security for embassies doesn’t negate the fact that the President watched those people die and didn’t try to help them. As far as embassy security goes, 20 Marines in the Embassy in Paris, and none in Benghazi? Mixed up priorities, don’t you think?

          • JustLikeAnimals

            Hey, who wants to go to dirty, dusty, dangerous Benghazi when you can hang out on the Champs Elysees?????


    Susan Rice Meeting Left Us ‘More Disturbed’ Than Before.”

    These people were born “disturbed”. How much more disturbed can they get.

    They will for ever be disturbed by women, especially if these are intelligent and self sufficient.

    • JustLikeAnimals

      Hahahaha!! Yeah, right! She looked real “self-sufficient” in the presser when Barack Hussein was standing up there treating her like a helpless whelp. “Stop picking on her because she’s an easy target!!!!” Even Obamas doesn’t think she can stand up for herself. Give me a break.

  • Rashied Rushing

    The Obama admin. is so amateur hour that they can’t even get a cover up right.

  • RightThinking1

    “regardless of who may have done it, day-to-day the admin has steadfastly said the changes had nothing to do with politics.”

    Now, if the President was anyone but Obama, the press would say; “regardless of who may have done it, day-to-day the admin has steadfastly *denied* that the changes had anything to do with politics.”

    Not that CBS reporting has anything to do with politics.

    I’m sure that Rice’s serial TV appearances had nothing to do with politics. I’m sure that the Candy Crowley set-up had nothing to do with politics, I’m sure that the delayed food stamp reporting had nothing to do with politics.

  • seriouslysickntired

    Real question I would like answered. Where did the idea to blame a VIDEO start and who chose the video to blame it on.

  • Susan Reaney

    Did you break this?
    I didn’t break it!
    Who broke it?
    Not me, I didn’t break it!
    So it got broke all by itself?
    Shoulder Shrugg!

    • Lisa Dean

      Sounds like typical preschool banter at the WH…And yes, things do break by themselves because it’s happened in my childhood. LoL :-)


    Given how our intelligence system was ‘blinking red’ in the summer of 2001, how the hell did the original 9/11 attacks happen? McCain and Graham were in the Senate at the time, I seem to recall, and their party occupied the White House in all of their stunning incompetence. Who said Osama bin Laden didn’t matter? Oh, right, George Bush and Mitt Romney.

    It’s nothing short of astonishing how brazen these people are; or would be, if we weren’t all so used to it by now.

    What is even more sickening is that most of these proud oversight folks — had voted against full funding for security at diplomatic stations.

    • JustLikeAnimals

      Go back 2-3 years before 9/11/01 when Rice was a security policy advisor to Clinton. She recommended then that Clinton ignore an offer from Sudan to give the US information where AQ and OBL were hiding and to assist in going after them. Clinton declined and the rest is history. So educated yourself about ALL the facts leading up to 9/11/01 or STFU.


        Unlike President George H.W. Bush, who stuck the incoming Clinton team with the Somalia mess in the closing days of his term, President Clinton apparently didn’t want to do something similar as he left office.

        Aug. 6, 2001, President Bush received a memo entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” It suggested al-Qaida – the same group that blew up the U.S. embassy in Kenya in August 1998 and the USS Cole in Yemen in October 2000 – might be planning an attack in this country and were planning to hijack airliners sometime soon.

        Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas that month. And nothing happened.

        The sad truth is that it took a Democratic Administration to clean up the mess that was handed to them. When it came to bin Laden, the Obama team did the job that the Bush team failed to do, and no amount of spin can change that.

        • JustLikeAnimals

          Parsing an well-established, comprehensive historical timeline of facts so that it fits your twisted view of reality is academically dishonest and speaks volumes about your intellectual and moral integrity.

          • GEORGE_W_TUSH

            Facts are facts…

        • Lisa Dean

          Your revisionist history is amazing. In your facts you forgot about bin Laden being handed to Clinton on more than one occasion, he was warned about the growing threats to the embassy in Nairobi and so was Madeleine Albright and yet nothing was done. No amount of your spin can change those facts.

          • GEORGE_W_TUSH

            Speaking of revisionist history.

            Bush turned down an offer from the Taliban who wanted to turn Bin Laden over way back in October of 2001.

            Then in December of 2001 Bin Laden escaped in Tora Bora.

            Bush said Bin Laden was not a “top priority” just 6 months after 9/11: “I don’t know where Bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” – G.W. Bush, 3/13/02.

            President Barack Obama made killing Bin Laden the #1 priority of the CIA as soon as he took office. Going into Pakistan to get Bin Laden was a part of candidate Obama’s foreign policy platform in 2007 & 2008 and now President Obama has made it happen
            Yet another Rapepublican mess a Dem has to clean up, figures…

          • Lisa Dean

            So you can’t get past Bush huh? What about Clinton? Not revisionist history there. Actually, by your account it would be Obama had to clean up what Clinton didn’t do either. Obama didn’t do anything different regarding bin Laden, he just continued the efforts that Bush started. He happened to be the sitting president when the intelligence information led to where bin Laden was in Pakistan.

          • GEORGE_W_TUSH

            61% still blame Busholini for the economy, apparently im not the only one who cant get past the WORST PRESIDENT in HISTORY..

            How can Pres Obama clean up a balanced budget? How is that a mess? Only mess he is currently cleaning up is the disaster he who must not be mentionted (even by his own brother)?

            Hey, Republicans, we get that president Obama wasn’t with Seal Team 6 in Abbottabad. Just like Osama bin
            Laden wasn’t flying a plane on 9/11

          • Lisa Dean

            And those 61% including you have had a president in office who didn’t do what he said he would. I believe he even stated it was a lot harder than he thought it would be. bin Laden also wasn’t with those who bombed the embassies in Nairobi or Tanzania but he gave the orders. That’s why he was the leader of Al Qaida so he could have others carry out his plans. I’m not sure what you mean by how can Obama clean up a balanced budget. Are you suggesting we have a balanced budget now? How is that possible if Senate Democrats haven’t passed a budget in three years?

  • JustLikeAnimals

    What’s probably most disturbing is that the administration of the US government, the busy of the American people, is being run like a political campaign. Vital information is being parsed, sanitized, qualified, and calculated before the American people are being told anything. And all of it in an effort to shield this fraud of President, and those who hail him, from any appearance of his enormous incompetence, ineptitude, and general lack of any semblance of integrity. God help this great nation.


    “This is gonna go down as the biggest coverup in history,” Inhofe predicted during an appearance on Fox News.

    And the GOTaliban Propaganda machine is in full swing.

    Someone please remind this genius about:

    Iran Contra
    Iraq (you know those WMD mushroom clouds that were supposed to appear…)
    Keating Five
    And the grandaddy of them all: Watergate

  • GaryTheBrave

    In response to 09:09am
    Nov 28, 2012Susan Reaney

    Did you break this?
    I didn’t break it!
    Who broke it?
    Not me, I didn’t break it!
    So it got broke all by itself?
    Shoulder Shrugg!

    In California we would say, “Uh, yeah. There was a tremor…”

  • Libertyship46

    I get a big kick out of this new excuse the White House is putting out that Rice didn’t mention al Qaeda for fear of “tipping off” al Qaeda that we knew they did it. That’s like saying that on 8 December 1941 Roosevelt didn’t want to mention Japan for fear of tipping off the Japanese that we knew they attacked us the previous day. How lame is that? If you noticed, the White House isn’t repeating this excuse that much. I don’t think even THEY believe it, and that’s pretty sad.

  • ali3nation

    People, open your eyes and see that this is all smoke and mirrors. The most important thing to be scrutinizing now is how and why Stevens was sent to Benghazi on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11 ( a time when all of our shields and sensors should have been up and at full power). Benghazi was known to be a hotbed of al quaida and CIA activity at that time. There was a massive CIA led weapons search going on, and what is most likely at the very least was that Stevens, even though he held the title of Ambassador had some other less publicized duties. His death and the attack on the CIA station was an act of terrorism and possibly reprisal by al quaida and their affiliates. Who cares if Rice lied to the public, she is a pawn in an ongoing coverup of major proportions. I have no problem if the Senators want to interview her and then profess their doubts about her but this is getting us no where, except to put in place valid points to keep her from becoming Secretary of State. Speaking of whom, where is the current Secretary? Lets not forget that Stevens was her underling, she has been incredibly silent on this matter and even more disturbing is that even the so called non MSM ( ie FOX, Rush etc.) seem to be looking everywhere else but in her direction. Why is that? And lastly lets keep in mind that we seem to be looking at Benghazi as an isolated incident when the entire Middle East is a tinderbox, status post Gaza, Tahrir square full of protesters, Morsi usurping power, Syria aflame. Benghazi is just part of this ugly mosaic. And the paw prints of Hillary and Obama are all over it. Has any one heard from Humaaaaa??????? Tweet me when you have some real answers.