Benghazi documents newly obtained by Judicial Watch show that one of the administration’s primary communications goals soon after the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate was “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.” [Emphasis added]
cc @rhodes44 RT @bfinstock Wow. That's a big fuckin email: #Benghazi pic.twitter.com/QdfQHd6Su5
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) April 29, 2014
@redsteeze @rhodes44 @bfinstock I guess THAT'S what difference it makes!
— ThePeoplesBacon (@ThePeoplesBacon) April 29, 2014
The newly released documents were not included in the initial set of emails released by the White House last May. The new documents can be found on the Judicial Watch site.
Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce that White House was pushing that video was to blame http://t.co/11olDWyQue
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 29, 2014
My God. RT @jaketapper: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce White House push that video was to blame http://t.co/AWfAhPlFUA
— Julia Porterfield (@JK_Porterfield) April 29, 2014
“What difference does it make?"-HRC. RT @jaketapper: Newly released Benghazi documents reinforce White House push that video was to blame
— Mr. America (@EricBandazewski) April 29, 2014
I hope @jaketapper gets an interview with @HillaryClinton and asks her where she was the night of #Benghazi and why she ran away. #NotReady
— USA Values (@_Alec_P) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper The lead is that the emails show the video push was for political reasons. Why bury that?
— S D Winkler (@sdwinkler) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper Reinforce? No I would say "Deliberately prove"
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) April 29, 2014
How about "prove beyond a shadow of a doubt" or "remove any question" or "are a smoking gun"
Much more appropriate wording. @jaketapper— — Bonk — (@BonkPolitics) April 29, 2014
"push". You spelled "bold-faced lie" wrong.@jaketapper
— RightGirlNYC (@RightGirlNYC) April 29, 2014
.@jaketapper @jtLOL You spelled lie wrong. Also, how about "be resolute in bringing people who harm Americans to justice" name one.
— Joe Matthew (@KoenigJojo) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper Wow. You have got to be the only one @CNN to cover this story.
— Ellen (@ellen6019) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper Just as conservatives said all along. Criminal.
— H (@Tark31) April 29, 2014
https://twitter.com/SeaPeaDub/status/461229603780956160
@jaketapper the way this story was buried is a sad statement about journalism. Used to go after scandals regardless of pol leaning. #scandal
— Sam Won (@SamObiWon) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper Anyone uncomfortable now that a "filmmaker" was made a scapegoat over this #Benghazi cover story by WH?
— GayPatriot™ (@GayPatriot) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper too bad the media is the public relations arm of the WH these days. This info should not have taken you this long. #Shame
— Doris Daylight (@DorisDaylight1) April 29, 2014
@DorisDaylight1 I've been covering Benghazi since it happened. Try google
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 29, 2014
@jaketapper Don't be a hater, Jake. I still love you. I've been reading you faithfully. But u had to know this was election motivated.
— Doris Daylight (@DorisDaylight1) April 29, 2014
Related:
Sharyl Attkisson dissects ‘evolving history’ of Benghazi talking points after House hearing
‘That’s why he hired a Carney’: Obama shamefully calls Benghazi talking points a ‘sideshow’
Darrell Issa says there was ‘clearly a political decision’ regarding Benghazi talking points
CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson tries to untangle twisted trail of Benghazi talking points
