What the Fuck Is All This Benghazi Shit: An Explainer

[Galraedia]

Your uncle has been posting on Facebook about "Benghazi" or whatever for months now, and you have no clue what the fuck he's talking about because, really, you don't have time for this shit. It's OK. We do. Here's your guide.

What the fuck is all this Benghazi shit?

On September 11 of last year (you might remember), an attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, ended in the death of four Americans: staffers Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods; and U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Initially, the deaths were blamed by the Obama administration on a "spontaneous protest" like the many taking place that day over the anti-Islam film (or film concept) Innocence of Muslims. But it was later determined that the strike was a premeditated terrorist attack.

Read more: http://gawker.com/what-the-fuck-is-all-this-benghazi-shit-an-explainer-499776059

[niyad]

1. that pretty well covers it

[Dawson Leery]

2. As for Rand Paul,

he is playing to his base of supporters(right wing conspiracy kooks/skinheads)

[JDPriestly]

3. This part is completely, completely false.

The scandal is that the administration attempted to cover up the fact that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, so the news wouldn't harm Obama in the election. This is the one that has mainstream conservatives salivating. They're specifically interested in the talking points used by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, who (during appearances on Sunday talk shows) said that the attack grew out of spontaneous protests; today, ABC's Jonathan Karl released a series of a memos showing how the State Department successfully lobbied for the removal of some references to terrorists. This, Republicans claim, proves—uh, well it proves that White House Press Secretary Jay Carney lied about there being no "substantive" revisions to the talking points, depending on how you define "substantive." The memos don't make the State Department look noble, but they also show that before and throughout the revision process the top talking point across all memos was still about spontaneous protests—and that the motivation was more inter-agency cover-your-ass jockeying than protecting Obama.

http://gawker.com/what-the-fuck-is-all-this-benghazi-shit-an-explainer-499776059

In the Rose Garden, on Sept. 12, 2012, which I believe was the first official statement from the President and Hillary Clinton, they clearly called it an attack, not a demonstration. I believe they actually called it a "terrorist attack." Their language was diplomatic, very careful. And there was confusion because there were demonstrations in other countries on that same date, but an intelligent person might have been a little confused, but must admit, there was no deception.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/09/12/president-obama-discusses-attack-benghazi-libya

I am posting this for the umpteenth time. I wish the Republicans would get this straight finally. All they have to do is listen to the speeches.

And I understand that some of the Republicans in Congress were given the opportunity to be properly briefed on everything but did not attend.

This is sickening. People this stupid should not be sitting in Congress and should not be voting on our laws. Please.

This is absurd.

If Republicans think this was about arms sales to who knows who, they should shut up about it. Assange is in jail for less.

[yurbud]

4. It's like Whitewater: there's nothing there, but they figure if they talk about it long enough..

people will think there must be.

[Moostache]

5. Winner winner Chicken dinner!!!

Like pretty much every right wing meme, the truth of the claim is utterly irrelevant - the only thing that matters is how many times you can get the lies repeated and given credence as legitimate points or actual disputes.

Whenever idiots in the media fail to point out that there is only one side of the political divide that ROUTINELY used out and out fabrications (not my OPINION that they are lying, but the actual, demonstrable FACT that they are lying!) it cheapens honest discourse and makes it seem like there really is an equivalency between the two parties. Makes me physically ill.

[Shrike47]

6. The equivalency treatment needs to be confronted.

The media act as though the rational people and the tinfoil hat crowd are entitled to equal time. They have the duty to investigate and report fact, but that's too much work.

[John2]

9. The people working in

need a microscope on them too. They have become unprofessional and part of the Republican spin mode. That take the Republican side and run with with it. They need to put out all the information and let the American people decide on the truth and leave the spin out the door. The bottomline is intelligence people had to clear the talking points. There was no cover up. There is no intelligence person testified before the prior hearings, the white house pressured them to change the talking points. They had no definate conclusion it was a Terrorist attack, but they did have a definate conclusion demonstrations was going on at the time of the attacks. That is the best information they had period. They had no evidence at the time who made the attacks until some time later and even that is not conclusive or they would be charging the milita some are accusing now. That militia is still in Libya and playing a role in their political process. So if they think that militia carried out the attacks, then go after them. What are the Republicans and Media pundits waiting for or are they scared of starting another civil War in Libya? Obama is carrying out their stupid Policies of regime change anyway while they are trying to bring him down at the same time. If I was him, I would quit this stupid notion of regime change and deal with America's real problem, a rightwing extremist Republican Party.

[yurbud]

13. fact-checking is considered impolite in the elite media.

[quadrature]

7. when was the 'video', no longer being blamed ...

for the attack in Benghazi?

[CJCRANE]

8. I'm sure Mitt Romney mentioned the protests

in his late night speech on the same day as the attack on the consulate.

That was before anyone even know for sure what was happening.

So it seems like it was the GOP who were the first to link the protests and the attack.

[John2]

10. Of course he did, with his spin masters in the media.

And they think all the American people are dumb enough not to know they themselves were trying to influence the Election Romney's way. They had no issue against Obama on Foreign Policy but they needed to create one. They wanted to make him look weak on Foreign Policy. I still remember a certain reporter operating for CNN went to Libya and somehow took Steven's diary from the crime scene before investigators got to the scene or someone at the scene passed it to the reporter. As far as I'm concerned that person took evidence from a crime scene and made sure a Republican operative got possession of it, instead of giving it to investigators. I think that needs to be investigated. How did a reporter enter an area investigators couldn't even get to because it was perceived to be dangerous and who cleared her? She must have obviously known someone in control of the area. And I still have not forgotten Petraeus's female busom buddy.

[John2]

11. Did he mention the

video also?

[CJCRANE]

12. His statement conflated the protests in Egypt against the video

and the US Embassy's response in Egypt (about the video and protests) with the attack in Libya (an event which was still unfolding and unclear).

Here's some of what he said:

"I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi...It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks”.

The last sentence is about a statement the US Embassy in Cairo released about the video and protests and which was released before news of any American casualties in Benghazi.

Report here: http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/09/romney-condemns-disgraceful-obama-response-on-mideast-135249.html