Susan Rice calls blaming Benghazi on the Mohammed video a 'false controversy'

The Obama administration Benghazi stonewall continues to add boulders, as inner circle member Susan Rice parroted the "nothing to see here, move along" line on 60 Minutes last night:

Susan Rice: I don't have time to think about a false controversy. In the midst of all of the swirl about things like talking points, the administration's been working very, very hard across the globe to review our security of our embassies and our facilities. That's what we ought to be focused on.

It is now beyond dispute that from the beginning the administration knew that the action against our diplomatic facility in Benghazi was not a spontaneous uprising based on a video. That was lie that was cooked up in order to protect the re-election effort of Barack Obama. Susan Rice willingly went on  5 Sunday shows to push this lie onto the American people because Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of State declined to do so:

Lesley Stahl: But the questions keep coming. When someone heard that I was going to be talking to you they said, "You have to ask her why Hillary Clinton didn't do the interview that morning." Did she, did she smell trouble?

Susan Rice: She had just gone through an incredibly painful and stressful week. Secretary Clinton, as our chief diplomat, had to reach out to the families, had to greet the bodies upon their arrival at Andrews Air Force Base. If I were her, the last thing I would have wanted to do is five Sunday morning talk shows.  So I think it's perfectly understandable--

Lesley Stahl: So when they asked you -

Susan Rice: So when the White House asked me, I agreed to do it.

Lesley Stahl: Do you ever think, "Gee, I wish I hadn't done that." You know, if you hadn't done that, I'd be calling you Madam Secretary of State maybe.

Susan Rice: Well, you can call me Susan.

How charming! Call me Susan the liar.

60 minutes is complicit in the cover-up, too. Aaron Goldstein, writing in The American Spectator, lays out the ways in which the 60 Minutes segment misleads the public about the cover-up effort.

When discussing Rice's infamous appearances (when she was then U.S. Ambassador to the UN) on five Sunday talk shows on September 16, 2012 in which she claimed that the attacks on Benghazi were a result of spontaneous demonstrations, Stahl states:

That particular assessment from talking points prepared by the CIA was wrong, and Rice was accused of being deliberately misleading. But a former senior intelligence official told us that the talking point that called the Benghazi attack spontaneous was precisely what classified intelligence reports said at the time.

While the CIA's original talking points do indicate that the attacks occurred "spontaneously" following protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo they also stated, "We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack." These talking points also mention Ansar al-Sharia. However, at the request of the State Department, references to both al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia were removed. Indeed, following former the testimony of CIA Director David Petraeus in November 2012 to the House Committee on Homeland Security, its Chairman Peter King noted that "(T)he original talking points prepared by the CIA were different from the ones finally put out." 

In May 2013, it was revealed that State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland wanted references to al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia removed because it "could be abused by members (of Congress) to beat up on the State Department for not paying attention to warnings." It was particularly egregious for 60 Minutes to cast the errors in the Benghazi talking points entirely at the door of the CIA considering that 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley, in his capacity as anchor of the CBS Evening News, also reported about the revisions to the talking points and the e-mail correspondence from Nuland at the time of these revelations.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention that Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard wroteextensively about how the White House and the State Department revised the CIA talking points on Benghazi. If not for Hayes the truth about Benghazi might never have come out.

In the final analysis, by omitting crucial details reported by the CIA in the original Benghazi talking points, 60 Minutes effectively misled the American public by minimizing the role of Rice, the State Department and the Obama Administration in misleading the American public about what happened in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 and thus further tarnishing its diminishing credibility.

It will require the election of a Republican president and the appointment of a GOP attorney general to get to the bottom of this. I only hope that both possibilities become reality, and that the decision is made to come clean about what nhappened at Benghazi. The four Americans who died, including an ambassador, deserve no less. This is among the most disgraceful diplomatic scandals of all American history, and so far the Obama adminisntration is skating.

The Obama administration Benghazi stonewall continues to add boulders, as inner circle member Susan Rice parroted the "nothing to see here, move along" line on 60 Minutes last night:

Susan Rice: I don't have time to think about a false controversy. In the midst of all of the swirl about things like talking points, the administration's been working very, very hard across the globe to review our security of our embassies and our facilities. That's what we ought to be focused on.

It is now beyond dispute that from the beginning the administration knew that the action against our diplomatic facility in Benghazi was not a spontaneous uprising based on a video. That was lie that was cooked up in order to protect the re-election effort of Barack Obama. Susan Rice willingly went on  5 Sunday shows to push this lie onto the American people because Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of State declined to do so:

Lesley Stahl: But the questions keep coming. When someone heard that I was going to be talking to you they said, "You have to ask her why Hillary Clinton didn't do the interview that morning." Did she, did she smell trouble?

Susan Rice: She had just gone through an incredibly painful and stressful week. Secretary Clinton, as our chief diplomat, had to reach out to the families, had to greet the bodies upon their arrival at Andrews Air Force Base. If I were her, the last thing I would have wanted to do is five Sunday morning talk shows.  So I think it's perfectly understandable--

Lesley Stahl: So when they asked you -

Susan Rice: So when the White House asked me, I agreed to do it.

Lesley Stahl: Do you ever think, "Gee, I wish I hadn't done that." You know, if you hadn't done that, I'd be calling you Madam Secretary of State maybe.

Susan Rice: Well, you can call me Susan.

How charming! Call me Susan the liar.

60 minutes is complicit in the cover-up, too. Aaron Goldstein, writing in The American Spectator, lays out the ways in which the 60 Minutes segment misleads the public about the cover-up effort.

When discussing Rice's infamous appearances (when she was then U.S. Ambassador to the UN) on five Sunday talk shows on September 16, 2012 in which she claimed that the attacks on Benghazi were a result of spontaneous demonstrations, Stahl states:

That particular assessment from talking points prepared by the CIA was wrong, and Rice was accused of being deliberately misleading. But a former senior intelligence official told us that the talking point that called the Benghazi attack spontaneous was precisely what classified intelligence reports said at the time.

While the CIA's original talking points do indicate that the attacks occurred "spontaneously" following protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo they also stated, "We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack." These talking points also mention Ansar al-Sharia. However, at the request of the State Department, references to both al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia were removed. Indeed, following former the testimony of CIA Director David Petraeus in November 2012 to the House Committee on Homeland Security, its Chairman Peter King noted that "(T)he original talking points prepared by the CIA were different from the ones finally put out." 

In May 2013, it was revealed that State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland wanted references to al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia removed because it "could be abused by members (of Congress) to beat up on the State Department for not paying attention to warnings." It was particularly egregious for 60 Minutes to cast the errors in the Benghazi talking points entirely at the door of the CIA considering that 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley, in his capacity as anchor of the CBS Evening News, also reported about the revisions to the talking points and the e-mail correspondence from Nuland at the time of these revelations.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention that Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard wroteextensively about how the White House and the State Department revised the CIA talking points on Benghazi. If not for Hayes the truth about Benghazi might never have come out.

In the final analysis, by omitting crucial details reported by the CIA in the original Benghazi talking points, 60 Minutes effectively misled the American public by minimizing the role of Rice, the State Department and the Obama Administration in misleading the American public about what happened in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 and thus further tarnishing its diminishing credibility.

It will require the election of a Republican president and the appointment of a GOP attorney general to get to the bottom of this. I only hope that both possibilities become reality, and that the decision is made to come clean about what nhappened at Benghazi. The four Americans who died, including an ambassador, deserve no less. This is among the most disgraceful diplomatic scandals of all American history, and so far the Obama adminisntration is skating.

RECENT VIDEOS