Jake Tapper destroys "cover-up" conspiracy... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Owner59 -> Jake Tapper destroys "cover-up" conspiracy... (5/15/2013 6:38:55 PM)

So the White House was telling the truth.....


"It starts with interpretation. An event occurs, perspective is shared in all the ways we share information, and as that perspective makes its way from the communicator outward, and much like the childhood game of “Telephone,” spin is applied; tweaks and twists are added so that the message may ultimately become something much different from the original intent. Such, it appears, is the case with the much-discussed White House e-mail on the Benghazi leaks

As Tapper points out, context of the e-mail chain, as well the context of the e-mail itself, are both at issue here. According to sources, Victoria Nuland was only one of many who expressed concerns about what information, or, of more concern, misinformation, was being disseminated. The CIA had its own internal discussions (and, apparently, disagreements) about whether the Benghazi attack was pre-planned or the result of a political demonstration (which intelligence later confirmed it was not), and the FBI expressed concerns about how much and what information should be made public in light of political sensitivities and the demands of an ongoing investigation. The State Department was not in the forefront demanding “talking points” intended to protect its flank or that of a president in the middle of a reelection campaign.

While pundits and political opponents of the Administration have been busy spinning the ‘interpretation’ of the e-mail by the aforementioned media sources and others, the truth should become clearer upon reading the actual words. As Tapper continues:


Previous reporting also misquoted Rhodes as saying the group would work through the talking points at the deputies meeting on Saturday, September 15, when the talking points to Congress were finalized. While the previously written subject line of the e-mail mentions talking points, Rhodes only addresses misinformation in a general sense. [...]

The e-mail chain was generally about the talking points for members of Congress and a government source says Rhodes, in his e-mail, was talking principally about the talking points for members of Congress but he was also discussing other items more broadly, including the investigation into the attacks, related intelligence, and what administration officials would say to reporters and the public.

The deputies’ meeting the next day was to focus on more than just the talking points, sources tell CNN, looking primarily at security at U.S. diplomatic posts around the world"


Now let’s look at the actual e-mail:


In the e-mail sent on Friday, September 14, 2012, at 9:34 p.m., obtained by CNN from a U.S. government source, Rhodes wrote:

“All –

“Sorry to be late to this discussion. We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.

“There is a ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain from Congress and people who are not particularly informed. Insofar as we have firmed up assessments that don’t compromise intel or the investigation, we need to have the capability to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened mis-impression.

“We can take this up tomorrow morning at deputies.”









http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/15/no-cover-up-cnn-obtains-actual-white-house-e-mail-on-benghazi-leaks/




papassion -> RE: Jake Tapper destroys "cover-up" conspiracy... (5/16/2013 3:03:34 PM)


AHH, you are aware that the E-mails released so far are a fraction of what was requested, and the e-mails released have obviously been OK'd for release by the "people" being investigated! Or they would not have been released! The White House, The CIA and State Department are not TOTAL retards. They wouldn't be stupid enough to release documents that would put them in deep shit!




mnottertail -> RE: Jake Tapper destroys "cover-up" conspiracy... (5/16/2013 3:16:14 PM)

Requested by whom?  For what purpose?  Under what authority? What is the fraction?  What is the count of emails in total requested dealing with this and how does this phantom know which ones?

Credible citations please.  Or we just call asswipe out of hand.  It was the one repeatedly misquoted, you missed that as usual right?




DomKen -> RE: Jake Tapper destroys "cover-up" conspiracy... (5/16/2013 4:00:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion


AHH, you are aware that the E-mails released so far are a fraction of what was requested, and the e-mails released have obviously been OK'd for release by the "people" being investigated! Or they would not have been released! The White House, The CIA and State Department are not TOTAL retards. They wouldn't be stupid enough to release documents that would put them in deep shit!

Emails have date and time stamps. Those prove that the emails leaked by the GOP were edited to make the White House and State Dept. look bad.




Owner59 -> RE: Jake Tapper destroys "cover-up" conspiracy... (5/16/2013 6:32:41 PM)

"Who burned ABC News on the Benghazi emails?"

http://theweek.com/article/index/244214/who-burned-abc-news-on-the-benghazi-emails


"Last week, ABC News' Jonathan Karl had a big scoop, reporting on a series of 11 revisions to Obama administration talking points hashed out in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. Karl quoted emails from State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland raising objections to some points the CIA included. Karl also appeared to tie the revisions to the White House by quoting an email from the deputy national security adviser for strategic communication, Ben Rhodes:

"We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don't want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting."

Karl says he relied on "White House emails reviewed by ABC News," but later in the story adds the caveat that some of the story's contentions rely on "summaries of White House and State Department emails." The quoted Rhodes email, CNN's Jake Tapper reported Tuesday, was a misleading summary provided to Karl by his source. The real email doesn't mention the State Department at all:"



This POS should lose his job.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125