Democrats desperate to make the debacle of Benghazi go away are not having a good week. Two stories in the news so far and, by this Sunday, there will be a new blockbuster twist. First, there is the drama surrounding former Deputy Director of the CIA, Mike Morrell. Morrell is on the hot seat for his role in twisting the CIA talking points about the attack in Benghazi in September 2012–Morrell specifically removed language linking the attack to Al Qaeda and Islamic extremists. Instead, as we now know, he watered down the analyst’s assertion about the role of Al Qaeda in the attack as to render the talking points meaningless.
Here is what the analyst initially wrote:
The crowd almost certainly was a mix of individuals from across many sectors of Libyan society. That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.
Morrell stepped in and changed the fundamental meaning with this edit:
The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.
Morrell’s edit had only one purpose–to immunize the Obama Administration against the fact that elements of Al Qaeda had carried out a successful terrorist attack. Morrell decided to give the White House political cover.
Now we have more evidence to buttress this fact. Guy Taylor at the Washington Times reports:
Before the Obama administration gave an inaccurate narrative on national television that the Benghazi attacks grew from an anti-American protest, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred, documents and interviews with current and former intelligence officials show.
The attack was “not an escalation of protests,” the station chief wrote to then-Deputy CIA Director Michael J. Morell in an email dated Sept. 15, 2012 — a full day before the White House sent Susan E. Rice to several Sunday talk shows to disseminate talking points claiming that the Benghazi attack began as a protest over an anti-Islam video.
That the talking points used by Mrs. Rice, who was then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, were written by a CIA that ignored the assessment by its own station chief inside Libya, has emerged as one of the major bones of contention in the nearly two years of political fireworks and congressional investigations into the Benghazi attack.
Other intelligence from the 11th and 12th of September 2012 corroborates the position of the Chief of Station. But there is more to this story than Mike Morrell using his position to provide political cover for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The story of Benghazi also is about a covert policy of the Obama White House to send arms to Islamic radicals in Syria via Turkey. That’s the real untold story, until now. Look for news this weekend, coming out of London. There is a blockbuster article coming. I can’t say more now.