Again, just post these talking points etc. I am not reading through a wall of biased journalism, you made a claim, support it, brevity would be nice.
you presented me with a 2000 word news report.
you mean you have no support to say that petraeus's emails were "doctored"? lmfao color me shocked...
"Among the details, the documents show that then-CIA Director David Petraeus objected to the final version that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used five days after the assault"
The White House on Wednesday released 99 pages of emails and a single page of hand-written notes made by Petraeusí deputy, Mike Morell, after a meeting at the White House the day before U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice began giving interviews to the media based on the agreed 'talking points.'
On that page, Morell scratched out from the CIAís early drafts of talking points mentions of al-Qaeda, the experience of fighters in Libya, Islamic extremists and a warning to the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on the eve of the attacks of calls for a demonstration.
'No mention of the cable to Cairo, either?' Petraeus wrote after receiving Morellís edited version, developed after an intense back-and-forth among Obama administration officials.
Critics have highlighted an email by then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland that expressed concern that any mention of prior warnings or the involvement of al-Qaeda would give congressional Republicans ammunition to attack the administration in the weeks before the presidential election. Fighting terror was one of President Barack Obamaís re-election strong points.
That email was among those released by the White House, sent by Nuland on September 14th at 7:39 p.m. to officials in the White House, State Department and CIA.
'I have serious concerns about all the parts highlighted below, and arming members of Congress to start making assertions to the media that we ourselves are not making because we donít want to prejudice the investigation,' she wrote.
In another, she sends the White House and intelligence officials an email warning that the talking points could be 'abused' by opposition politicians 'to beat the State Department for not paying attention to agency warnings so why do we want to feed that either?'