Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
First it first walk from and the first question has to be the CIA the former CIA directors saying that.
He doesn't know what happened after the CIA sent over their memorandum.
But that isn't the one he delivered in the changes had to be made subsequently.
This CIA director by the way you anticipated when you were on this broadcast a few days ago.
Saying that it had to have originated and -- understood those changes in the low.
From from the White House to the central into the United Nations ambassador.
Had to occur either in the State Department or the White House itself.
I stand by that low and the fact is is that.
No one rewrites those sorts of things that CIA officer would write you know that a director with right.
Other than you know at them at the White House or at state remember something.
The UN ambassador -- our ambassador to the United Nations is a member of the cabinet also.
This has been lost on a lot of folks she's a cabinet member she would be taking instructions directly from the White House I'm probably not the secretary of state on this.
But whether President Obama acknowledge exactly -- that she was on those five chart shows because look at the White House request.
It creates a number of troubling questions one he says he knew immediately.
That it was a terrorist attack.
Secondly he testified.
Just a few days later on the fourteenth of September before.
The intelligence committee.
And frankly -- to by the by at least the statements most members of that committee.
To exactly the White House line on.
An Internet video.
Which the president himself as pointed to disavowing that very message.
That -- very talking point.
From them from the first 24 hours after it hurt.
Clearly he's amended his statement.
-- they'd get a vote of the first statement you know said that he purportedly -- that was written and sent from CIA.
How was that al-Qaeda was suspected the words were changed to.
Suspected or indications -- that you say he has defended his statement who is the he referring to Petraeus for the president.
Petraeus Petraeus -- statement appears to have been amended.
But what he did say today based on that the news reporting is is that the statement and that was sent out the writing it said.
Al-Qaeda suspected and the change was indications of extremists this goes to the larger narrative of this White House that there wasn't a terrorist attack.
And if you listen to the president's words that the United Nations.
He talks about -- mindless attack mindless activities well know what the mindless it was pretty quiet.
And it goes again here's the president again trying to make.
The point that the it wasn't up a planned terrorist act this is something about.
The way the president's approaching this and all of -- supporters have gotten wind gotten wind behind him.
To try to sell this narrative to the United States -- to the American people and it just wasn't true.
-- top house armed services Democrat.
I don't write letters rice's we've Adam -- -- as we just sought talk about.
The statements by -- -- right.
Saying he doesn't stand Howard terrorists -- can't be both spot and if it's -- and pre planned or.
That I mean is just.
Bizarre what is going on here the the ideological.
If you will mandated logic of -- all is Paula.
These are democratic opportunists.
Trying to support the president here.
It may be that straightforward the fact of the matter is we also have some -- tortuous.
On Capitol Hill.
Who -- have yet to it expresses complete outrage.
It what was a completely different statement by a man who's engaging in some contortions of his own that is David Petraeus who testified on the fourteenth of September.
Queuing to the White House line are now acknowledging he knew that there was say.
-- terrorist attack not a reaction spontaneous or otherwise through a Internet video.
Who is now.
Apparently not discussing why he thinks events changed over the past a week and a half but I have to ask you.
This is nothing happened here.
With what had been a very long investigation apparently into Petraeus.
On the part of the Justice Department which is a politicized Justice Department and I -- and I mean that is an understatement.
Nothing happened till he insisted on putting out the CIA timeline and then some -- In his world all hell broke loose you think that's a coincidence.
I don't think direct many coincidences.
In any of this.
You know if you look at that -- you know if you look at all of of the time winds in terms of of what is clearly a cover up.
You know when you have -- this many questions when you have to push this hard when they won't give a straight answer when they wordsmith.
All of this.
Mean it's clear they're not telling the truth.
They are trying to conceal protect -- the president I'm sure at some point.
You know given the testimony today and yesterday they'll find some mid level -- that they can blame this all on down at the NF state.
-- -- --
Filter by section