The CNN Manipulation of Benghazi Cover Is Getting, Well, Silly…. (CNN propaganda Video highlights)

We have well documented the CNN White House protectionist propaganda in such a manner as we never expected we would be able to document so openly.  Here and again HERE and again HERE and even again Here.

It really is brutally obvious at this point; so obvious in fact that few could even attempt to discharge or ignore the point.

To think that a few years ago people never understood the filter in front of their eyes. Thank goodness for the internet, research, and honesty. I digress… we continue….

The latest example was evident last night on the Erin Burnett show, “Out Front”, when she engaged the Benghazi story with an “exclusive” of sorts.

“Exclusive” in that the CIA held, according to CNN, a “press briefing” on Benghazi. Please note the term “press briefing”, then note the “briefing” only consisted of one reporter: CNN’s Susan Kelly.

You might say, who the heck is Susan Kelly? Well, Susan Kelly is the “Senior Intelligence Reporter” who suddenly and mysteriously *poof* appeared once the damning State Dept e-mails were released leaked to the media.  As soon as the details of the cover-up began to sneak out into the narrative former intelligence/security correspondant Fran Townsend was quickly dispatched and replaced on all shows by the-all-of-a-sudden appearing Susan Kelly.

Anyway, here is the transcript of the propaganda with emphasis from me:

And now, our fifth story OUTFRONT: Breaking new, new details on the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya. An intelligence official this afternoon holding a very rare briefing with reporters to defend the CIA, giving a detailed timeline of events leading up to the attack. And this afternoon, our Suzanne Kelly was the only television reporter invited to the briefing and she’s OUTFRONT tonight.

So, Suzanne, what did they tell you?


Well, a senior U.S. intelligence official who offered almost really a minute blow by blow of what happened the night of the attack, saying they felt passionately about what they said are the facts after FOX News reported last Friday that officials within the CIA’s chain of command denied repeated requests from its officers on the ground to assist during the attack on the U.S. mission, and were actually ordered to stand down.

Now, that senior official said it just never happened. The official insisting that the CIA operators on the ground were in charge of what they did and when they did at that night, and that the safety of those who were repairing to respond was also an important consideration.

The officials saying there were no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support.

BURNETT: And a briefing like this, I know, is very rare.   So when you think about why did that, Suzanne, I mean, is it because of the pressure they’ve been under? What’s your understanding?

KELLY: I think that’s a fabulous question, Erin. The reason being, there are really two different Benghazi stories. There’s the story of what actually happened that night and those people who are on the ground, under fire, who were responding, trying to make difficult decisions and then there’s the political story and you know as well as I do how politicized this story has become.

How much did the administration know? When did they know it? What should they have done differently?

I think five days before an election for them to come out, for any intelligence official to come out and really feel passionately about setting the record straight tells you that they really feel like the people who are out there doing the work are really getting a disservice sort of by the back and forth of all of this.

So you look at the political and you look at the intelligence community as sort of the accounts on the ground and the tick tock and sometimes they don’t always match up.

*snip*  Ok so a “rare” CIA press briefing was held with “one reporter” to outline the “detailed moment by moment” event….. aaaaaand what exactly did SUSAN KELLY just reveal from that super rare “briefing with reporters”?    Huh?….  You getting this?

BURNETT: All right. Suzanne, thank you very much.

Thank you very much for what?

And Peter Brookes was a deputy secretary of state under President George W. Bush. Nick Burns, former undersecretary for political affairs on the Democratic side, and Republican.

Good to see both of you.

Let me just ask you your reaction first to this, Peter, to Suzanne’s reporting what the CIA says happened. What do you say?

PETER BROOKES, FORMER DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, as a CIA alumni, I’m not surprise told at the bravery of these officers. I mean, these people have been at war for many years now and their bravery is no surprise whatsoever.   I’m sure they went and did what they felt they needed to do to protect their fellow — their colleagues as well as other Americans. I think we’re deeply indebted to them.

BURNETT: Nick, Eli Lake from “The Daily Beast”, I know you’re familiar with his reporting. He’s done some fantastic reporting.

He’s saying the State Department never requested military back-up the night of the Benghazi attack. Normally that would have been the responsibility of the ambassador who of course was in the heat of the moment there. So that then would have fallen to the State Department to make that decision, and as we know, they could hear it in real- time.

Does this surprise you?

NICHOLAS BURNS, HARVARD’S KENNEDY SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT: You know, Erin, I have to say, I served not just in Democratic administrations but in Republican administrations —

BURNETT: Yes, indeed.

BURNS: — including the administration of George W. Bush — I really find it disturbing that people are trying to make ultimate judgments about what happened in Benghazi based on piecemeal reports. The only responsible way for us to proceed is to listen to Ambassador Pickering who has been asked by Secretary Clinton to undertake an investigation or review of what happened. He has not come out with his report yet.

And, you know, we’re right before an election. This has been politicized, as your reporter said, and not by the administration. And I just think it is disturbing that somehow all these reports come out piecemeal and people try to draw a broader conclusion. We really owe it to everybody in concern to take a deliberate look at this and I actually think it’s best that this come out after the election so it’s not political.

BURNETT: What’s your response to that? At this point, should we just wait here? Another couple of weeks. And there are going to be hearings to really find out the time line.

BROOKES: Well, I agree with Nick to a point. And he is right. We’ve been getting these piecemeal reports, but almost eight weeks after this tragic event, there are more questions than answers and they persist. And I think it’s unfair to the American people, and it’s wrong that we don’t have these answers.

Why are we having this intelligence briefing by a senior unnamed intelligence official as opposed to having a time line from the government two months after this tragic event? I don’t understand it. That’s why I think people are very suspicious and very skeptical.

*snip*  Gotta step in here again….  “Intelligence briefing”?   Whiskey Tango Foxtrot… This was one “supposed” CIA guy talking to one “supposed” CNN reporter….  call it what it is:  A single cover story provided to only one media person.  Period.  Sheeeesh….

So, I agree with Nick to a certain point but I think we should have more transparency on this issue at this point.

BURNETT: Nick, what about that? I mean, why is it that it is behind closed doors and so rare, and you can’t name the person. Why not just put it out there in the public realm with your name on it?

*snip*  DUH!

BURNS: Well, of course, I don’t know anything about the briefing that took place. I just heard about it for the first time, listening to your broadcast. But I can say this, I do think the president and Secretary Clinton made the right decision here. And that is to order an independent, objective investigation and review and that’s underway. And sometimes these things take time. And they don’t lend themselves to people’s political calendars.

I also think, the two most important issues here that are getting lost is, what can we do to upgrade embassy security? And that means that Republicans and Democrats should fully fund in the Congress and receive security.   And can we go after the groups that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and his colleagues?

President Obama said he will do that and I trust President Obama is trying to do that. I think that’s where we should be putting our attention, especially this week.

*snip*  Short version, quit asking questions… this is not ok… it’s election week….

BURNETT: Peter, a final question to you.   Is it possible that we may never know why certain crucial pieces of information that were known to some people very early on were not shared with the American public? That we’ll never know whether there was a concerted decision and who made it?

*snip* laying the cover groundwork for a story that will never be told….  insufferable…

BROOKES: Well, that would be a shame. It would be a problem, a travesty. And I think this is why Congress really needs to dig into this. We deserve answers. Certainly the families of those who lost their lives bravely defending the American sovereignty and American interests certainly deserve those answers and I think that should be — we should come to some sort of conclusion on that.

BURNETT: All right. Well, thanks very much to both of you. We appreciate you men being on together again.   (Transcript link)

Mission Accomplished !

You really should look up the interview on line to see how ridiculous it actually was, the transcript does not do it justice.  You can watch the video CLICK HERE

This entry was posted in Benghazi-Gate, Clinton(s), Dem Hypocrisy, Egypt & Libya Part 2, Election 2012, Islam, media bias, Obama re-election, Sept 11, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to The CNN Manipulation of Benghazi Cover Is Getting, Well, Silly…. (CNN propaganda Video highlights)

  1. Artist says:

    yabba dabba dabba dabba say the monkeys in the zoo.

    What a crock of happy horses*it that was…… sad that so many will eat it with a spoon .


  2. howie says:

    Cowpie pseudo-news.


  3. Mikado Cat says:

    Its a vicious cycle, watch Team Obama media calmly state the party line, makes me crazy, and nobody pays attention to crazy people. All I know is that some calm people need to put some good questions out instead of going for the jugular, something that seems reasonable to the average person, but not something like the movie that would drive things down the wrong path.

    We need a HARD version of what happened, not these daily rabbit releases.

    Maybe a good place to start is to ask about the information being leaked out? Why and who is doing the leaking?


  4. Mikado Cat says:

    Did some google on Suzanne Kelly, nothing really prior to 10/5/2912

    Its an entertainment story, but she is listed as intelligence reporter, which may only mean the tag is dynamic and updated with whatever her current title might be.

    Going back to April 2012 I found this in an announcement for a conference and workshop by

    Forum moderators include CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Jill Dougherty; the AP’s Kimberly Dozier; The Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman; Fox News’ Catherine Herridge; The Washington Post’s David Ignatius; Newsweek’s Dan Klaidman; CBS’ Steve Kroft from “60 Minutes”; ABC News’ Terry Moran; The New York Times’ David Sanger; NPR’s Dina Temple-Raston; and NBC News’ Pete Williams.

    Additionally, the Golden Globe-award-winning Showtime series, “Homeland,” will be screened. A panel with “Homeland” Executive Producer Alex Cary, former CIA Director Jim Woolsey, and Director of Intelligence Analysis at the New York Police Department Mitch Silber will discuss terrorism and other national security challenges and how these challenges are portrayed in Hollywood, with CNN’s Suzanne Kelly as moderator.


  5. Tuduri says:

    CNN and other media of the same ilk are like PRAVDA in the old Soviet Union never telling the truth to protect the Party. It was common to use Pravda as toilet paper since there was rarely toilet paper to buy. But Russians took a visceral delight in demonstrating the only usefulness of Pravda. 1984 is here. The media cannot be trusted.


  6. boricuafudd says:

    I read their original timeline last night, but I am unable to find it anymore, now there is a condensed version of it online at the CNN website.

    Here is the timeline of events, as provided by the senior intelligence official:

    – Around 9:40 p.m. (local time) the annex receives the first call that the mission is under attack.

    – Fewer than 25 minutes later, a security team leaves the annex for the mission.

    – Over the next 25 minutes, the team members approach the compound, attempt to secure heavy weapons and make their way onto the compound in the face of enemy fire.

    – At 11:11 p.m., the requested drone surveillance arrives over the mission compound.

    – By 11:30 p.m., all U.S. personnel, except for Stevens, who is missing, depart the mission. The exiting vehicles come under fire.

    – Over the next roughly 90 minutes, the annex receives sporadic small arms fire and rocket-propelled grenade rounds. The security team returns fire and the attackers disperse at approximately 1 a.m.

    – At about the same time, a team of additional security personnel lands at the Benghazi airport and negotiates for transport into town. Upon learning the ambassador is missing and that the situation at the annex has calmed, the team focuses on locating the ambassador and tries to obtain information on the security situation at the hospital.

    – It’s still predawn when the team at the airport finally manages to secure transportation and an armed escort. Having learned that Stevens is almost certainly dead and that the security situation at the hospital is uncertain, the team heads to the annex to assist with the evacuation.

    – They arrive with Libyan support at the annex at 5:15 a.m., just before the mortar rounds begin to hit the annex. The two security officers are killed when they take direct mortar fire as they engage the enemy. That attack lasts only 11 minutes before dissipating.

    – Less than an hour later, a heavily-armed Libyan military unit arrives to help evacuate the compound of all U.S. personnel.

    A few things that immediately jumped at me, was that the rescue team spent 4 hours at the airport before heading to the annex and to find the body of the Ambassador. The second thing was the extra hour that the fight lasted. Then, there is the statement that when they landed at the airport they knew the Ambassador was at the hospital. HUH! That is right they watched the Ambassador as he was removed from the property.


  7. apachetears says:

    I see admin Officials and the MSM, Poo Pooing and laughing as they answer as if talking about a social blunder, Ha. Ha, they laugh, Ha ha Baracks fly is open Ha, Ha,.
    Making light of four deaths from an abandoned ambassador to the three SEALs doesn’t bother these assholes one bit.
    Even if suppressed, even if re-elected this will not go away easy for Obama.


    • stringplayer55 says:

      If re-elected (Lord, I hope not!), this had better not go away until Obama AND Biden are both impeached! Remember, both of them are in on this together (along with Hillary and Leon and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and who knows how many others).

      I believe that it was Newt Gingrich on Fox a couple of nights ago who stated the Benghazi fiasco has three components to it: 1) failure to take the necessary steps to ensure the safety of Ambassador Stevens and others in Benghazi despite all of the warning signs ahead of time (including having the compound walls breached in June. HELLO – IS ANYBODY LISTENING?), 2) the night of September 11 when the fatal attack occurred and during which time the administration twiddled their thumbs in the situation room, and 3) the ever shifting stories and the piecemeal nature in which accounts of what happened in Benghazi are released to the public.

      So, we have incompetence preceding 9/11, we have Obama allowing Americans to be left behind even though “As Americans, we don’t leave anybody behind,” and we have a cover-up of immense proportions. Now, Richard Nixon was impeached for his role in covering up the Watergate break-in. Tell me that this administration is not committing a cover-up that dwarfs what the Nixon administration attempted WRT Watergate. The incompetence and the failure to send aid to Ambassador Stevens and the other Americans in Benghazi is failure enough. But the stonewalling and efforts to mislead the American public, the cover-up that is going on daily while this election is upon us, the American people, represents the most horrific misappropriation of power by the Executive office in the history of these United States. This misappropriation of power is NOT confined just to Obama, but to the entire Executive branch that has a hand in this affair. As equal participants in the cover-up, Obama and Biden should both stand for impeachment if the American public fails to give them their walking papers on Tuesday.


  8. boricuafudd says:

    The media is all over the new timeline, saying it shows error by the CIA but not coverup or manipulation on behalf of the Administration.


    • ytz4mee says:

      Yes …. wasn’t that terribly convenient? And of course, because it is from an unnamed “intelligence official” it can’t be verified/examined. Just accept at face value. After all it was a “Senior” intelligence official giving an “unprecedented” “briefing”.
      See how that works?


      • boricuafudd says:

        The fact that it contradicts other sources, including the one from TIME magazine also own by their parent company, does not matter.

        What is most interesting is, that they make it appear as if this whole incident happened in a vacuum, where only the CIA had operational control, thereby exonerating the President, the DOD and the State Department. It was all the CIA’s fault.


      • stringplayer55 says:

        You noticed, of course, that this “briefing” with an “intelligence official” was brought to pound the opposition for making the Benghazi fiasco “political”. There was nothing “political” about this “unprecedented” “briefing.”

        Can I vomit now?


  9. ytz4mee says:

    To recap:
    Whenever in a major media news story you see the phrase “senior intelligence official” or some variation of same, know this – immediately what follows is spin/deliberate deflection. Period.

    Second. “Intelligence” never makes the decisions. They provide analysis to the “deciderer”.
    So, whenever a story pivots to “intelligence”, it is a deliberate deflection away from those who made the decision under scrutiny.

    That is all.


  10. Sharon says:

    ….the CIA and the State may both be at war with the White House over Benghazi. The Atlantic’s John Hudson thinks they may be at war with each other over it, too — and that David Petraeus is caught in the crossfire….

    ..the White House is the actual target of this war — and the two other players are responding to the shifting narratives coming from the Obama administration in their efforts to duck responsibility for the lack of preparation and response to this terrorist attack. That all but guarantees that the flood of leaks from both State and CIA will continue.

    Is greenroom’s analysis relevant?


    • stringplayer55 says:

      Ultimately, everyone involved is in CYA mode. That means that while they all stonewall as much as possible to prevent the truth about the Benghazi fiasco from becoming public, eventually bits and pieces are uncovered that expose the lies for what they are. And when a lie is exposed, then that leads to chinks in the wall that result in other lies becoming exposed as well. Pretty soon, you see those chinks becoming full-blown cracks. That is when the infighting gets really good, because everyone wants to be the last man standing. So, when the cracks occur, then each of the participants starts throwing stones to slam everyone else.

      So, yeah, I’d say that greenroom’s analysis is relevant. If Obama is re-elected on Tuesday (how the American public could do that is beyond me!), then we should be in for a good display of just how kind and open and warm the Obama administration really is! Warm is the operative word here. They will warm each other’s backsides in order to protect their own.


  11. Sharon says:

    Ignatius says this:

    While there were multiple errors that led to the final tragedy, there’s no evidence that the White House or CIA leadership deliberately delayed or impeded rescue efforts.

    Yet the timeline he then reports is wholly irrelevant to deciding that crucial question.,,,

    What is missing from this account? Any details at all about the military or White House’s situational awareness and decision-making….(a) when the military learned of the attack; (b) the military’s state of situational awareness hour-by-hour; (c) whether it received any requests for help; (d) what assets — if any — were available to render aid in time; (e) what recommendations were made; (f) whether any definitive orders were given; and (g) who gave them.

    CNN is being CNN. Normal Americans are being normal Americans and exposing CNN’s TAP (Traitor Assistance Provided).


  12. Pingback: CNN And Benghazi BS... - NY Sports Day Forums

  13. jordan2222 says:

    Slowly but hopefully surely, truth is coming out.

    From the WSJ today:

    Had a lunch today a friend that believes Petraeus will be the first to fall…


  14. LandauMurphyFan says:

    I ran across this prophetic quote in a comment today, so I’m going to drop it into a couple of threads here.

    “We’re developing a new citizenry. One that will be very selective about cereals and automobiles, but won’t be able to think.”
    — Rod Serling


  15. Mikado Cat says:

    Its been almost two months, if Obama still doesn’t know what happened in Benghazi he should admit it, if Obama does know, why won’t he tell us the truth NOW?


  16. Lee says:

    They know exactly what happened and what they did and did not do. The reporter (con artist/spin master) slipped up on the reason for the new smoke and mirror – five days to the election. It doesn’t matter to them that it is not the truth. All they have to do is create doubt, dangle the mirror to get you to look in the other direction – until Wednesday morning – then they could care less. I remember the day that Hilary Clinton gave her report about the movie and subsequent riot scenario – Al Jazeera news had an Egyptian professor on TV saying no one she talked to knew anything about a controversial movie and the US was warned back in July about attacks due to the drone kills and failure to release the blind terrorist.


  17. hooson1st says:


    ” “Exclusive” in that the CIA held, according to CNN, a “press briefing” on Benghazi. Please note the term “press briefing”, then note the “briefing” only consisted of one reporter: CNN’s Susan
    Kelly. ” –

    I read the CNN transcript on this a little differently.

    ” An intelligence official this afternoon holding a very rare briefing with reporters to defend the CIA, giving a detailed timeline of events leading up to the attack. And this afternoon, our Suzanne Kelly was the only television reporter invited to the briefing…”

    The transcript reads that “reporters” were briefed, and that Kelly was the only “television reporter” invited to the briefing. I take that to mean that CNN was not alone at the briefing such as it was.


  18. Pingback: CNN being paid with YOUR tax dollars to manipulate coverage that is being shoved down our throats as propaganda | Powdered Wig Society

  19. Pingback: CNN Tells LIES & DECEPTION On Benghazi Special | PatriotsBillboard

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s