where the f*ck is the media on this one?????

[spanone]

Republicans Altered Benghazi Emails, CBS News Report Claims

One day after The White House released 100 pages of Benghazi emails, a report has surfaced alleging that Republicans released a set with altered text.

CBS News reported Thursday that leaked versions sent out by the GOP last Friday had visible differences than Wednesday's official batch. Two correspondences that were singled out in the report came from National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.

The GOP version of Rhodes' comment, according to CBS News: "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."

The White House email: "We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/republicans-benghazi-emails_n_3289428.html

[Scuba]

1. Suddenly they're tired of the Benghazi story.

[Iliyah]

9. Issa is not

and its shameful. There needs to be an investigation. Believe me if it was the other way around ALL CORPORATE media outlets including GOP and their insane base would be SCREAming from every mountain top!

[SkyDaddy7]

12. The reason the media is giving the GOP a pass...

Has to do with the media trying to make a big deal about the AP Subpenas despite the FACT it too is a NON-scandal...It was an FBI investigation into a classified leak that caused serious national security problems. So, the press is doing their part to keep the Obama Administration on its heals...Or that is is the plan but it has yet to work as Obama's poll numbers have not moved.

[madokie]

2. Because people like my neighbor doesn't want to hear about it anymore

or so the 'news readers' figure. The people who vote based on guns, gays and abortions should have their voting privileges taken away as those three issues, pretty much alone, is what puts these assholes in office. Wedge issues and the people who vote based on them are stooooopid fucks. Don't even realize how they're screwing our country up with their votes.
I use my neighbor as an example because he and her are some of those people who vote based on those wedge issues. No amount of my talking, sending emails or pleading with them to stop and think what they're a part of has any effect on them at all. I keep trying because as long as there is breath there is hope.

[Ilsa]

16. And they won't care until they

are shot, need an abortion, or a beloved child comes out of the closet and is treated like trash by other GOP supporters.

[BlueCaliDem]

28. It's like trying to convince a sociopath to have empathy for a fellow human being.

Not going to happen until they're directly affected by something.

The sad thing is, had our side come out en masse in 2010, we would have a Speaker Pelosi today and there would not have been the gerrymandering of districts as we have now.

Even sadder is, I've been reading a few usual suspects here on DU that they still haven't learned their lesson and still believe that voting for Third-Party candidates {or if they don't get the Democratic candidate they want, they won't vote} is somehow going to move their priorities forward. Unbelievable.

[malaise]

3. Amazing indeed

Where are the ReTHUGs? Are they allowed to lie with impunity?

[spanone]

4. you would think it would be criminal to alter white house emails? you'd think....

not in this fucking world.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

7. Freedom of speech and of the press are too important to make it a crime to satirize or alter the

works of others. The words of people in government are not sacrosanct. They deserve no special protection.

The civil law system provides ample recourse for people who have incurred actual damage due to libel or slander.

If it can be satisfactorily proved that someone in the press deliberately altered a government employee's words in order to further a political agenda, the journalists who did that will rightfully end up looking like asses.

[malaise]

21. Are you fugging serious

You think changing the text of emails is part of free speech?

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

24. Passing an altered version of what another person wrote or said is simply gossip.

And here we are, together, happily gossiping about gossip.

[malaise]

25. FFS it's not gossip when you attempt to pretend it was the original text n/t

[BlueCaliDem]

30. Bullshit. It ain't that simple.

Although I'm becoming increasingly convinced you really wish it were.

[arcane1]

31. It's not "gossip" when it's used in an official congressional investigation

[WRH2]

32. It's FRAUD

[spanone]

54. oh you're a comedian, now your silliness makes sense.

[Cheviteau]

56. Try Harder

No one here is buying your faux intellectualism.

[KansDem]

71. You've been watching FOX News too much...

Now, that's gossip!

[another_liberal]

74. That's what they all say.

All of the Republican shills, that is.

[In_The_Wind]

27. That's not the way I see things!

[BlueCaliDem]

29. This wasn't a simple case of plagiarizing or "gossip".

The text to e-mails they were privy to was altered in order to persecute and scandalize this president. And it weren't journalists who deliberately altered the correspondence between the WH and the Dept. of State. It were Republicans. So stop trying to muddy the waters...unless that's your agenda, Noob.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

38. Congress has no power to prosecute people for crimes

The investigation is just political theater. It's a filthy game, one that I could not lower myself to indulge.

It's certain that at least one version of the email in question was altered by someone. Until the author comes forward and tells us what he actually wrote, we don't really know who altered which version, or both, or why.

[BlueCaliDem]

41. Never claimed that Congress has the power to prosecute. I wrote PERsecute. There's a difference.

And even their most ardent defenders can't deny that's exactly what they've been doing. Persecuting President Obama and others in his administration.

Since the House does oversight committees, and Republicans have held on to power even though they got 1.5 million votes LESS than Democrats in the last election, do you actually think Issa will volunteer an investigation into his own party's part in doctoring WH e-mails? Really?

Criminal Issa was hoping that the WH would stick to tradition and not release those e-mails that someone among them had doctored for the sole purpose of creating a scandal against this remarkably scandal-free president {and to not have to do anything for the American people during this all}. They've received their marching orders from the Heritage Action committee to focus on scandals, not bills that would help create jobs by passing the American Jobs Bill act {low unemployment doesn't benefit their corporate masters and it doesn't look good on Republicans}, repeal the sequester, and implement ObamaCare.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

43. Yes, of course. I understand the difference. Political PERsecution is a waste of time, and

also an inevitable consequence of a multi-party adversarial political system. Partisans have been slinging muck at each other since the concept of parties was invented.

[BlueCaliDem]

46. But NONE have been as good at it, or were as supported by widespread corporate media,

as the Republican Party - the preferred party of the Koch Bros and other plutocrats who want to usurp democracy and the U.S. Constitution, and replace it with a "mother" corporate charter instead.

Republicans have been trying to do since FDR when they launched The Business Plot, led by proven Republicans like Prescott Bush - yep, grandpappy of George Bush - and aided and abetted by U.S. corporate hundreds of millions of dollars. Thanks to General Smedley Butler, a true American hero, whom they had chosen to lead 500,000 marines but who loved the country more than profits, they were stopped.

Do you think they've changed their minds since 1931? One look at the Koch Bros says no.

And where is the evidence that Democrats hold the same view or have tried the same treasonous acts as the Republicans have committed? There isn't any.

So let's drop the "both sides do it!" bullshit and call a spade a spade; identify the true enemy of this country, and work toward eradicating them from positions of power.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

49. The Republicans have changed a lot since 1931, in particular since 1974 or 1980

They've gone far to the right. They have always had the support of business, at least since the early 20th Century. The modern Democratic Party has the support of academics, and has used it to great advantage.

I can't vote because I am deceased. I was a Federalist. Given the stark choice that people face today, surely I would register as a Democrat.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

67. The President appears to be handling the situation with alacrity

He has neither been besmirched nor scandalized.

[BlueCaliDem]

68. I don't know if President Obama is handling the situation with alacrity.

I seriously doubt he was going to show his concerned face in public.

But you're right . . . he has neither been besmirched nor scandalized by any of this despite the Republicans' best efforts to do just that.

I guess you can attribute this to the fact that the American people are sick and tired of the do-nothing Republicans in Congress, and are tired of the Republican boys crying wolf while they suffer.

[awoke_in_2003]

48. I think you are confusing...

satire and libel.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

66. Proving libel requires the establishment of both malicious intent and actual damages

[awoke_in_2003]

69. And you think republicans...

don't have malicious intent?

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

70. Naturally their intent is to do as much political damage as possible to their polical opponents

That's the nature of partisan politics. Proving libel requires proof of actual damage, which has clear legal definitions.

If the author of the altered email believes his reputation or livelihood has been damaged, he can sue whoever made the unauthorized edits. He is the only person in the world who has standing to pursue such an action.

The First Amendment prohibits criminalizing speech, even if it can be found in a civil court to be libelous. We're not talking about an Earth-shaking lie here. Nobody is trying to start a war by altering an email.

[Kingofalldems]

78. They're trying to destroy a President

which would embolden our enemies.

Not fooled in the least by your posts.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

79. Opposition parties have been trying to destroy Presidents since John Adams' term

It happened to be a party called "Republican" at the time, though they bore little resemblance to today's Republicans.

There is nothing new under the Sun here. President Obama got it right when he borrowed Gertrude Stein's quip about the city of Oakland.

[spanone]

53. el crocko of shite....full to the top!

[Doctor_J]

61. Altering WH e-mails does not fall under the protection of the constitution

and you're an idiot who won't last a week here, freeper.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

65. Please explain your subject line. Lying is protected speech, unless it qualifies as defamation.

You've presented what appears to be an ipse dixit with nothing to back it up.

[sheshe2]

8. One would think that, yes spanone!

However

[Cha]

59. Seems Jon Karl's been busy tweeting non apologies and weaseling 90 miles an hour..

Jonathan Karl ✔ @jonkarl
I should have stated, as I did elsewhere, the reporting was based on a summary provided by a source. I apologize for the mistake. 2/2 Joy Reid @TheReidReport

.@jonkarl but do you believe that source was deliberately misleading you? Or did you misinterpret what they told you. Important distiction.

Only4RM @Only4RM
.
@TheReidReport @jonkarl A further distinction, Karl wrote he'd "obtained" the emails & they'd been "reviewed by ABC News", both LIES. Joy Reid @TheReidReport
@Only4RM @jonkarl a very good point that also needs clarification.10:38 AM - 19 May 2013

Nerdy Wonka @NerdyWonka

Never believe any news @ABC tweets, prints, or says. If their reporter can LIE about Benghazi and Pres. Obama, they can lie about anything.

http://theobamadiary.com/2013/05/19/video-president-obama-at-morehouse-college/

I don't think this is over yet, spanone.. even though abc and Jon Karl want it to be.

[hue]

64. You nailed it! It's just a 3 ring circus on a merry-go-round!!

[lpbk2713]

5. They know the goppers are comfortable with their disinformation.

And the media wouldn't want to shatter their gnarly little world.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. I think the internet is going to have to make up for that omission.

The story is now how the media is unfairly covering the subject. The media's negligence is now the story.

[BlueCaliDem]

36. Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Martin Bashir, and especially Lawrence O'Donnell

would be perfect for this endeavor. Also, Latino/Hispanic teevee and Black commentators on their radio shows, led by Al Sharpton.

[Baitball Blogger]

37. Wow. Can you imagine the change in the political dichotomy if latino/Hispanic and Black Americans

began to express their frustration at the lopsided news media?

[BlueCaliDem]

39. It's why NewsCorpse has opened a Fox Latino channel . . . they want to do the same to them

as they've done to the TeaBaggers - brainwash.

This is the chance for Democrats and the president to get the full faith and support among Latinos and Blacks by rallying them against U.S. corporate media just as U.S. corporate media rallied against the American people.

[Baitball Blogger]

40. Except that most Latinos come from countries that push government propaganda.

I know where I was raised I learned how to tune it out.

[BlueCaliDem]

45. That appears to be true because they were nonplussed by all the advertising and

bullshit hurled around before the 2012 elections, ignored it and would not allow themselves to be distracted by it all by over-analyzing everything, and voted smart and focused.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

10. It's refreshing to see that the sport of muckraking is alive and well in the 21st Century

I see two different sources reporting two different versions of a single communique. That was quite common when I was alive.

In this case, given that the author of the piece in question is apparently still living, perhaps he could resolve this tempest in a teapot by announcing his own recollection of what he wrote. It seems to me that is the only way to resolve the dispute with certainty.

[Celebration]

18. the tempest in the teapot

Is the whole supposed scandal.

President Obama used "act of terror" as a description in the first days after the act.

End of discussion.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

44. Yes, I agree with your analysis.

Much ado about nothing. The attack itself and the tragic loss of life are what really matter.

[BlueCaliDem]

47. No. What really matters is identifying how this happened and to ensure

it won't again. But don't expect the Republicans to even consider doing that. There's nothing in it for them, and they'd rather demonize this president and Democrats to hopefully fool enough Americans to give them more power in our government, than care about the tragic, unnecessary deaths of those four Americans in Benghazi that the Teapublicans' zeal to Cut! Cut! Cut! - at a whopping $400 million in two years - had contributed toward.

[stevenleser]

11. I'm covering that on my radio show today. I'll put out an OP in a sec.

[spanone]

55. thanks steve.

[JHB]

13. Where are the Democrats on it?

Not to let the MSM off the hook, but it's been clear for decades now that if a Washington story is going to stick, it has to be pushed.

Every time the get in front of a camera, Democrats should mention this attempt at fraud by the Republicans, and use words like fraud and disinformation.

[zeemike]

14. True enough.

But good cop never does that to bad cop...instead they feel your pain.

[jimmil]

15. The answer is obvious..

The answer to why people aren't up in arms over this is they don't believe anything that does not match their preconceived ideas. They believe that there was a cover up because they want a cover up. They believe the emails were exactly as reported because they want to. There is nothing anyone can do or say that will change their mind. The only truth they know is their truth and your truth means nothing.

"Nine politicians out of ten are knaves who maintain themselves by preying on the idiotic vanities and pathetic hopes of half-wits."—H.L. Mencken

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

17. Indeed. From what I have read, it seems there are two versions of one sentence in question.

One is referred to as the "leaked" version, the other as "official." Both were apparently produced by people on the staff of the President, so the nomenclature of leaked vs. official really means nothing. Neither the individual who wrote the original, nor the President himself, has endorsed either version.

Members of the public may choose to take one or the other as a true and accurate reflection of the original communication. Surely at least one version was altered by someone. Or both could have been altered by different people with different agendas.

On this forum most people seem to accept the later or "official" version as accurate. I've read on other forums people expressing the opinion that the earlier version is correct, and that the President's people for some reason altered the text before making the "official" release.

To me they look like six of one thing and half a dozen of another. The document doesn't seem important enough to argue about, given that the author hasn't taken the trouble to clear up the dispute. Apparently he doesn't care, or has been directed to keep quiet.

[Celebration]

19. Good grief

ABC News had to do a whole bunch of spinning to try to get themselves out of this one.

And, they are NOT saying that the White House released a bunch of doctored documents. They are only saying that in context that what they reported was correct, although the wording they reported was INACCURATE. Talk about spin! But even ABC and the source admit that their wording was incorrect. Yet you think this is in QUESTION??? REALLY??

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/more-details-on-benghazi-talking-points-emerge/

I asked my original source today to explain the different wording on the Ben Rhodes e-mail, and the fact that the words “State Department” were not included in the e-mail provided to CNN’s Tapper.

This was my source’s response, via e-mail: “WH reply was after a long chain of email about State Dept concerns. So when WH emailer says, take into account all equities, he is talking about the State equities, since that is what the email chain was about.”

The White House could still clear up this confusion by releasing the full e-mail transcripts that were provided for brief review by a select number of members of Congress earlier this year. If there’s “no ‘there’ there,” as President Obama himself claimed yesterday, a full release should help his case.

Of course the White House DID clear up the "confusion" but apparently that is not enough for some here. The source did NOT deny that his wording was incorrect.

[Nimajneb Nilknarf]

26. The response from the "original source" seems to be gobbledygook and pettifoggery.

Last edited Sun May 19, 2013, 01:13 PM - Edit history (2)

It would be helpful if the actual author of the original email would make a public statement about it.

[sigmasix]

75. silly teabagger- your disguise is slipping

This poster is a good example of the teabagger bubble defense; he knows that parroting right wing pundits and ignoring the truth about the unAmerican intentions of the Republicans that changed the emails will serve as aid and comfort to the enemies of truth. This poster's oh so cute refusal to recognize the serious nature of the crime committed by the Republicans that changed Whitehouse emails in order to perform a political lynching of the POTUS is the result of hours and hours of Fox "news" training and education about the true meaning of "fair and balanced".

Isnt there a cross burning you would be more comfortable at? You really ought to attend it- who knows- you could meet your teabagger equivalent of a soul mate. (teabaggers have no soul- they gave it up when they decided to embrace the hate and birtherism).
I'm somewhat amazed at the intelligence displayed by this particular teabagger in creating a user name; it was able to spell two names backwards, without much obvious trouble.
Teabagger's mommy must be so proud!

[Doctor_J]

62. No, they believe there was a coverup because 1500 radio stations and all TV stations

told them there was a coverup whether it was pre-conceived or not, they have been lied to about it, constantly, for a month. This didn't happen in a vacuum. It was planned, deliberate, sabotage.

Christ, when are we going to DO something about these people.

[W T F]

20. The News Media will not report stories that put themselves in a bad light.

[go west young man]

22. If Obama wants to defeat these assholes he needs to highlight this point

in the coming week. If he chooses not to then once again he chooses to let them roll over him.
I can't for the life of me imagine why he wouldn't take advantage of this obvious deception and
expose the traitors that did this. This is tantamount to treason. They conspired to altered the words
of the President of The United States in order to bring him down. I say a full investigation is merited
and we need to get this ball fully rolling now. I am so very tired of our party not fighting back when
we have an opportunity.

[go west young man]

33. Bill Maher agrees on this point.

It's time to get them for treason. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/18/maher-gop-has-moved-beyond-obstruction-to-treason/

[Doctor_J]

63. He won't

he is an appeaser and IMO afraid of his own shadow. See my post #60

[W T F]

23. You can start hitting ABC News where it hurts right here.......

https://www.facebook.com/abcnews Start posting and pointing out how partisan the are, and be sure to use words and phases like "Doctored Fake Emails" " Undermine the President" and point out the double standard they have when Dan Rather got fired at CBS for the same exact thing that Jonathan Karl did.

[DCKit]

42. Dan Rather has been exonerated.

"The typeface didn't exist then" turned out to be a lie.

Can't blame you if you didn't know that... the MSM didn't report on it.

[Rex]

34. It should be obvious by now which side the M$M works for.

HINT: It ain't our side!

[napkinz]

35. lots of scandals ... and they all are Republican!

[WIProgressive88]

50. The media has found a narrative that it likes with the "Obama is the new Nixon" meme.

I am not disappointed in the media for not paying more attention to the altered emails as my expectations of them are so low to begin with. I am disappointed in the president and Democrats for not pushing this issue. The Republicans will do absolutely anything to destroy this president, so he needs to get far more aggressive in dealing with these creeps.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

51. Rachel annihilated ABC News

GOP congressmen invented the story that they fed ABC, ABC made an exclusive report based on GOP lies, then the rest of the media sourced ABC News. One incestuos clusterfuck.

[sulphurdunn]

52. The same powers that own

all of the Republican Party, three-fourths of the Democratic Party, five votes on the Supreme Court, half the state legislatures, thirty governorships, also either own the corporate media outright or control it through advertising.

[Corruption Inc]

57. CBS is part of "the media" and "the media" only cares about money

"The media" is incapable of identifying what news is, they are simply salespeople who throw stuff out into the public view to see what sells. The public is used by them, not served by them.

So to answer the question "where is the media", the answer is they are at their desks looking for anything that sells so they can enrich themselves. When they are not at their desks, they are getting plastic surgery, applying makeup and sitting in front of a mirror practicing their sales pitches.

"The media" lies for a living, as do most politicians, neither care about informing the public of anything.

[rhett o rick]

58. Jonathan Karl meet Judith Miller. nm

[Doctor_J]

60. Partial blame to the WH on this

Get on TV and call the Repukes AND THE MEDIA liars, traitors, propagandists, slanderers, and saboteurs.

Speak the fucking unvarnished truth for once

[Anymouse]

72. It is not against the law for the media to lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre

The Wikipedia article above details the story of a Fox local affiliate reporter in Tampa, Florida, who claims she was specifically asked by her station management to distort a particular news story. She was fired when she refused.

The subsequent court case in Federal Appeals Court determined that she was not unlawfully fired, and Fox News (and by extension any news organisation) has the first amendment right to lie. Lying is not prohibited in the Constitution.

The court case substantially weakened libel and slander law, however if you can show direct damage to yourself (economic) you can still sue. As for Jane Akre, she was out of luck: she did not follow her employer's lawful directive to lie about a news article, so her firing was lawful.

[another_liberal]

73. Good grief!

Talk about creating your own reality?

Did they really think no one would notice that level of revision? The Republicans must think we're all brainless sheeples, like the regular Church-attending dupes who elect and reelect their crooked asses year after year.

[zbdent]

76. It hurts Republicans ...

What, you think they're going to do anything to do that?

I mean, come on ... if they actually do their job instead of spreading the Repuke propaganda, they'll be accused of worshipping Obama!

[AzDar]

77. Good question...