Bolton: The only explanation is the WHITE HOUSE removed Al Qaeda from Ambassador Rice talking points

Former Ambassador John Bolton said that General Petraeus’ testimony this morning ‘put this dead cat right on the White House’s door step,” referring to Petraeus’ revelation that the CIA had included that it was a terrorist attack by an Al Qaeda linked group.

Bolton goes on to say that short of evidence to the contrary, the only explanation as to how the talking points on Benghazi were edited to remove references to Al Qaeda and Ansar Al Sharia is that the White House did it. And he says it’s perfectly consistent with the fact that top level officials in intelligence and the State Department and elsewhere don’t have a clue who wrote the final talking points for Ambassador Rice.


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • anyonebutbarry2012

    I believe John Bolton any day of the week. 4 more years of this awful corrupt administration… sigh

    • E. Lee Zimmerman

      Couldn’t agree more. Bolton seems like a straight shooter. Always has.

  • Sober_Thinking

    Just another scandal… just another cover-up in the Obama regime. Nothing to see here.

    Watch the “journalistic ju-jitsu” as the LSM covers for their messiah.

    • Rightstuff1

      The presstitutes will be out in force NOT covering this at all. Hey everyone look over here at this sex scandal involving a couple of Generals. They will keep it base and salacious and attempt to skate over or ignore this crap. Makes me so nauseous.

      The 4th Estate is as reprehensible as is humanly possible. They could easily have written for Der Volkischer Beobachter – Nazi Party Newspaper.

      One of the biggest achievements of the Left has been portraying Nazism as being on the Right. It was Socialist through and through but I digress.

      • Sober_Thinking


        “Presstitutes” – BRILLIANT!

        • Susitna

          May I use the word Presstitutes in the future? Just brilliant!

          • It’s been around for quite a while. Don’t believe the top entry claiming to know who coined the term. I remember seeing it decades ago.

            • Rightstuff1

              LOL. I don’t believe that I claimed to have coined the term. Although I do think it entirely apropos for describing the water carriers for Regime Obama.

              • It’s about the only word you could find that’s both close to the mark and also fit for a forum where decency is maintained.

      • E. Lee Zimmerman

        Ooooooh! Presstitutes! We’re ALL gonna use that now.

        • Rightstuff1

          Feel free Zimm. I came across it on Breitbart a week or so ago. I found it fitting and apt for the so-called 4th Estate. It says it all really.

  • Which agency had any motivation at all to obscure the truth of what actually happened? The White House of course. They are the only people in this whole fiasco that were about to be held accountable by the voters. Of course it was them! The notion that it could or even WOULD be anyone else is so absurd as to deserve derisive mockery.

    • Yes, the White House had motive and opportunity. No official statements made by administration personnel (Carney, Rice, Clinton, etc.) could occur without Obama’s approval. In addition, while the Benghazi attack was occurring, there is evidence that the administration stood by and denied any assistance from support troops. These hard questions need to be asked of the White House.

  • pdxlady

    This was a really great exchange. I watched it live, and was interested to see Megyn visibly frustrated/upset this morning at not being able to get a straight answer about, among other things…who removed the ‘terrorist ‘ language from the CIA talking points?

    Always like to see John Bolton (he got a haircut), as he seems to always be the adult in the conversation.

    • las1

      Always the adult… always.

      True words.

  • Rocco11

    People act like Susan Rice was some innocent babe in the woods, this woman is every bit as evil as Valerie Jarrett, Barack Hussein Soetoro Onyango Obama, Richard Trumka, Bill Ayres, and Saul Alinsky.

    • sjmom

      You’re probably right but what if Rice did not know and only did what she was told? If it were me I’d be livid knowing someone used me to lie. Just a thought but let’s face it Obama will use anyone to save himself.

      • pdxlady

        sjmom, I don’t think it plausible that she didn’t know. But of course she was doing what she was told, speaking the WH talking points; memorized thoroughly.

        As in solving a murder…she has both motive and opportunity.

        • sjmom

          I agree she has motive and opporturnity and you’re probably right. Was just thinking aloud if I were her and lied unknowingly I would be beyond livid. At this point I don’t trust anyone, especially Obama, and think he’d throw his own mother under the bus and watch it run over her to save himself.

          • pdxlady

            I agree; in fact, I think he has thrown both his mother and grandmother under the bus to suit his purposes. Everyone is a prop in Barry’s World; to be used and discarded as he pleases.

            P.S. I used to love Nancy Drew mysteries as a child. 😀 Oh, and Perry Mason too!

            • sjmom

              I read a few Nancy Drew books as a child and enjoyed them but after her never got into murder mysteries.

              • pdxlady

                Oh, I have been an unmitigated sleuth ever since! 🙂

                • sjmom

                  🙂 🙂

            • jodypear

              Everyone is a prop. That’s because he is scared of his own shadow. He has to keep up the charade. He doesn’t know who he is. He is white. He is black. He is Muslim. He is Christian (debatable). He is “A Bound Man” (a book by Shelby Steele).

              • Avspatti

                “He doesn’t know who he is.”


                • pdxlady

                  I think he believes (truly) that he is King Barry. And this belief is constantly reinforced by the sycophants that surround him in his bubble.

                • Avspatti

                  I don’t doubt it for a minute. What is the mental health of someone who is so delusional? We are in such trouble and it seems that NOBODY in Congress is going to do anything to stop him. It is sick.

          • Patriot077

            Hi sjmom. I posted a reply to rocco that you might be interested in also. Susan Rice isn’t being thrown under the bus or forced to lie. She is complicit and has reason to cover up the effects of her own actions in pushing the R2P project for Libya to begin with. Ovomit is protecting her “good work” of lying for him.

            • sjmom

              Thanks because I was not aware of her other involvement.

        • Avspatti

          Susan Rice is the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, for heaven’s sake. Are we prepared to accept that she doesn’t have her own sources of information? Is she such a robot for Obama that she meekly accepted her ‘assignment’ and did no independent checking at all? That is pathetic. A potential SofState with no curiosity, no independent thought, no inclination to check facts. Lovely.

        • mikeinidaho

          It is being reported that she wants to be Secretary of State, so of course she would lie for Obama. She has to “earn her stripes”!
          The MOST corrupt administration in the history of the US.

          • pdxlady

            Exactly mike! Tow the party line and get rewarded = politics.

            I really cannot understand how those people can live with themselves. Is pulling the big lie over on people, and laughing together w/ all the other liars about the con, really worth it for them to sear their conscience?

            “Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;” 1 Tim 4:2

    • Patriot077

      Yes she is evil. She is part and parcel of the plan to oust Gadaffi from the get go. It was Susan Rice, Samantha Powers and Hillary Clinton that pushed the UN Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

      Susan Rice has a vested interest in covering up what an abject failure that policy actually is. She and her counterparts have successfully de-stabilized the entire middle east. It is no accident.

  • tinlizzieowner

    The situational hypocrisy of the left never ceases to amaze me. Poor Susan Rice, just a (Black) ‘babe in the woods’. Some of us have been around long enough to remember what the left did to John Bolton.

  • You should see Glenn Beck’s research on the issue. The USA is supplying Al Queda with money and weapons!!!!! Oh yea, check it out – google Glenn Beck Benghazi video

  • sjmom

    It is obvious the WH was involved in changing the talking points and just as obvious why they were changed so the next question is who and Congress needs to subpoena everyone who was in the WH during that period of time until someone opens up and tells the truth.

  • colliemum

    To think that John Bolton could’ve been the next Sec of State … those numbskulls who voted for free stuff and free lady parts have no idea how much damage they have inflicted on their country.

    • StandingGround

      You know they don’t Care about the damage, colliemum. You and I don’t know how to relate to that way of thinking. It’s unreal that this is our world! Makes me sick.

      • colliemum

        Yes, indeed, standingground.

        What makes me sad and angry at the same time is that these people are happy to parrot what the corrupt media tell them, without one single thought. They are so easily led, it is frightening.

  • opinionatedhermit

    It’s very obvious who took out the references to Al Queada.

    His name is David Axlerod…….

    • Betsey_Ross

      I’m betting on ValJar.

      • opinionatedhermit

        Point taken. Thank you. Most excellent.

        In all reality, it is my belief (and, I’m open to being proven wrong) that the entire little commie cabal in the White House, those that created the Libya fiasco in the first place, was all of the sudden called upon by the campaign to give the President some “cover” …. and, with whatever else they were doing, they committed a “cover up” in the process….

        We haven’t even begun to unravel the bungle in Benghazi ….

        • pdxlady

          Agreed, and on a (much) lighter note…

          “Your bungle in Benghazi” instantly popped this Jethro Tull tune into my head, “Bungle in the Jungle”

          • Good call.

            • pdxlady

              Thanks K-Bob…brought back a lot of memories…that I couldn’t remember. 🙂

  • Susitna

    I am waiting either for the recount in the battleground states or for an impeachment, whatever comes first. We have to get rid of this Sunni Muslim and his entourage!!!!
    And the GOP has to urgently stop criticizing each other and regroup for the final fight.
    They need to learn to hold together and to show more cojones.

  • He is right. Another scandal, another day, another 10 cents.

  • E. Lee Zimmerman

    Wait a minute: you’re saying down Bolton left a dead cat on the White House lawn? What?

  • Liberty At’Stake

    Impeachment articles before Inauguration? I can fantasize.

    • Ohio_patriot31

      From your lips to God´s ears! Biden in the wings… boy, that would definitely shake up history. But, then again… we had Carter, Ford, and Clinton didn´t we?

  • deeme

    What’s really sad is how different this would of turned out had John Bolton been in charge..With the media on your side you can do anything..they are outraged..we are even talking about the four dead..they sure never have. That was because pure and simple obvious to all of U.S. they had an election to terrorist’s were going to get in their way..

    If Hollywood and the Media want to go after a President..boy do they ever..I think we need to look at the History of Watergate and think twice about the double standard..

  • NJK

    REPUBLICAN INSIDER: “Petraeus Gave Us An Opportunity – Now We Need All Of Your Help”

  • NJK

    Of course Obama did it.

    • Yes, with Valerie Jarrett holding the strings. It’s the Chicago way

  • I don’t believe for a second that they ‘don’t have a clue’ who changed it. Maybe they just won’t say, but they know. It was Axelrod and Jarrett, I would be my last nickel on it. Only THEY are stupid enough to think the video excuse would fly. I mean, really? Most 8 year olds knew it was terrorism. And they did for one reason only, the election. These frauds need to be burned at the stake!

  • cathmom

    Everybody’s talking about talking points, but I want to know when and how we are going to find out who gave the orders to “stand down”. When we find that out? That’s the real problem here. someone ordered no defense for our guys.

    • a janitor cannot order “stand down”. Not even Al Franken.
      Maybe it was that dude who, according to Clinton, “would serve us coffee”

      • cathmom

        So when are we going to get to that point? When will they start discussing why our guys were left uncovered?

  • Constance

    So… what exactly positive has come out of this all-important Petraeus testimony? Nothing. Because it was done behind closed doors, and we have to trust that what we are being told by our elected dimwits is the truth. The democrats are telling their story, and the republicans are telling theirs, and funny – the stories just aren’t matching up, yet they all attended the same closed-door hearing. Nothing but a waste of time.

  • Valerie Jarrett is the power behind Obama. She stopped him getting Ben Laden 2 times before the final hit. She probably was watching and said don’t send in help. The cover-up is she is running decisions as important as national security. Be worried America!
    And I believe they knew about Petreus affair in May and used him to protect them. Then he sent out the timeline on Bengazi against Clapper and White House wishes. This was payback for not letting CIA take fall.

  • Well, if Petraeus is trying to sell the idea that he said it was terrorism all along, then why didn’t he come out and say it well before today, while he was still head of the CIA? This guy has remained silent to the public ever since 9/11, not giving any information either in writing or in person to anybody in the media. He could have put the breaks on all of this right from the start. Instead he only talks when forced to talk by Congress. That doesn’t sound like a man willing to put country before his career. And, in the final analysis, he didn’t have either because the White House flipped the switch on his affair. Eric Holder is at the present moment held in Contempt of Congress with possible litigation pending against him, and they get rid of Petraeus because of an affair? Give me a break. Obama threw Petraeus under the bus and now Petraeus trying to save what’s left of his reputation. He should have come clean and just said what he knew. THAT would have been the sign of a real patriot.

    • jodypear

      He was hoping they would let him keep his job. Then I guess the pressure to continue to lie for them became too great; or they decided they would not let him keep his job because he stepped out of line when he said he didn’t refuse anyone in Benghazi help; or they got Jill Kelley to blow it up on him because he was not compliant enough for their taste. Whatever the reason he did not tell more complete truth before today, he did not. Then something went wrong with General Petraeus, and here we are. I’ll bet he’s glad he’s out but still looking over his shoulder. I think there’s a lot more he’s not telling us, such as the nature of being a part of the Obama administration.

  • wolfveryne

    Now all you Dwiebs ,, that voted for (0%)-44 ,, if he Lied on Benghazi ,, do you think he will not Dump on you ? ? ,, Suckers ! Enjoy your new life . Fend for self for a change .

  • All roads lead to the White House.

  • stage9

    If they’ve lied about who the actors were in the attack, what else are they lying about?

    I think the entire Congress and every other office in Washington needs to be scrubbed clean and every politically connected agent removed from office immediately. This government is so corrupt and so degenerate that they couldn’t POSSIBLY serve us in an honest and forthright and capable capacity.


  • Their are other possibilities. Rice advocated for U.S. involvement in Lybia. It might have been her own editing. Donilon might have altered the message. In the end it was a political attempt to spread propaganda, not to share the facts.

  • Michael Beck

    As Commander in Chief, and a lousy one at that, Barack Obama took it upon himself to send Susan Rice out to lie to the American people about the true nature of the attack on the consulate in Benghazi, Libya. General David Petraeus originally gave testimony on September 14th that suggested the attack was also due to an online video, that next to no one had ever seen prior to the attack. I believe David Petraeus spoke the ‘talking points’ that the White House had given to him to speak before Congress on September 14th in reaction to the sex scandal that was being investigated by the FBI and was being used against him as potential blackmail that the White House hung over Petraeous’s head back in September. In order to try and save his own job as director of the CIA, Petraeous ended up giving erroneous information in what was Barack Obama’s attempt to “cover up” the attack in Benghazi right before the election. If Petraeous hadn’t given the White House talking points to Congress that he did on September 14th, I believe the White House would have revealed his affair with Broadwell in an effort to shame Petraeous into submission. Therefore, General Petraeous “caved” to the Obama administration’s demands and ended up saying on September 14th that the attack in Benghazi was the result of some video that next to nobody had even seen prior to the attack on the consulate.

    The testimony given ‘today’ by David Petraeous flies in the face of the actual testimony he gave before Congress on September 14th. But after resigning from his CIA post David Petraeous was then “free” of all ties to the Obama administration, and therefore, he was able to give a “full” account of what he viewed was indeed a premeditated “terrorist attack” from the get go on the consulate in Benghazi. In other words, he was “free” to tell the truth because he was “free” of the blackmail attempt that was hanging over his head from the White House because of his affair with Paula Broadwell. But once the indiscretion became public by other means, Petraeous then realized his days were numbered at the CIA and resigning was really his best option because then he would be “free” to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about what happened in Benghazi. And the truth is David Petraeous knew right off the bat that the attack in Benghazi was instigated by terrorists affiliated with al-Qaeda, but afterward, the intelligence memo deleted any mention of a premeditated terrorist attack, and that edited version is what ended up being the ‘talking points’ that Barack Obama gave to Susan Rice to “lie” to the American people on five different TV talk shows. Saying ‘falsely’ that it was a “spontaneous” uprising from an online video that next to nobody had seen prior to the attack. Which was a bald faced lie that Susan Rice either participated in, or as a confirmed Obamabot, dutifully gave that erroneous info which Barack Obama had given to her, without so much as even questioning its highly suspect and fabricated content.

    Why would Barack Obama tell Susan Rice to “lie” to the American people? Why it’s elementary. Barack Obama wanted desperately to get reelected and a premeditated “terrorist attack” on the anniversary of 9/11 was a real hindrance to his reelection prospects. Obama also deceptively portrayed al-Qaeda as ‘decimated’ and ‘on it’s heels’ and since he didn’t want Benghazi to be his Waterloo, he deliberately “lied” and then evaded Congress, and the American people, on the whole issue.

    By saying it was simply an unorganized mob uprising due to an online video, it was an easy way for Obama to “skate” by until after the election. But Republicans put a kink in his plan and demanded answers. Which Obama then stalled the inquiry and then lied to the American people and even threw the intelligence community under the bus in an attempt to escape personal harm in the run up to the election. Mitt Romney didn’t press the matter at the second or third presidential debate and Barack Obama ended up getting reelected.

    So what we have here is a White House administration that failed in its primary duty to protect US property or the lives of American citizens, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Chris Stevens had repeatedly requested additional security reinforcements at the consulate in Benghazi after previous attacks had occurred at the consulate, but was denied each and every time by the Obama administration. Barack Obama then stood by and let Chris Stevens and three other American citizens “die” by refusing to send help during the attack and then “lied” afterward to the American people about what really happened. If the President of the United States deliberately “lies” and then tries to “cover up” what happened in Benghazi (or wherever), he must be held accountable and then hopefully impeached by Congress for his high crimes and misdemeanors and for failing to protect the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens or the three other brave Americans who died as the direct result of Barack Obama’s incompetence. They lost their lives because Barack Obama wanted to play politics rather than carry out his sworn duties as president of the United States… to protect American citizens.

    Barack Obama seems to know no shame and that is one of the main reasons why the United States of America is in serious decline under his incompetent, failed presidency.

  • Although I think that Congress today was on better behavior by sheilding Patraeus from the press on his way in to the hearing, I still think that we’d all be better off at the next step if we brought in Judge Joe Brown

  • ImacowgirlinTucson

    This Rice and all the other involed..knew EVERYTHING in hours..Rice went on 5 seperate shows..sprewing her/WH filthy lies..they’re all bass terds..and let 4 Americans die! Half the Americans in this country KNEW it was terrorist when they heard what happened..didn’t matter what mainstream said..any darn person with an ounce of common sense knew it was a terrorist was 9/11 for GOD’S SAKE!!!

  • mikeinidaho

    BINGO! John Bolton calls it as it actually IS.
    Now can we get to the other item and that is WHO exactly denied military assistance to the ambassador and his security force, such as it was, and WHY did they refuse them any help.

  • brilliant man

  • elijahzabmom

    Who brought up anything about the video? What this new development confirmed to me is that the video excuse was SOMEWHERE in there. Obama can latch on to that and call it an intelligence breakdown. After 9/11 we had a commission and as Condi Rice says we were supposed to have closed all of those breakdowns. This video had been on YouTube for months. What evidence was there that the people attacking were complaining about youtube? I assume that our government monitors the internet for anti and pro islam propaganda so maybe that’s why they knew it was there. The problem is why was that in their report at all? The attack came in two waves and it was very coordinated. They had a specific objective, what was it?

    Also please note that our ambassador is dead, the building is burned to the ground and there has been NO American response.

    • “Also please note that our ambassador is dead, the building is burned to the ground and there has been NO American response.”

      What do you mean? We did respond. We sent CNN to retrieve Ambassador Stevens’ journal. Now that’s tough!!! Muslims are quaking in their boots that we sent CNN.

      • elijahzabmom

        Point taken. I still want to know what we were doing there because we know that it wasn’t a consulate. The fact that this was a “secret” facility doesn’t necessarily mean it was ethical or in our interests. Our government has been involved in various scandals, for example Iran/Contra. I happened to flip through cable news and there I see Ollie North commenting. His view was that it was very possible that Obama knew nothing at all so as to maintain plausible deniability.

        Our government has propped up dictators and taken sides in civil wars by providing weapons and support. Quadaffi was neutralized and now we have MB in charge in Egypt. Poor Israel is surrounded by people who want to kill them when they simply want to exist. What was so important in Benghazi that we stayed on the ground and Stevens had to be there on 9/11? He knew it was dangerous.

        We were attacked on 9/11 and we did nothing. Obama supported this “arab spring.” Both he and Bush should realize that until Islam goes through a reformation and modernization as Christianity did we are fighting a losing battle. We are in a Holy War whether we like it or not. Once we eliminate the religion they have nothing to fight for. The only problem I have is I don’t want peaceful Christianity to be eliminated as well. We aren’t blowing any one up or chopping anyone’s head off.