The three headed dragon against Obama

[Ckmlb1]

badgenome said:

Ckmlb1 said:

There's the CIA doubt again. 

 

Okay, so again, let's assume they had the purest of motives there and that State's more political motives weren't the reason for this: why did the administration continue to push the idea of a protest for weeks after the fact when they certainly knew better by then?

 

For weeks? 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/10/world/libya-attack-statements

September 12 -- President Barack Obama

 "The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. ... No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation."

September 12 -- Obama, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, again uses the "act of terror" line

He repeats the line again the next day in Golden, Colorado. "I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished."

(That shows that he was directly referring to the Benghazi attack not the original 9/11 like you claimed)

September 20 -- Jay Carney

"It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials."

 September 21 -- Hillary Clinton

"What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans."

Then we have Susan Rice saying the video was to blame on the 16th of September and Obama saying on the 25th that extremist militias were involved on The View on ABC:

"We're still doing an investigation. There's no doubt that (with) the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn't just a mob action. We don't have all the information yet, so we're still gathering it. But what's clear is that around the world, there's still a lot of threats out there." Obama also said "extremist militias" were suspected to have been involved.

Sounds like there was confusion on the intel for about 2 weeks, but several people in the administration (including Obama and Clinton call it a terrorist attack in that time). 

In that time there were intelligence officials talking about how, initially it was believed to be a mob.

September 28 -- Statement by Shawn Turner, spokesman for Director of National Intelligence James Clapper

"In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to executive branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. Throughout our investigation, we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving. As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists."

If it was a cover up why are Clinton and Obama both calling it a terrorist attack? They called it other things too because they weren't sure of the intelligence.