I tried to let this stuff go….but I cannot…there is so much crap about this situation that it is drawing flies…….

Some things are growing more quiet now……we have had a couple weeks of an IRS scandal……..the AP scandal…….a massive killer tornado in Texas….and thanx to those situations the yelling about Benghazi has become more subdues….either the BS talking points are drying up or the Right is getting over their fascination with the attack on the consulate…..(please notice that it was a consulate and not an embassy….they are not the same thing)……….

Let see…the emails have been released and the only time they were inappropriate is when they were doctored…….emails have surfaced where the ambassador refused extra security on two occasions……..so if there is to be a culprit to all this faux drama….who shall it be?

I know!  I know!

(Newser) – So far, most of the public anger about the Benghazi scandal has focused on the State Department. But the Washington Post has an in-depth piece today suggesting that the real blame for the infamous talking points may lie with everyone’s favorite philandering ex-spy chief, David Petraeus. “It was from his initial input that all else flowed,” the paper argues. Here’s how the Post says things went down:

• It all began when the House intelligence committee asked Petraeus for some minimal guidelines to ensure members didn’t reveal anything classified while talking to the press.
• Instead, Petraeus produced a much broader document that included the classified information that Ansar al-Sharia was suspected in the attack and mentioned that the CIA had sent “numerous” warnings. It also said the attack was “spontaneously inspired.”
• The draft generated some blowback even within the CIA. The CIA’s general counsel noted that it conflicted “with express instructions” from the FBI, National Security Council, and Justice Department, who didn’t want to name any suspected perpetrators.
• Petraeus circulated them anyway. The State Department complained, as did the NSC, mostly objecting to naming Ansar and mentioning the CIA warnings. The White House was basically the only entity with no objections.
• The talking points were paired down to three bullets. Petraeus was not a fan, but not because he objected to the spontaneously inspired bit. “No mention of the cable to Cairo, either?” he complained. “Frankly, I’d just as soon not use this then.” But he said it was the NSC’s call.

I suspect that if there is any comment from the Right it will something as lame as WaPo is a liberal point of view……as opposed the facts doled out by FUX or Drudge, right?  Plus I want to see if there is any other right group that will talk about the real culprits in this whole affair or just keep fanning the flames of stupid!