In the wake of the Benghazi attack, State Department officials requested changes to official talking points drafted by the CIA editing out references to terrorist groups and warnings of an attack, according to documents obtained by ABC News’ Jon Karl.
According to e-mails, the original draft said the attacks were “spontaneously inspired” by protests at the American embassy in Cairo, but added that “Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack” including Ansar al-Sharia.
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland called for the reference to be stripped because “we don’t want to prejudice the investigation.”
Nuland also asked to remove another paragraph left out of the final version detailing past warnings by the CIA that al-Qa’ida afilliated groups were an active threat in the region and had previously attacked foreign interests. In an e-mail, she wrote the paragraph “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …”
White House spokesman Jay Carney had previously said the draft originated by intelligence officials and that only minor cosmetic changes were requested by the State Department and White House. He told ABC News the e-mails did not change that assessment because the final draft was ultimately approved by the CIA.
“The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points,” Carney said. “The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like. And ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn’t the substance here.”
Some of the e-mails were previously reported on by the Weekly Standard.
