Ambassador Susan Rice Denies Lying About Libya Attacks

At the Washington Post, "UN Ambassador Susan Rice denies she was trying to mislead Congress about attack in Libya."

But see the Wall Street Journal, "Discord Skewed Benghazi Response: Divergent Views, Agency Infighting Slow White House Efforts to Address the Cause of Deadly Strike on Consulate in Libya":

WASHINGTON—New details are emerging of discord among federal agencies that has complicated the Obama administration's response to last month's deadly attack on the American consulate in Libya, creating intense political pressure for the White House just weeks ahead of the presidential election.

More than three weeks after the attack on Sept. 11, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents finally reached the scene in Benghazi on Thursday—amid an emerging picture of confusion and competing narratives within the administration and intelligence community about what happened there.

Shifting views within the intelligence community have further complicated the administration's ability to firm up its conclusions about the attack. White House officials were initially aware of intelligence reports that suggested a possible connection to al Qaeda, administration officials said.

But the Office of the Director of National Intelligence discounted those reports in its initial statements about the attack, and the White House stuck to those conclusions, making it appear, at least to the public, like it was behind the curve.

Critics of that response paint a picture of a White House preoccupied with the president's re-election campaign and determined to take the most cautious approach possible. White House officials strongly reject suggestions that politics were at play in its response to the crisis.

On Friday, the administration continued to face criticism that those initial statements were misleading, including comments on Sept. 16 by Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, that the attack was a spontaneous uprising prompted by an inflammatory video.

"Elements of the intelligence community apparently told the administration within hours of the attack that militants connected with al Qaeda were involved, yet Ambassador Rice claims her comments five days later reflected the 'best' and 'current' assessment of the intelligence community," Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz) said Friday. "Either the Obama administration is misleading Congress and the American people, or it is blaming the entire failure on the intelligence community."

Two weeks after the incident, which led to the first killing of a U.S. ambassador in a generation, the administration called it an organized attack by terrorists with links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

After the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, the U.S. overhauled the way it collects and analyzes intelligence to ensure contrary views are considered and assessments from across the government properly aired.

Among the post-2001 changes was the creation of the DNI to oversee the 16 U.S. spy agencies. The office is responsible for collating agencies' intelligence and reaching a consensus view to present to the president.

The DNI contended with dueling positions after the Benghazi attack. Within 48 hours, some military and intelligence analysts started briefing lawmakers about what they saw as evidence suggesting al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM, was involved in the assault.

These analysts pointed to intercepted conversations between militants involved in the attackon the U.S. Consulate and a nearby annex that was used for intelligence programs. The Central Intelligence Agency produced a similar document citing AQIM links.

Other officials, including those at the DNI and FBI, were more cautious about AQIM's involvement, calling the early information inconclusive. At least some of the communications were members of AQIM bragging about their roles after the attack, officials said. One official said such boastfulness is commonplace and isn't proof of involvement.

The DNI presented to the White House its view that the assault grew out of a spontaneous protest over the anti-Islamic video produced by a provocateur in California. DNI analysts then thought that "at best, al Qaeda sympathizers" were involved, playing down communications pointing to AQIM, according to a senior intelligence official.

White House officials were aware of the reports of AQIM communications from the start, according to administration officials, but they relied on the DNI's assessment. Officials said the White House treated those communications as classified.

Based on those early DNI assessments, intelligence agencies developed unclassified talking points, and provided them to members of Congress of both parties, among others. The White House said the information was developed at the request of lawmakers.

On Sept. 14, White House spokesman Jay Carney described the unrest that unfolded across the Middle East, including most notably at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, as a "response to a video that is offensive."

Amb. Rice used CIA talking points, which were updated on Sept. 15, when she was dispatched to appear on a round of news programs on Sunday, Sept. 16, officials said. Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers had been hearing the more aggressive interpretation from intelligence officials—and weighed in with their own assessments, charging the administration had failed to provide sufficient security and missed signs of the impending terrorist attack.

Intelligence that suggested possible al Qaeda involvement also surfaced in comments by other public officials and in news reports, but the administration didn't change its line.

"It's not a matter of the intelligence they were given," Rep. Mike Rogers (R., Mich.), House intelligence committee chairman, said of the administration. "It is a matter of how they interpreted the intelligence."

That's called plausible deniability. And that's always the White House line when information shows it's deceived the public. The Obama people are amateurs and clowns. They need to go and fast.