tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News May 10, 2013 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT
former chairman of the joint chiefs, admiral mullen, and ambassador, tom pickerring, nonpartisan, serving both parties. they conducted an extensive review of this -- >> welcome, you're watching something very unusual. we're going to be sticking with this. the white house is now backtracking trying to explain an abc news report that says shortly after the benghazi attacks, it had changed its talking points no fewer than 12 times, omitting reverends to a cia warning at the time of an al qaeda threat. what made this difference from fox reporting on this is that now everybody is reporting on this, and giving the press secretary of the united states a lot heat and questioning on this now. back to this. >> raises the objections to the fact the cia had warned bat terror threats in benghazi prior
to the attacks. those subjects were taken out of the cia talking points at the direction of the white house, based on -- >> no first of all, they weren't at the direction of the white house. the only -- the process, as everybody is an equal player -- said everybody's concerns have to be listened to and taken into account. ultimately these were intelligence community talking points that intelligence community, led by the cia -- john, can i finish? -- that the intelligence community has to sign off and believes represents the intelligence community's view about what they knew about what happened. again, this would be more significant if we didn't acknowledge from the beginning that extremists were likely involved. that we didn't acknowledge from the beginning that it could very well have been al-sharia or al qaeda of other al qaeda affiliates. this is an effort to accuse the administration of hiding
something that we did not hide. in fact we spoke publicly about it. the ambassador to the united nations, who was the lead administration official, talking about this that weekend, spoke openly about the possibility, and every bit of informing that has come out about what we know happened in benghazi has been a result of this information provided by various agencies of the administration. this investigation in fact continues to this day, just last week the fbi released photographs of individuals they believed might be connected to the attack on benghazi in in an effort to bring those people responsible. >> when you said what you said, did you know that this had again through 12 versions and there had been extensive changes made? were you aware of that? >> always a deliberative process, always input from agencies, and what also knew was that the cia, on saturday
morning, said, we're going to draft these points. they drafted those points, and those points were delivered virtually unchanged with the exception of the one change i mentioned, to member office congress and the administration for use. >> acknowledge your initial -- was a mischaracterization that the white house was involved -- >> i think it's important to examine the information again that we provided congress months ago which they have chosen for political reasons to leak today, which is their prerogative, i suppose, but the fact is, the white house's involvement to the talking opinions generated by the cia that saturday was to make -- suggest a single change. we suggest -- the white house suggests a change everybody signs off or doesn't, because it was a matter of fact. i think people were fine with it.
and even prior in a deliberative process i was referring to that john was talking about. the white house involvement in any changes was minimal and nonsubstantive. >> why not come forward and say friday night the white house officials were involved in an enter agency process, why not -- >> there was no intent here to do anything but answer the question. the questions were related, did the -- the republican accusation that everybody was very excited about at the time, that did the white house change the intelligence community's assessment of what happened? did the white house tell the intelligence community to say there were demonstrations? and the underreported fact of all the revelations today is that these documents bear out what we said all along. the answer is, no. the answer is, no. >> speaker boehner has asked for
the release of -- also asking they get more documentation about the saturday september 15th meeting at the white house. will you release those -- >> they're asking for e-mail they have already seen were able to review and take extensive notes on, provide verbatim information to folks, and including the speaker of the house. >> concerning the irs, is the president concerned about the allegations and will he make sure that those involved are held accountable. >> allegations oses what? >> the irs story. >> i health spoken to the president about that but you can be sure that if there was inappropriate conduct here that he would want it thoroughly investigated and we would not tolerate that. >> when did the white house become aware that the irs was looking into the tax. exempt applications. >> i don't have an answer to that specifically. i know when the -- they gap investigating it, it's been
investigating for however long the irs said but i don't have a specific answer to that. what i can tell you is what we learned today, two things, one, the irs has clearly taken action to correct this. clearly stated from the leadership of the irs, that this is unappropriate and unacceptable behavior, and we concur with that and expect a thorough investigation, and for all the necessary corrections to be made. >> conservative groups are complain about this all through the peferred between 2010 and 2012. was the white house aware of that? >> of what? the complaints? >> yes. >> i think there was -- i don't have any information on that. i think there were public reports but i would refer you to the irs. i don't have information about that. >> by some calls for congressional investigation. >> i think the irs is an independent agency. the inspector general is an
independent investigator, and that office is investigating this, and that is an entirely appropriate. >> i think speaker boehner's office want the e-mails to be released to the public. is that something the white house will do? >> there's a long precedent here for protecting internal deliberations. this is across administrations of beth parties. and we took the extraordinary step, which is unusual, in fact i think specially unusual with regard to our predecessor, of providing these e-mails in camera so relevant committee members and staffers and leadership members and staffers could review them, take notes, spend as much time with them as they like and that was an extraordinary send because it was demanded by republicans as part of what they were asking for during the confirmation process for john brenner, and in
response to that, a number of republicans said they felt they had gotten the information they needed. the brennan nomination moved forward and he was confirmed. >> help clear up for people who still have a lot of questions about what -- >> here's what we -- we have provided this information to the committee. the fact is, the very people who reviewed this and probably leaked it, you know, generally speak, not specifically, are asking for something they have already had access to. i think demonstrates that this is what it was from the beginning in terms of republican handling of it which it's a highly political matter. from the hour after the attack begin the republican nominee's unfortunate press release, and then his statement today, there has been an effort to politicize the tracks here. the deaths of four americans to try to suggest that even though the president called it an act of terror, even though the ambassador to the united nations
referred to possible connection by al qaeda or al qaeda affiliates, we were not talking about that, when the publicly available evidence proves the opposite. >> difference on -- the house will vote against next week to repeal the affordable care act. speaker boehner said -- >> you have been watching something very unspecial the reason why we said on the press conference, was this whole benghazi thing changed big-time today. namely because of an abc news report that the administration might have changed its talking points no less than 12 times after the september 11, 2012 attack that killed ambassador stevens and three others. we're learning from the e-mails they were edited to omit reverends to a cia warning of aned a quite threat.
up to now this has been seen by many on the left as a fox news or conservative cabal against the administration and its handling of this, and now it appears, given all the various news organizations, the reporters questioning of jay carney, to have branched out considerably larger than one network. what is being called into questioned here is how truthful the administration was at the time when it had been saying that it was not doctoring or urging anyone in any part of the administration to say anything that wasn't the truth. but now it would appear from this abc study that looked at e-mails back and forth between the various agencies, that there might have been an effort to scrub clean warnings of an imminent militant threat in that country and beyond that country. james rosen at the state
department with the implications from all of the above. james? >> neil, good afternoon. i was watching the portions top the white house daily press briefing conducted by press secretary jay carney. it was interesting to see carney struggle at times to explain some of his past statements about benghazi. in september of 2012, he said that in all of the initial evidence that the obama administration had, there was, quote, no evidence that the this was preplanned attack. the publications we have seen just over the past week first by the weekly standard and fox news contributor steve hayes and now by abc news jonathan carl everybody shown that in fact from the earliest moments of the attack of various institutions within the obama administration, principally the central intelligence agency were quite certain this was a premeditated terrorist attack and carney was taking a grilling not just from
fox news, in fact principally not from fox news in the briefing but from reporters from the various tv news networks, from cnn, our competitor, from print reporters, so we have seen whatever the back and forth between carney and the reporters that news media interest in the story has suddenly surged. >> he had show draw some fine lines and be very fine in his remarks, that is jay carney -- about what he knew and said at the time and what he was saying when a reporter said, were you aware of the revisions and trying to coordinate all this and he was saying, well, in -- this kind of stuff happens all the time. but there's a big difference between that and a concerted, colder nateed effort to make sure everybody is speaking from the same script. >> there were in the original cia talking points fir -- first
drafted, reverends to al qaeda affiliates and terrorism, and said we do know that was the first assessment of the cia in the talking points we do know that islamic extremists participated, and then after 12 verses late there are no reverends to al qaeda no reverends to islamic extremism or terrorism. jay carney maintained the white house only made one stylistic change to change the word consulate diplomatic facility at the end of the process but the e-mails published by the weekly standard and abc news made clear the deputy national security adviser, ben rhoads, what an early player in the process and siding with vic victoria knew lean whoa demanded this revisions on behalf of, quote, my building's leadership. >> the only issue that comes up now in this startling
development today is if this cia warning of an al qaeda threat that was in the original section, what happened at benghazi, was edited out. scrubbed oat, who edited it out? who scrubbed it out? more. and do you know your... blood type? a or b positive?? have you eaten today? i had some lebanese food for lunch. i love the lebanese. i... i'm not sure. enough of the formalities... lets get started shall we? jimmy how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? happier than dracula volunteering at a blood drive. we have cookies... get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. all stations come over to mithis is for real this time. step seven point two one two. rify and lock.
>> neil: jay carney is still taking questions, and the white house press room right now. most of them have to do with what the administration knew and when it knew it about the benghazi attacks, and more to the point, the reports and e-mails and various exchanges after those attacks, apparently in an effort to all be on the same page. abc news is reporting that no less than 12 revisions were made in those reports to essentially say, that this was not an al qaeda threat as the cia had
warned or the results of actions by extreme islamists. now, if that is indeed the case it would fly in the face of the administrationies earlier argument that there was no doctoring or forced -- it was everybody trying to speak in the same way for the administration about this and not to promote or lessen the terrorist coordinated threat. it's going reported on fox, and now because of abc and its new revelations today, virtually all these news organizations peppering the white house spokesman. to illinois democratic congress, danny davis. a member of the house oversight committee. good to have you. what do you make of this and does it make a difference to you whether the administration had revised all of this stuff no less than a dozen times? >> well, it does make a difference, as a matter of fact,
itbut we are still talking about allegations. we're talking about possibilities. we're talking about if, then, who, when, where, and so obviously all of the information is not in. it is not conclusive. i think that much of this has been an attempt to somehow or another tie in of is with hillary clinton, who is just simply out of the box in terms of who might become the next president. she is way ahead of anybody who could possibly run, and i think there's an effort to lay as much of this at her doorstep as possible, but so far it hasn't happened. >> neil: do you worry if there is a connection or that someone has indeed done this, races another question, who would be doing that, who we be changing it?
and hillary clinton's name does come up. but you were saying that if true this would matter to you. so, -- if true. >> neil: what you want to do -- >> if true i would say much of it would rest at the feet of the cia. the central intelligence agency. which really had more access to the situation through the information -- >> neil: the cia issued the reverends to the warning. someone took the warning out. so, that would be someone else, wouldn't it, sir? >> it would be and we don't know if they did, who it was, we don't know under what authority, they may have been operating, and so we're still investigating. i mean, we had a full day of hearings just day before yesterday, and there was nothing conclusive that came out of that day-long hearing that oversight and government reform had. so the verdict is still out.
>> neil: congressman, thank you very much on this breaking news developments but we always appreciate your coming here. again, this has changed. the benghazi thing has changed. the question is, how much so. after this. the american dream is of a better future, a confident retirement. those dreams have taken a beating lately. but no way we're going to let them die. ♪ ameriprise advisors can help keep your dreams alive like they helped millions of others. by listening. planning. working one on one. that's what ameriprise financial does. and that's what they can do with you. that's how ameriprise puts more within reach. ♪
>> all right. not an easy day for jay carney. he is still taking reporters' questions and not only on what the administration knew in these supposed revisions and e-mails back and forth as to the appropriate response after the benghazi attacks, but a separate issue mushrooming right now. no less than the irs it had to apologize to a number of conservative groups, tea party groups, fox essentially -- for essentially singling them out and putting the pressure on them
andle examining them, have their tax returns examined. tax exempt status, whether they were violating. we're hearing from tea party leaders saying that won't fly, apology not accepted. herman cain, not liking it one bit. he says this is every bit as big a deal as what is going on with the benghazi situation in a domestic sense. first, to retired lieutenant colonel ralph peters, a fax news strategic analyst. he has a great book, and speaking of which, hell or worse for the administration right now, colonel, given these latest abc news reports that it did indeed change talking points a dozen times so everybody could be speaking from the same script, susan rice included, that these benghazi attacks were not an act of terror, and the cia originally claimed that was scrubbed clean.
>> it's encouraging to see the main stream media finally get set up -- get up with the obama administration's lies. this is patently a fundamentally corrupt administration. as far as benghazi goes, how many smoking guns does it take? we have an arsenal of smoking guns and the poor congressman trying to defend the administration, tap dances, et cetera. >> neil: he pointed out, if true, obviously it would be troubling. but he said if not true. at it hard to prove these thing but if they come to late, then what? >> it is proven. we heard the testimony on wednesday. we have the 12 changes unveiled today. neil, it's important now that the media doesn't get what i call target lock just on these 12 changes and victoria newland and her scandalous behavior.
the question is now about the original talking point. i want to know if the white house had already influenced and shaped and add or deletes things from the cia talking points before it got to the interagency process. the key to that is getting david petraeus on the hill. he was being investigated. he was worried about the scandal, and the reason i worry is there might have been a fight in the intelligence agency about what should be said. dave petraeus may have comprised and said we'll go along with the video. i'm a former intelligence guy. i still -- i do not know one intelligence person who ever believed this was a spontaneous demonstration caused by the video. something happened at the cia
and that where is the media needs to look now. >> neil: now, what you raise is that -- because the cia originally had it in there as an act of terror, and furthermore linked it to al qaeda at the time. they obviously were overruled. i don't know how this stuff goes. and then in these various revisions so everybody said the same thing. went does it get to be something more than an administration trying to put out a point of view? where does it get into the realm of, this just isn't p.r., this is plain wrong? >> well, i'm not a lawyer. i'll tell you this. it's not bet the fine legal print here. it's bat great moral issue. the president and all the president's men, and women, lying not only to american
people for political advantage with an election looming. it's so obvious they have been lying all along, and the way to get at it now is to keep pulling the thread, go back to the cia. i worked the interagency process within the intelligence system, and you could argue and did argue about the enter operation of the facts, but you never played with the facts. you didn't change the facts, and we now know, beyond dispute, that at the state department's behest, the facts were changed before the talking points went out. i want to know if other facts were changed, aid or deleted before the original talking opinions left the cia you. can't let go of this. this is coming apart at the seams. >> i want to go into more department. but your fine book, the good colonel is the man and as he pointed out here for the administration to say it's not a
>> we certainly find the actions taken to be inappropriate and we would fully expect the investigation to be thorough, and for corrections to be made in a case like this. i believe the irs has addressed that and has taken some action, and there's an investigation ongoing, but it certainly does seem to be, based on what we have seen, to be inappropriate action that we would want to see thoroughly investigated. >> neil: inappropriate or illegal. what the irs admitted to do, inappropriately flagging conservative groups last year for additional review, understand, reviewing returns, tax exempt status, if they were doing anything out of the normal, violating things, their tax status, you name it. 0 the irs singling them out and
now apologizing for it. essentially saying that was wrong. that was absolutely incorrect it was insensitive and inappropriate. that is not how we go about selecting cases. the irs would like to apologize for that to tea partyer herman kay who says not accepted. that is a hell of a lot worse. what do you think of that? >> i like your word, illegal. it is illegal to harass an individual and it should be illegal to harass an organization itself when it comes to the irs, they have gotten away with it, neil, for decades. what surprised me most wasn't the fact that they had done this. but what prized me most, they apologized for it. this is unprecedented in itself. the other issue here is that there's no disincentive for the
irs at the present time to too this again. ahead it happen to me in the early 1990s when i criticized bill clinton relative to hillary care. i have talked to at love people, probably like queue have, where this goes on all the time but when the president says, through jay carney, that would be a thorough investigation, i'm not convinced. whatever is a thorough investigation on benghazi, and everytime congress pushes on ben georgia si, -- benghazi we find out the investigation was not that thorough, and they're trying to ignore the testimony by three very credible witnesses a couple okays ago. >> neil: i'm looking at what the irs says in this apology. when it starts singling out conservative groups, to just sort of mess with them and their tax status, everybody who has
gotten a letter from the irs, you're scared. and that is intimidating. but obviously someone higher up has to make the call. that could be a high-up at the irs who is a liberal and hates conservative groups, was during the nixon years. notice the irs is supposed to be an independent agency, an arbiter of all things green, not red or blue, and that's goes wayon what is inappropriate or unwise. that is the least -- weird thing. >> neil, i agree with you 100%. i just finished talking about the book, "1984" by george whorl where the big brother controlled every. the irs is the epitomy of big brother at its best. >> neil: the irs is going to be
in charge of enforring a number of healthcare provideses so it will have a much -- hiring thousands of irs agents and i can see my policy right now, i'm dead. but my point is that they're going to have this role that is going to be far greater, grander, more intrusive than ever before. timing, shall with say, bad. >> timing is terrible. according to reports, the irs hired an additional 16,000 agents just to focus on being the health care police. they have taken the obamacare legislation, which was shoved done our throats, has now taken big brother the irs, and made it even bigger and more spin intrusive in our lives. congress needs to intervene and put up some sort of safeguard to help the american people such that this harassment does not
happen. and the long-term solution, replace the tax code such that they dent have nearly 80,000 pages of ways they can harass individuals and harass organizations that appear to be conservative. >> neil: all right, thank you, herman cain. this is startling. i want you to think about whates going on here. leaving benghazi aside. the irs is now apologizing for an action it took, deeming it inappropriate, singling out conservative groups and their tax-exempt status. what would prompt that apology? what was discovered where day were more or less caught with the proof they were doing this? they wouldn't just willy nilly come out and volunteer that apology. there's more to this here, and believe me, i'm the sharpest tool in the shed but there's going be something more that would prompt no less than the irs to say, we goofed, we're sorry. that doesn't cover it. nor this whole benghazi mess and
imi can mr. egg indication office what the administration said then and now, someone lied. and just give them the basics, you know. i got this. [thinking] is it that time? the son picks up the check? [thinking] i'm still working. he's retired. i hope he's saving. i hope he saved enough. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. whether you're just starting your 401(k) or you are ready for retirement, we'll help you get there. over any other carrier? many choose us because we have the largest 4glte network. others, because of our reputation for reliability.
or maybe it's because we've received jd power and associates' customer service award 4x in a row. in the end, there are countless reasons. but one choi. which is why he's investing in his heart health by eating kellogg's raisin bran®. good morning dad. hi, sweetie. [ male announcer ] here's another eye opener. not only is kellogg's raisin bran® heart healthy it's a delicious source of potassium. ♪ mom make you eat that? i happen to like raisins. now that's what i'm talkin' about. [ male announcer ] invest in your heart health with kellogg's raisin bran®. and didn't know where to start. used a contractor before [ male announcer ] invest in your heart health at angie's list, you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare written by people just like you. no company can pay to be on angie's list, so you can trust what you're reading. angie's list is like having thousands of close neighbors where i can go ask for personal recommendations. that's the idea.
nations that very sunday that caused republicans so much concern talked.the possible involvement of al qaeda and al-sharia. all of this is a distraction from the key issues. >> neil: sort of a right-wing cabal, this is all based on an abc news report that verifies a lot of the things fox news handbeen reporting, catherine herridge has been reporting about an effort by the obama administration to revise the comments. >> first and foremost, on september 12, one day after the attack in benghazi, fox news was first to report that they had nothing to do with the antiislam youtube video that was blamed by the administration and it was a coordinated, premeditated attack, and significantly that reporting was based on an interview with the charm of the house intelligence
committee, mike rogers, who is getting regular briefings on the situation in libya. he was looking at the same intelligence that jay carney has just claimed was not clear, and in the fog of war that seemed to suggest the video. we now know that is simply not the case. then one day of susan rice was on the sunday talk shows, fox news was first to report based on a libyan intelligence source on the ground in the country there was no demonstration. when the attack unfolded, just after 9:35 local time, and opposite you pull that thread, that data point, the administration explanation this was spontaneous and linked to a youtube video began to fall apart, and what we're seeing play out today again is this inability to square what the white house is saying today versus what they tried to say about the attack in benghazi six months ago, neil. >> neil: thank you. the difference today is fax has
been reporting this from the very beginning. i don't know whether it's a good or bad thing that abc news gave cache from the mainstream media to confirm what we have been reporting. and rick santorum is with us on the phone. what do you make of these developments? >> i think it's a very, very serious issue. we have really three levels of either negligence, inpresence are income -- income tense or -- >> and you had a situation, which ills now clear, they were asking for aid, very clear what was going on there, and there wasn't a -- they were asking for backup, and the administration denied them that.
and, third, -- that's, again, a judgment call, yes, but certainly given the severity of what was going on there and what was known to be going on, not sending our troops to help protect those men and women in harm's way i can't imagine doing as the president of the united states. and finally, coverup. and everybody is focusing on the coverup, which is legitimate because that is -- tends to be the worst thing you do is -- could be errors in judgment but there's no error in judgment. this is a coverup by this administration because they had run a narrative that al qaeda was defeat. islamic terrorism was on the wane and barack obama had won and this would have altered that story. >> there is the development the irs, and the irs apologizing for singling out conservative groups on their tax status, harassing them. a lot of the consecutive groups are angry.
what is going on here? >> i gave a speech at the national rifle association about this president, and you have to take him at his word when he said he wants to transform america, and i do believe he wants to do that, and what you're seeing here is a systemic assault on organizations and people that he does not agree with, and he is using the levers of power in government, using his friends in the media, to levy that assault, and i'm hopeful that the american public will start to see a president obama for what he is, which is someone who is a very ideology ideologyicly driven man who wants to make changes and has a willing made ya to dry to do so. >> neil: we'll watch closely, senator. good to hear you.
two attacks, one from the irs and whether it interfered, harassing groups last year, and now benghazi, 0 coordinated effort according to abc news, to police memos and to strike from those final communicate okays anything having to do with the word terror. anything have having to do with warnings from the cia, a double-whammy, and it's just friday. clients are always learning more to make their money do more. (ann) to help me plan my next move, i take scottrade's free, in-branch seminars... plus, their live webinars. i use daily market commentary to improve my strategy. and my local scottrade office guides my learning every step of the way. because they know i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade...
and more to the the point an al qaeda threat. so, obviously it must go way beyond just the fox news report. i don't know, congresswoman, what that says about us we have been saying and reporting this, but you take the news and you take the news. what too you make of these latest developments? you were asked, attending the hearing this week. how does this change things or does it? >> it changes everything because at this point now, all bets are off and the administration has been caught in the midst of a lie, not only a lie but a coverup. they've been covering up since
september 11th about the phony cover story they were peddling about islamophobe ya and heard that yesterday. and the witnesses said yesterday, within minutes of the attack, he received a phone call and the phone call stated, we are under attack. he contacted the emergency services, as he should, to send relief. the called the white house. he called the secretary of state. at no time was there any indication of a phony protest over islamophobea. it never happened. that one just by susan rice. that was continued be president barack obama after he went on september -- and what is more important is the testimony came out that because the white house chose to go with that phony baloney cover store on islam ya
phobia. they caused libya to prevent our fbi for going in for 18 days to the crime scene to gather information. we lost crucial time and crucial information to be able to interview witnesses, get to the crime scene, and collect -- >> neil: let me ask you this, because we're tight on time. one argument is there's nothing unusual sordid about any information wanting to preach from the same prayer book and just make sure everyone is saying the same thing is very different than -- >> this is a lot -- >> neil: just getting there. >> sure, but -- >> neil: what makes this particularly egregious to you? >> this is egregious because we heard jay carney say that there was no substantive changes in these talking points. that is was just stylistic, it was completely a different
story. >> neil: omitted references to al qaeda, cia warnings, anywhere they could and that is what made this unusual. right? >> it is very unusual. i also don't think it's a coe -- coincidence that we have this story about the administration using the irs -- this is a soft underbelly for the administration and hurtful for hillary clinton. >> this is a huge one and one we'll follow. and tonight we'll look at a separate corporate soap opera going on. -- ♪ cash money sorry. i see you have allstate claim free rewards, for every year you don't have a claim, you'll get money off your home insurance policy. put it towards... [ glass shatters ] [ girl ] dad! dad! [ girl screams ]
noise canceling headphones? [ nicole ] that's a great idea. [ male announcer ] home insurance that saves you money for not having a claim? that's allstate home insurance with claim free rewards. talk to an allstate agent... [ doorbell rin ] and let the good life in. talk to an allstate agent... [ doorbell rin ] at od, whatever business you're in, that's the business we're in with premium service like one of the best on-time delivery records and a low claims ratio,
you need an ally. hello? ally bank. your money needs an ally. >>. >> kimberly: i'm kimberly guilfoyle, eric boling andrea tantaros andrea tantaros greg gutfeld. this is "the five"! >> kimberly: so much for benghazi happened a long time ago. jay carney postponed his regular scheduled briefings three hours as he held a discussion with the press corps trying to spin the attack in libya. two days ago we heard explosive testimony from three state department whistleblowers and today jonathan carl obtained 12 different edits to talking points that were the basis for the administration's leading message after f