With Obama re-elected, the Left concede his White House lied on Benghazi Even the New Yorker concedes after the election what no media organisation of the Left would concede before it - the White House didn't tell the truth about the Benghazi attack: It's a clichÃ©, of course, but it really is true: in Washington, every scandal has a crime and a coverup. The ongoing debate about the attack on the United States facility in Benghazi where four Americans were killed, and the Obama Administration's response to it, is no exception. For a long time, it seemed like the idea of a coverup was just a Republican obsession. But now there is something to it. On Friday, ABC News's Jonathan Karl revealed the details of the editing process for the C.I.A."s talking points about the attack, including the edits themselves and some of the reasons a State Department spokeswoman gave for requesting those edits. It's striking to see the twelve different iterations that the talking points went through before they were released to Congress and to United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, who used them in Sunday show appearances that became a central focus of Republicans" criticism of the Administration's public response to the attacks. Over the course of about twenty-four hours, the remarks evolved from something specific and fairly detailed into a bland, vague mush. From the very beginning of the editing process, the talking points contained the erroneous assertion that the attack was "spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved." That's an important fact, because the right has always criticized the Administration based on the suggestion that the C.I.A. and the State Department, contrary to what they said, knew that the attack was not spontaneous and not an outgrowth of a demonstration. But everything else about the changes that were made is problematic. The initial draft revealed by Karl mentions "at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi" before the one in which four Americans were killed. That's not in the final version. Nor is this: "[W]e do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack." That was replaced by the more tepid "There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations." Even Maureen Dowd writes after the election what was derided as paranoid Right-wing spin before it: The administration's behavior before and during the attack in Benghazi, in which four Americans died, was unworthy of the greatest power on earth. ... in this hottest of hot spots, the State Department's minimum security requirements were not met, requests for more security were rejected, and contingency plans were not drawn up, despite the portentous date of 9/11 and cascading warnings from the C.I.A.... The hierarchies at State and Defense had a plodding response, failing to make any superhuman effort as the siege waxed and waned over eight hours. In an emotional Senate hearing on Wednesday, Stevens's second-in-command, Gregory Hicks, who was frantically trying to help from 600 miles away in Tripoli, described how his pleas were denied by military brass, who said they could not scramble planes and who gave a "stand-down" order to four Special Forces officers in Tripoli who were eager to race to Benghazi. "My reaction was that, O.K., we're on our own," Hicks said quietly.... The defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, insisted, "We quickly responded." But they responded that they would not respond... In the midst of a re-election campaign, Obama aides wanted to promote the mythology that the president who killed Osama was vanquishing terror. So they deemed it problematic to mention any possible Qaeda involvement in the Benghazi attack. Looking ahead to 2016, Hillaryland needed to shore up the mythology that Clinton was a stellar secretary of state. Prepared talking points about the attack included mentions of Al Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia, a Libyan militant group, but the State Department got those references struck. Foggy Bottom's spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, a former Cheney aide, quashed a we-told-you-so paragraph written by the C.I.A. that said the spy agency had "produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to Al Qaeda in Benghazi and eastern Libya," and had warned about five other attacks "against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British ambassador's convoy." Which means Hillary Clinton lied over the coffin of Ambassador Stevens (from 16:30) when she blamed his death on protests against an anti-American video: Joy Overbeck: Evidence is mounting that Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens, staffer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods could be alive to celebrate this Mother's Day with their moms if Clinton and others in the Obama administration had heeded Stevens's pleas to beef up security at Benghazi. Or if they had sent a fighter plane roaring overhead or special ops team to respond to the desperate signals for help that the men under attack repeatedly sent out. There was plenty of warning that the Americans there were in big trouble. The British had closed down their embassy in June after their ambassador barely survived an assassination attempt. The Red Cross vacated its Benghazi offices following two vicious attacks in two months. After bombs blew a huge hole in the Benghazi compound wall, everyone knew that the situation was coming to a boil. In all, the Regional Security Office reported 50 security incidents in Benghazi between June 2011 and July 2012. No wonder Ambassador Stevens kept begging for more security ... Yet in her testimony before Congress, Clinton said she had no knowledge that security had been chopped drastically a month before the attack, nor was she aware of any pleas from her good friend the ambassador for security to be increased. But a few weeks ago, Rep. Issa (R-CA) revealed documents signed by Clinton denying Stevens's request for increased security prior to the 9/11 attacks... And that 2 a.m. phone call Greg Hicks reported having with Clinton as the Benghazi battle was raging makes clear that she knew, even as her employees were being murdered, that the assault was a pre-planned jihadist attack that had nothing to do with a YouTube video nobody had seen. Yet Mrs. Clinton stood at a podium in the Andrews Air Force Base hangar before four flag-draped coffins and solemnly told their families that "an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with" was responsible for their loved ones" slaughter. Media reported that "her voice broke" and "she fought back tears" as she rolled out what she knew to be a shameless lie. Then Hillary and Barack hugged the bereaved as some of the Benghazi moms cried on their shoulders. Mark Steyn: As Mr. Hicks testified, his superiors in Washington knew early that night that a well-executed terrorist attack with the possible participation of al-Qaeda elements was under way. Instead of responding, the most powerful figures in the government decided that an unseen YouTube video better served their political needs. And, in the most revealing glimpse of the administration's depravity, the president and secretary of state peddled the lie even in their mawkish eulogies to their buddy "Chris" and three other dead Americans. They lied to the victims" coffins and then strolled over to lie to the bereaved, Hillary telling the Woods family that "we're going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video." And she did. The government dispatched more firepower to arrest Nakoula Basseley Nakoula in Los Angeles than it did to protect its mission in Benghazi. Judge Jeanine Pirro shreds the lies of Barack Obama and his cronies, and notes they demoted the whisteblower who tried to get help for Stevens: Thanks to readers Kathleen and doc molloy.