Our View: ‘Talking points’ concern? Nah

Posted: November 30, 2012

If one is inclined to take Jay Carney’s convoluted ramblings as gospel, a statement made by the White House spokesman Wednesday most likely sparked nary a second thought. But we found it stunning, even chilling.

The subject, oddly enough, was not the “fiscal cliff,” but the Benghazi attack. In response to a question about the much-disputed “talking points” given to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, this is what Mr. Carney had to say:

“What the president is worried about . . . is what happened and why in Benghazi. He is not particularly concerned about whether the ambassador or I went out and talked about the fact that we believed extremists might have been responsible. And whether we named them as al Qaeda or not does not — no, it certainly doesn't have any bearing on what happened and who was responsible as that investigation was continuing on Benghazi.”

Are you kidding us? By the time Ms. Rice went on those Sunday talk shows five days after the raid, the White House knew darned well the assault was the work of terrorists rather than a “spontaneous” mob protesting an anti-Islamic video. Courtesy of real-time video, the West Wing knew “what happened” and, for some reason — most likely political — chose to mislead the American people.

This does not “particularly concern” the president? Perhaps not, because he was providing similarly inaccurate information — on TV talk shows and at the United Nations — two weeks after the attack.