Former deputy director and one-time acting director of the CIA, Michael Morell, wrote a scathing article for Politico publication. In the article about Libya and Benghazi, Morell offered a real view of what many politicians have distorted for their political gains, Pravda.Ru reports.
"Like clockwork, every several weeks, someone discovers a new document that, to their minds, "proves" that what the administration and the intelligence community have been saying about Benghazi is a bunch of lies. But time and again these documents don't add up. They don't show what the pundits think they show-and the Benghazi broadsides miss their mark anew," Michael Morell wrote.
Many reasonable people in the United States and abroad understand a lot of what the former CIA official wrote in his piece. However, many conservatives utterly refuse to understand that in an effort to discredit Hillary Clinton ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
Also read: Libya: Why the silence?
"Here is a recent example: Earlier last week a handful of number of news organizations, including Fox News, breathlessly reported that they had just gotten their hands on a Defense Intelligence Agency report-acquired through a FOIA request by Judicial Watch-that they say proves that the government knew very soon after the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12 that they had been planned ten or more days in advance. These news organizations suggest that this document puts the lie to what I and other current and former intelligence officials have been saying-that there was little planning before the attacks," Michael Morell wrote.
According to him, the Benghazi "outrage has built on three main points: The administration knew it was terrorism and blamed a video, they could have saved the four men who died and instead ignored them, and that Susan Rice engaged in some sort of "cover up" to hide the truth that Hillary Clinton was aware of the threat long before it happened."
Read full report here
Read article on the Russian page of Pravda.Ru
An objective analysis of where the United Kingdom and its Prime Minister stand one hundred days before the Brexit deadline. Let us see the facts, not conjecture