Memo Reading for Idiots: Missing Video Hidden in Third Edit

That's when the video became the deus ex machina, the soon-to-be-visible hand of the bag of lies dumped on the electorate to prevent us from seeing the catastrophe of the Obama appeasement of radical Islam -- a.k.a. "leading with the behind." Saying "attacks" would have automatically put the Benghazi events in the context of the (banned concept) war against terror, whereas  "demonstrations" shifted the context -- the whole Arab Spring thing consisted of lots of demonstrations, and the Obama crowd was basically pro-demonstration.

Indeed, Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice justified the demonstrations. How? By blaming them on the video. More evidence that the invisible video was hidden in the third edit.

More "memo reading for idiots," apropos the CIA's efforts to look good: again, the third version points the way. In it, we are told that CIA has been warning about nasty events for some time; they have produced several "pieces" and have referred to "social media" talking about "the threat of extremists" (you can't say "terrorists," remember). So this bad thing can't be blamed on the spooks;  it's the dips' fault for ignoring that terrific intelligence.

Except that such "pieces" are worthless as guides to day-by-day action. They're generic. They just repeat in spookspeak what everybody knew anyway: there were radicals and terrorists running around, attacking other diplomats and other diplomatic sites.  What we want from our intelligence mavens is specific information, like "al-Qaeda's friends in Ansar al-Sharia are planning to attack us with RPGs and mortars on the anniversary of 9/11."

We didn't have that. The braggadocio was unwarranted.

But then, the point was not to learn lessons; the point was to cover their behinds. Having led with the derriere, it was now necessary to hide the black and blue marks.