Hat tip Town Hall
Town Hall is reporting that acting CIA director Michael Morell told Congress today that Susan Rice was provided with the initial intelligence (that later turned out to be erroneous) when she appeared on news shows five days after the attack.
Rice may be eventually somewhat vindicated here, but we still don't know why the administration would send her ( of all people) out there with the video-protest line when intelligence knew within 24 hours this was no protest gone out of control. State Department officials were monitoring it in real time.
Even before Morell appeared today, CBS released a report that the talking points given to Rice never mentioned terrorism. (Hat tip Hot Air)
So was Susan Rice simply a dupe for the administration who had no inside details of how the attack occurred? It is curious that the administration sent the UN ambassador to the news shows instead of someone like Petraeus, Tom Donilon or James Clapper. Was it their opinion at the time Rice was speaking that the Benghazi attack was simply a protest gone wild? Would they have told the news shows the same line on September 16?
Here from Town Hall is an update on Saxby Chambliss' (R-GA) reaction to viewing the real time video of the attack:
Something isn't squaring here.