and the cia's assessment was 100% accurate, that it was terror-related. al-qaeda-linked group, ansar al sharia. it evolved into somethi everything knew didn't have anything to do with the attack, it was somehow spontaneous. and that's what the president was telling the world via the u.n. few weeks later when everybody knew it wasn't true and jay carney are saying these are stylist stick changes, they were substantial substantive changes. what do you think is worse, the before, the during or the after part? seems to me the coverup always makes it worse. >> they tried to cover it up by constructing a false story, claiming there was confusion about what happened in the benghazi compound. there was no confusion. it was obvious as soon as we got

about ansar al-sharia? >> jenna, ansar al-sharia is a name commonly used for a variety of groups that share a common ideology, a common modus operandi although they're separate. they cropped up first in yemen in 2011. then in libya later that same year. and they have now shown up also in tunisia and egypt and they're inspired by a slightly different model than the al qaeda which tried to unify all the jihadist groups into one global entity. instead you have local groups operating locally but sharing a common global ideology of violent extremist. and in libya the group is headed to two fellows well-known to the counterterrorism community. he was a former guest at guantanamo until he was released in 2007. sent back to libya and from there disappeared and formed this group. along with another fell maimed mohammed al-sawa a prisoner of qaddafi until the libyan revolutions. he was an another islamic extremist. jenna: they're under the same umbrella of whyeddology. what does that ideology feel about the america? >

then ansar al sharia, then extreme ifts and the mention of previous attacks. leaving rice on sunday shows to blame the attacks on a movie. >> this is a spontaneous reaction to a video. >> we did not and the intelligence community did not and others within the administration did not jump to conclusions about who was responsible before we had an investigation. >> reporter: the number two u.s. diplomat in libya gregory hicks testified wednesday he told then secretary of state hillary clinton during the attacks they were terrorism. but clinton, like rice, for days afterwards, stuck to the talking points and blamed the video. i'm steve handelsman, nbc news, washington. >> republicans charge clinton's motive was to avoid damaging president obama's re-election efforts. the question now is what the damage to her presidential prospects may be. >>> a school involved in one of the deadliest shootings in american history may soon be demolished. today a grouch elected officials in newtown, connecticut, voted unanimously to tear down sandy hook elementary and rebuild a new

the revised talking about had reference to ansar al-sharia. the talking points did not go for the leadership. and when asked today house minoritty leaderinance -- nancy pelosi said it is not trough. >> it has to do with the people we lost that night. emotional new reaction from the mother of one of the benghazi victims. tomorrow marks the first mother's day since pat smith lost her son in the terrorism attack. >> i am waiting for answers to everything. i want to say one thing. i want to wish hillary a happy's mother day. she has her child. i don't have mine, because of her. >> pat smith mother of shawn smith, second from the left on the screen. shawn do ied with our ambassador to libya and the navy seals last september 11th. >> the house where throw women were held prisonner for a decade is now boarded up. authorities are placing a chain link fence around it. they are trying to lead a normal life. there are questions about michelle knoit. she was discharged from the hospital yesterday. garrett, the report of what this particular welcome went t

what we see here is that the state department raised objections about the references to ansar al sharia, raise ed objections to the fact the cia warned about terror threats in benghazi prior to the attack. those subjects were taken out of the cia talking points at the direction of the white house based on -- >> no, they weren't. first of all -- the only -- this process, everybody is an equal player in this process, says everybody's concerns have to be listened to and taken into account. but ultimately, these were intelligence community talking points that the intelligence community, led by the cia, had -- >> changed because of objection. >> john, could i finish? you had a long time there. that the intelligence community has to sign off on and believe represents the intelligence community's view of what they knew at that time about what happened. and, again, this would be more significant if we didn't acknowledge from the beginning that extremists were likely involved, that we didn't acknowledge from the beginning that it could very well have been ansar al sharia that was involv involved

killed, we have four dead americans and internally i think we flew the get go that it was in part ansar al sharia which has strong ties to al qaeda. i think there was some motivation there to cover some things up. and, look, people make mistakes. we can't protect against everything but issually the coverup that gets you in a lot of trouble and it feels like that's where we've been heading. and if we didn't ask hard questions the white house spokesman, jay carney, would still allow us to believe oh, it's just a video gone awry, don't worry, nothing wrong here, folks, keep moving. and that's not the case. >> rose: it's reported former vice president dick cheney met with house republicans today, this morning. did that happen? >> he did meet with the group. i wasn't in that meeting, charlie. >> rose: are you aware he suggested-- it has been reported also-- tt secretary clinton be subpoenaed? >> i've heard that news report. i have nothing to verify it. i haven't talked to anybody who's been in that room. i wouldn't be surprised. there's been a host of people that want us to just subpoena everybody. on

ansar al-sharia, the state department weeks after the attack in benghazi designated this group as parts of al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. important testimony coming up. quick break. we'll be right back with more in just a moment. >> trying to make a difference. we got adt because i walked in on a burglary once. the physical damage was pretty bad. the emotional toll was even worse. our daughter had nightmares. what that robber really took from us was our peace of mind. with adt, we got it back. [ male announcer ] every 14.6 seconds, a burglary takes place in the united states. so rely on the fast alarm response of adt. a single adt system can help protect you from burglary, fire, and high levels of carbon monoxide. when an alarm is received, adt calls the local authorities for help. and you can get this monitored protection, plus great local service, starting at just over $1 a day. and only adt offers a theft protection guarantee. take it from me. the time to think about a security system isn't after something bad happens -- it's before. [ male announcer ] call now and get one of ou

what we see here is that the state department raised objections about the references to ansar al shariaise

after ansar al-sharia had been subscrubbed, the fbi said al-qaeda was involved and they are pursuinghat theory. >> the only edits by the white house was stylist and corrected the description of the building, and the facility from conulate to diplomatic facility and the like. >> in fact tommy veter e-mailed to say that john brennan, a white house counter terrorism aid will have edits. they opted to editted the sectors. >> and the only credibility. no one believes that the white house spokes person jay carney they were stylistic changes. >> we'll see sworn congressional testimony by two co-chairs of the benghazi review board. >> thank you. still a head, a fox news exclusive. israel special fores are inside of syria? and how the irs scandal might choke off obama care. years ago, my doctor told me to take a centrum silver multivitamin every day. i told him, sure. can't hurt, right? and now today, i see this in the news. once again, centrum silver was chosen by researchers for another landmark study. this time looking at eye health. my doctor! he knows his stuff. [ male announcer ] centru

we learned about the benghazi scandal, they had it right from day one, they knew halves ansar al shariaaeda linked group and it was a big web of lies they created to protect the president and the election. but on cnn, they don't try to control the message, lying? >> it's obvious that someone mishandled something. it's obvious. it is looking pretty partisan when you look at all of the talking points that are being used. let me ask this question because the accusation is that the obama administration in some way tried to change the talking points or water them down my question is, and i'm being honest about this, what administration, anna, doesn't try to control the message no matter what it is? >> i think every administration tries to control the message. but one thing it's controlling the message is one thing is scrubbing e-mail twelve times to the point where they are completely false and misleading. >> controlled message, these are outright lies. >> that's like saying that richard nixon was controlling the message when he erased the videos. he was also controlling the message. life it

the were from the imran kha--- salafist ansar-al-sharia movement. members of the group are suspected of involvement in several attacks. in pakistan, the funeral of zahra shahid hussain has come amid the accusations that political rivals were involved in her death. the leader of the movement for justice party, imran khan, blames this on the opposing party. this was one day after she was gunned down in front of her home in karachi. a possible rerun continues because of allegations of voter rigging. the u.s. embassy employee has flown out of russia u.s. embassy is refusing all comment on this case. the state department confirms he worked at the embassy but has given no details about his job. russia has accused him of working for the cia and he was caught trying to recruit a counter-terrorism officer. moving onto the sports news. we start with women's football. defeateda champions -- pottsdman and take on -- but now, walsberg celebrates their victory. >> the bundesliga won the cup after a strong performance in the first hour. there was fancy footwork fr

reporter: what rice did not disclose is investigators suspected an al qaeda connected group, ansar al sharia was behind the attack. in an e-mail, state department spokesman wrote, "why do we want the hill fingering ansar al sharia when we aren't doing that ourselves. and the penultimate point could be abuseded to beat the state department for not paying attention to agency warnings." nuland chimed in again, "these don't resolve all of my issues or those of my building's leadership. they are consulting with nss." then they warn the talking points shouldn't jeopardize the investigation and that the matter will be dealt with at a white house meeting the next day, when it appears the decision was made to drop the reference to the terror group. the end result, this e-mail to rice, "you are doing the sunday morning shows and need to be aware of the final posture these points took." the big changes to the talking points run counter to what jay carney told reporters last december. >> the single adjustment made to those talking points by these two institutions were changing the word consulate to dipl

and the cia's assessment was 100% accurate, that it was terror-related. al-qaeda-linked group, ansar al sharianto somethi everything knew didn't have anything to do with the attack, it was somehow spontaneous. and that's what the president was telling the world via the u.n. few weeks later when everybody knew it wasn't true and jay carney are saying these are stylist stick changes, they were substantial substantive changes. what do you think is worse, the before, the during or the after part? seems to me the coverup always makes it worse. >> they tried to cover it up by constructing a false story, claiming there was confusion about what happened in the benghazi compound. there was no confusion. it was obvious as soon as we got the ambassadors stevens on the phone that night and he said, quote, we are under attack, the coverup included several officials up to and including president obama and the coverup is still ongoing. >> let's go to the before part. we now know, and we learned this at the hearings last week, the cia knew that this particular consulate was a potential threat. and as you ment

ansar al sharia. there's communication about this in the state department but those are removed ultimately for the talking points in preparation for members of congress and for susan rice to appeared here and on other sunday morning talk shows. and steve hayes reported about this in the weekly standard and writes about some of the changes. the official who changed it at the state department, the weekly standard confirmed was victoria nuland. worried that members of congress would use the points to criticize the state department for not paying attention to agency warnings about security in bengsz. in an attempt to address, cia officials cut all references to ansar al sharia. but in a follow-up e-mail, new land wrote that the problem remain that her superiors, he she didn't say which ones were unhappy. the changes she wrote did not resolve all my issues. you suggest she's playing politics with the aftermath of all of this. but chairman, didn't the cia and the intelligence community have the final word o

terrorist and incompetence on the part of the obama administration does not mask the fact that ansar al sharia or some other group that is been associated with al qaeda is responsible for the action itself almost like saying that willie sutton the bank robber he was asked why he robbed banks a set of because that's where the money is really sucking didn't say i robbed banks because i disagree with the policies of the philadelphia city council he didn't talk about policy he talked about getting the money the terrorist are terrorists al-qaeda nine eleven why did that happen ray mcgovern has written that it's because of george w. bush that nine eleven happened that's nonsense it's not true. good way to do a show break i'll wait for a reply to that after our short break stay with r.t. . as. we speak your language another day of. school music programs and documentaries in spanish matters to you breaking news a little tonnage of angles kittens stories. you hear. all teach spanish find out more visit eye to eye on t.v. dot com. they're ready to come here to work and not get paid for it. people from a

the mention of ansar al-sharia an african based affiliate. the words were toned down. words violent demonstration instead of attack. and any mention of the c.i.a. having previously warned of -- of previous attacks that suggested that somebody should have known better about security. >> and did -- jay carney in that rather contentious white house briefing today explain why there were these changes or in some cases those omissions? >> what carney said is they wanted to make sure they only put out the information they knew to be true and didn't want to be speculative and put out information that would turn out to be wrong after more investigation. what he didn't really explain, though, is why he said or originally that the white house and state department actually only asked for one word to be changed. and in fact, we learned today the white house presided over an interagency process in which a lot of these changes were made eventually rewritten by the c.i.a. but after white house and state department input. so i think there's a lot of questions about how much was politic

. >> you mean there's been some revision now in what we know to be the case, that ansar sharia, the al qaeda group in south africa was somehow erased? take that one. the initial version of the talking points to be used by susan rice referenced ansar sharia, al qaeda group in north africa. that was taken out and the cia says now that didn't influence our information on what had happened, a lack of a terrorist reference? >> they are saying the use of the word "extremists" according to senior administration officials was a reference to terrorists in some form. it continued to have reference to spontaneous protests that had been taking place there. according to senior administration officials, their assertion is they're not using al qaeda or reference to ansar al sharia, sort of commonly referred to as an affiliate of al qaeda though some people would insist otherwise. nonetheless it is a terrorist organization. they say at that time it was not -- they couldn't be certain that was the case. they at no time want to prejudice the investigation already being launched by the fbi at that time.

he explained away the talking points and terrorism and ansar al-sharia and it was cloerl an attack on the ambassador and how that got changed and he tried to explain it away. there is clearly a cover up and a fiction being written and i think the press is catching on to it. >> tell me what probably happens in the state department and the people who work there when they see people above them running for cover and saying if there was any blame it was the folks in the lower levels, does that lesson the confidence of people in the state department and make them think i am on my own down here? >> and if you lock at mr. hicks. they are not hostile to the obama administration. the foreign service and diplomat that exists in the state department are democratic and left loning. they would not be -- they feel they are tloun under the buzz. what can we expect to so unfold in the next few months and years. it could be a while before the layers of the onion come forth. we'll be right back. [ lisa ] my son is my world. he is the most awesome 5-year-old on the face of the planet. the most important

state for near eastern affairs write a memo the day after the attack saying it was an attack by ansar al sharial qaeda affiliate. state department commits it on day 2. cia submits evidence, its evidence on day 4 that it's all about a terror attack. there is no speculation about a video. there was no demonstration. why else would you create a false story that you announce on the five networks. i mean, there is no plausible reason. the only possible reason is that they were trying to look politically good in the election campaign. >> bill: didn't want go after them. romney came after the attack. >> it's so disproportionate. it makes no since. admit they made mistakes. americans are forgiving. >> bill: in this crime 24/7 news. you think you are going to cover something like that up? come on. is it possible this was donte level -- i don't think it's possible in the state department. i think that hillary clinton had to know that hix was, you know, he was off the reservation. that's the term they use. she had to know that she was okay with the demotion which is ridiculous. at the white house level, i

regina elements carried out the attacks, i told him that the group that conducted the attacks, ansar al-sharia, is affiliated with islamic terrorist. she told him the -- on september 12, days before the ambassador went on television, is telling the ambassador to libya the group that conducted the attacks, ansar al-sharia, is affiliated with islamic terrorists. mr. hicks, i want to know two things. number one, why in the world would susan rice going five sunday talk shows and put actuate -- and perpetuate a false narrative? what impacted it have on the ground in benghazi, the fact that she contradicted the president of libya? >> that's the first question -- i cannot provide an answer. perhaps you should ask ambassador rice. >> i would love the opportunity to do just that. >> as to the second question, at the time we are trying to get the fbi to benghazi to begin its investigation. that talkshow actually provided an opportunity to make that happen. afterwards, we encountered bureaucratic resistance for a long period from the libyans. living government at this time -- the libyan government at thi

he explained away the talking points and terrorism and ansar al-sharia and it was cloerl an attack on the ambassador and how that got changed and he tried to explain it away. there is clearly a cover up and a fiction being written and i think the press is catching on to it. >> tell me what probably happens in the state department and the people who work there when they see people above them running for cover and saying if there was any blame it was the folks in the lower levels, does that lesson the confidence of people in the state department and make them think i am on my own down here? >> and if you lock at mr. hicks. they are not hostile to the obama administration. the foreign service and diplomat that exists in the state department are democratic and left loning. they would not be -- they feel they are tloun under the buzz. what can we expect to so unfold in the next few months and years. it could be a while before the layers of the onion come forth. we'll be right back. tony used priceline to book this 4 star hotel. tell 'em why. free breakfast with express deals, you can save

for example, the state department pressed to take out ansar al sharia, an the al-qaeda affiliate, was behind the attacks. there is evidence that the state department did press for that change. so there is enough for both sides to grab at in these e-mails to keep this alive as an issue for some time to come, piers. >> okay. very quickly. the pair of you, just tell me which one of the three you think is actually the most damaging. i'll start with you, jessica. >> i think the irs. because it hits americans where they understand it. >> okay. dana? >> absolutely agree. look, we all are -- it sends a chill up our spine. the concept of the federal government taking all of our -- or the press corps' e-mail records or phone records, i should say. but i don't think the american people care as much as we do. the irs is something everybody gets, everybody has to pay their taxes. they completely understand that things they have to go through with regard to that. so that is absolutely the worst. but i think if you take all of these together, big picture, the reason why they all kind of have a threa

regime elements carried out the attacks, i told him that the group that conducted the attacks, ansar al sharia, is affiliated with islamic terrorists. >> reporter: on september 14th, a cia document first published in the may 13 issue of the weekly stanrd, likewise stated we do know that islamic extremists withties to al qaeda participated in the attack. yet rice and other senior u.s. officials far from putting out ery piece of informationas they got it continued to press the false narrative. >> our initial information and that includes all information, we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack. >> i wish i could sit here today and tell you that within days, within a week, by september 20th, when we came up here, we had a clear picture. we did not have a clear picture. >> reporter: another newly unveiled e-mail was sent on 9/11 by mark thompson, the operations officer at the state department's counterterrorism bureau, with the u.s.nnex in benghazi about to face mortar fire, thompson wrote to patrick kennedy deputy wondering why the undersec

these e-mails show that the state department asked for a different change, which was that ansar al sharia, an the al-qaeda affilia affiliate, as you know, is named in the talking points. the cia was fine with that and the state department asked for that to come out and it did come out. so, look, there is something for the critics to point to and say the state department wanted some the al-qaeda affiliate taken out and you took it out for state and you really can't argue with that. you know, we're told the cia was fine with that. but there's something for everybody to find in these. >> so gloria, you've been talking to sources, what do they say about this? >> if you take a step back here, what was really going on and what we didn't know at the time, was that benghazi was a cia outpost. it was not -- it was -- the state department was essentially providing the cover there for the cia. so the state department is taking a look at all of these -- at all of these iterations of these talking points that are going to go to congress. and they say, wait a minute, this makes it look like we were asl

regina elements carried out the attacks, i told him that the group that conducted the attacks, ansar al-sharia islamic terrorist. she told him the -- on september 12, days before the ambassador went on television, is telling the ambassador to libya the group that conducted the attacks, ansar al-sharia, is affiliated with islamic terrorists. mr. hicks, i want to know two things. number one, why in the world would susan rice going five sunday talk shows and put actuate -- and perpetuate a false narrative? what impacted it have on the ground in benghazi, the fact that she contradicted the president of libya? >> that's the first question -- i cannot provide an answer. perhaps you should ask ambassador rice. >> i would love the opportunity to do just that. >> as to the second question at the time we are trying to get the fbi to benghazi to begin its investigation. that talkshow actually provided an opportunity to make that happen. afterwards we encountered bureaucratic resistance for a long period from the libyans. living government at this time -- the libyan government at this time is not very dee

. >> sean: they knew it was ansar al-sharia and -- >> there was a major disagreement between multipleasn't just the state department. i know you keep saying that, but now there's this anything else that -- >> sean: now you're spinning it. >> -- that they changed the emails -- >> they did change it. >> no. whoever gave it to the press doctor the emails. >> sean: the whole thing was a lie. and greg hicks testified -- owe. >> when you say it was a lie -- >> sean: we got to take a break. we'll come back. i'll try to lift you off the mat, help you. we'll get his opinion on the irs we'll get his opinion on the irs story all stations come over to mission a for a final go. this is for real this time. step seven point two one two. rify and lock. command is locked. five seconds. three, two, one. standing by for capture. the most innovative software on the planet... dragon is captured. is connecting today's leading companies to places beyond it. siemens. answers. ♪ right. but the most important feature of all is... the capital one purchase eraser. i can redeem the double miles i earned with my v

where he explained away how, you know, talking points that said this was terrorism, this washe ansar al sharia, al qaeda affiliate in libya. this was clearly an attack on america's ambassador by terrorists islamist. how he tried explain that away. clearly there is a coverup here clearly just a fiction being written hopefully is catching on to it though. >> talk about what probably happens within the state department and the people who work there when they see people above them running for cover t and essentially saying if there was any blame it's those folks down there at the lower levels. does that lessen the confidence of people in our state department and makehe them think hey, i'm on my own down here? >> i think is it's interesting, if you look at people like mr. hix testifying before congress. these are not people whom you would presume to be hostile to the obama administration. the foreign service, the career guild of diplomats that exist at the state department is naturally democratic and left-leaning. these people never thought they would be at a hearing that is making a democratic adm

she didn't say terrorist tax, but a ansar al-sharia. >> greta: why didn't they release them?they're embarrassing. we're talking about unclassified documents, and still eight months later they won't release them. >> greta: can't you subpoena them? >> every time we have on the show we have the same discussion. we're taking this one step at a time, we're making progress. >> greta: if she's saying this on the 12th in an unclassified email that's white house won't surrender, we've gone through the 100 emails, the topic of video doesn't come up until the 15th. it comes up in a subject line, which is the day before the talk points, which was the 16th when ambassador rice went on. for the life of me, i can't figure out why they were stuck on that, kept pushing that on us, unless it's -- unless as the president said a week before at the convention that al-qaeda was on the run essentially. >> look, there was clarity when this event happened. we heard testimony from the people on the ground. we see an email going out to the senior leadership within the state department. there was clarit