WaPo Fact Checker: 3 Pinocchios For Claim Of ‘Doctored’ Benghazi Emails

[brett_jv]

Source: Washington Post via TPM

Washington Post fact checker Glen Kessler on Tuesday examined the controversy over Benghazi emails the White House released last week, dishing out "three pinocchios" to the administration's claim that Capitol Hill Republicans "doctored" quotes to "smear the president."

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/wapo-fact-checker-3-pinocchios-for-claim-of?ref=fpb

---

So ... I guess they're going to cover each others backs.

Is is just me, or has the WaPo has been coming off as bad as the Times lately?

I'm afraid that this development pretty much puts the kibosh on any hope we had on this particular story gaining any sort of traction. How are we going to argue that the "doctoring" was done when the "liberal" Post has all but proclaimed that the story ... is a lie?

The only thing that is not disheartening about this story is the comment section ... Kessler is getting read the proverbial riot act by EVERY poster. Nice to see

[blm]

1. word games used by the chronically crooked - the emails were meant to 'smear State Dept.'

not the president, so, GOP is not guilty of doctoring those emails to 'smear the president' were they?

The simple logic of those paid to service their fascist masters.

[dennis4868]

2. But the fact remains the same

The version of the development of the talking points meets what the WH has been saying all along. Not what Issa and others want you to believe...that WH was covering something up and protecting themselves via the talking points.

[SoapBox]

4. Ditto.

and damn to those pesky facts.

Facts that the major limp media refuses to state.

[Baitball Blogger]

3. I take your three Pinnochios and raise it by five pants on fire.

[blackspade]

5. It should read:

"WaPo Fact Checker gives himself 3 Pinocchios"

[CBHagman]

6. I'm getting sick of Glenn Kessler.

He's dealt with Benghazi a couple of times since it happened and his results never come out as impartial.

Of course Benghazi wouldn't even receive any current media coverage if it hadn't happened during the final weeks of Election 2012 and been seized upon by the GOP.

[DallasNE]

7. Who Is Kessler Fact Checking Anyway

I don't recall any administration official using the language Kessler fact checked (badly). Did he just throw up a straw man to fact check? Even if that is the case Glen Kessler's reasoning skills are zilch. For instance, the centerpiece of his finding says "Given that the e-mails were almost certain to leak once they were sent to Capitol Hill...". That was not a given at all. There was no incentive for the GOP to leak the actual emails because there was nothing damaging in them so it was a given that they could not leak the actual emails. It is also silly to call the doctored emails summaries because the word count in the "summary" exceeded the word count in the actual email. Once the Heritage Foundation came out with a statement admonishing Republicans not to legislate and instead do nothing but scandals it was clear that some Republican would respond accordingly and Jonathan Karl was more than happy to oblige. And now Glen Kessler comes up with round 2. Stay tuned.

[Cha]

8. Glenn Kessler also agreed with Darrell Issa that "an act of terror" is not "a terrorist attack"

"Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post’s resident Fact Denier (who so brilliantly agreed with Darrell Issa when he said an “act of terror” is not a “terrorist attack”) excelled himself today – he gave ‘Three Pinocchios’ to White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer for stating the facts: that the Benghazi emails were doctored in an attempt to smear the President.

Seriously.

So, his problem is with Pfeiffer, not with those who doctored the emails or the reporters who used them for their ‘exclusives’.

There are too many ‘highlights’ to choose from, here are two:

“….. the reporters involved have indicated they were told by their sources that these were summaries, taken from notes of e-mails that could not be kept.”

So, why did Jon Karl repeatedly imply that he had seen the original emails?

“Despite Pfeiffer’s claim of political skullduggery, we see little evidence that much was at play here besides imprecise wordsmithing or editing errors by journalists.”

“… imprecise wordsmithing or editing errors.”

Oh boy, nooooooooo words."

TheObamaDiary.com @TheObamaDiary

Claim: @GlennKesslerWP isn't a comical GOP shill.
Verdict: pic.twitter.com/PJwkPq891m

http://theobamadiary.com/2013/05/21/rise-and-shine-478/