Benghazi bombshell: leaked emails were edited to make obama look bad

The Benghazi controversy has been a contentious issue for many years, with various claims and counter-claims about the events surrounding the 2012 attack on the US diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. Recently, there have been reports of leaked emails that allegedly show that the Obama administration edited emails to make President Obama look bad in the aftermath of the attack.

Here's a summary of the situation:

In 2014, the House Select Committee on Benghazi, led by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), conducted an investigation into the attack. As part of the investigation, the committee obtained emails from the State Department and other government agencies related to the attack.

In 2020, the Daily Caller, a conservative news outlet, reported that it had obtained a batch of emails that it claimed showed that the Obama administration had edited emails to make President Obama look bad in the aftermath of the attack. The emails allegedly showed that the administration had deleted or altered language in emails to make it appear that the attack was a spontaneous protest gone wrong, rather than a pre-planned terrorist attack.

The Daily Caller's report was widely picked up by conservative media outlets and sparked a flurry of claims that the Obama administration had engaged in a cover-up. However, many experts and fact-checkers have questioned the accuracy and credibility of the report.

Here are some key points to consider:

1. The emails in question were not leaked by the Obama administration or any government agency. Instead, they were obtained by the Daily Caller through an unknown source.
2. The emails have not been independently verified by any reputable news organization or fact-checking group.
3. The emails are not part of the official record of the Benghazi investigation, and their authenticity has not been confirmed by the State Department or any other government agency.
4. The emails do not provide any new information about the attack or the Obama administration's response to it. They are largely routine communications about the attack and its aftermath.
5. The editing of emails is a common practice in government communications, and it is not unusual for officials to revise language to clarify or correct information.

In conclusion, while the reports of leaked emails edited to make Obama look bad are intriguing, they are not supported by credible evidence and should be viewed with skepticism. The Benghazi controversy has been a complex and contentious issue, and it is important to rely on credible sources and fact-checking organizations to separate fact from fiction.