McCain Backs Away From Benghazi Conspiracies, shitcunt still hanging on

[InstigatinMofo]

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) today issued a statement essentially conceding that he was wrong in accusing the White House of changing U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s talking points on Benghazi for political purposes.

McCain, along with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Republicans, has lead a proverbial witch hunt against the Obama administration and Rice, claiming that the administration deliberately misled the public about the nature of the attacks. Today’s news comes just a week after McCain went on national television and claimed that Rice’s “talking points came from the White House, not from the DNI.” He added on Fox that “I think it’s patently obvious that the talking points that Ambassador Rice had didn’t come from the CIA. It came from the White House.” For weeks, McCain has lambasted the administration for engaging in “either a cover-up or the worst kind of incompetence” on the Benghazi attack. McCain also said last week that “[e]verybody knew that it was an al Qaeda attack and she continued to tell the world through all of the talk shows [on Sept. 16] that it was a ‘spontaneous demonstration’ sparked by a video.”

McCain has also said he would block the nomination of Rice for Secretary of State, should the President choose her, saying he would “do everything in my power to block her,” that Rice is “not qualified” for the position and that “she should have known better.” He subsequently said he would bock any nominee Obama put forward.


But now that every angle of McCain’s attacks have been completely debunked, all he has left is to complain about not being told that intelligence officials didn’t give him this information sooner.



http://thinkprogress.org/security/20...nts/?mobile=nc

[shitcunt]

Is this the entire McCain statement?

“I participated in hours of hearings in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence last week regarding the events in Benghazi, where senior intelligence officials were asked this very question, and all of them – including the Director of National Intelligence himself – told us that they did not know who made the changes. Now we have to read the answers to our questions in the media. There are many other questions that remain unanswered. But this latest episode is another reason why many of us are so frustrated with, and suspicious of, the actions of this Administration when it comes to the Benghazi attack.”

Where does he surrender and concede that he was wrong?

I've seen liberals posting this same thing elsewhere about McCain giving up/backtracking/admitting he was wrong. I am still looking for any evidence of him doing that.

[InstigatinMofo]

Is this the entire McCain statement?



Where does he surrender and concede that he was wrong?

I've seen liberals posting this same thing elsewhere about McCain giving up/backtracking/admitting he was wrong. I am still looking for any evidence of him doing that.

Well first you need to improve your understanding of language. "Backing away" does not mean admitting that you were wrong. It just means you're no longer pursuing the same argument or attacks. Previously, Mccain viciously attacked Susan Rice every time he was in front of a microphone. This time Mccain did NOT use the opportunity to attack Susan Rice while talking about the issue. That means he is backing down from his attacks, or no longer attacking Susan Rice. Though this is not an admittance of being wrong, people normally stop pursuing their argument after it has been shown wrong, invalid, or misinformed.

If he was right in his attacks, then there'd be no reason for him to cease his agenda. Of course, we can continue watching his statements in the future, but this quote is a strong indicator that he is BACKING DOWN/AWAY from those previous attacks.

[SiriusDawg]

I am still looking for any evidence of him doing that.

The fact that he seems to be admitted that he was laughably wrong without fully doing so tells me that he, like most Republicans, probably realized he was dead wrong but can't simply admit it due to wanting to look 'cool' on Fox News

[shitcunt]

Well first you need to improve your understanding of language. "Backing away" does not mean admitting that you were wrong. It just means you're no longer pursuing the same argument or attacks. Previously, Mccain viciously attacked Susan Rice every time he was in front of a microphone. This time Mccain did NOT use the opportunity to attack Susan Rice while talking about the issue. That means he is backing down from his attacks, or no longer attacking Susan Rice. Though this is not an admittance of being wrong, people normally stop pursuing their argument after it has been shown wrong, invalid, or misinformed.

If he was right in his attacks, then there'd be no reason for him to cease his agenda. Of course, we can continue watching his statements in the future, but this quote is a strong indicator that he is BACKING DOWN/AWAY from those previous attacks.

From the article, quoted in your original post:

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) today issued a statement essentially conceding that he was wrong in accusing the White House of changing U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s talking points on Benghazi for political purposes.

Does Think Progress need to improve their understanding of the English language as well? On that we may actually agree.

[InstigatinMofo]

From the article, quoted in your original post:



Does Think Progress need to improve their understanding of the English language as well? On that we may actually agree.

You forgot the word "essentially"
essentially— adv in a fundamental or basic way; in essence
As I explained, his backing down is ESSENTIALLY conceding because if he was still fervent in the validity of his convictions, then he'd would still be aggressively attacking Susan Rice and would have no reason to start crying "well they didn't tell us that before hur durr" <-- that's a direct quote.

[InstigatinMofo]

John McCain Continues to Remind America How Little He Knew About Benghazi

[shitcunt]

You forgot the word "essentially"
essentially— adv in a fundamental or basic way; in essence
As I explained, his backing down is ESSENTIALLY conceding because if he was still fervent in the validity of his convictions, then he'd would still be aggressively attacking Susan Rice and would have no reason to start crying "well they didn't tell us that before hur durr" <-- that's a direct quote.

Interesting. So your point is that McCain is not conceding, but instead he is essentially conceding. I don't know how I missed that.

Any time that McCain is near a microphone and does not use it to bash Rice, he is essentially conceding that he is wrong. I think I got it now.

[SiriusDawg]

Interesting. So your point is that McCain is not conceding, but instead he is essentially conceding.

Well no, he is simply accepting reality.

[InstigatinMofo]

I don't know how I missed that.

me either, it's the first freaking line of the post after all