It seems that politicians and federal officials are permitted to lie to the American people if it advances the cause of the government or their career aspirations.
Did former acting CIA director Michael Morell mislead Congress and the American people during his testimony about the Benghazi attack before the House Intelligence Committee?
I don't know, but it may demonstrate how Washington DC constructs the truth to preserve the corrupt status quo.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have accurately defined the political strategy of truth construction when she said: "the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they'd they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?"
In other words, what good would it do to hold government officials accountable? It won't bring back the dead. Let's move on.
Clinton continued: "It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again."
Unfortunately, the truth would not advance the cause of government or promising careers.
As reported by Fox News, Morell overruled the guidance provided by the CIA chief of station in Libya that the attacks were "not/not an escalation of protests" in favor of the narrative eventually promoted by the Obama Administration that the attacks were an outgrowth of demonstrations in response to an anti-Islamic video. Morell is accused of heavily editing the so-called Benghazi "talking points," which were the basis for then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's controversial comments on several Sunday shows that also blamed the attacks on a protest spawned by a video.
A 2011 article "The Rise of Another CIA Yes Man" described Morell thusly: "as with many other successful CIA careerists, his strongest suit seemed to be pleasing his boss and not antagonizing the White House."