One last point on Benghazi: ABC provided shameless speculation, not news.

Mainstream media is a peculiar beast; it often tries to find something where there's nothing -- think unintended acceleration a la ABC's Brian Ross' fabrication.  It is up to real investigative journalists (and bloggers) to take down these fallacies.

In this case, Media Matters breaks down this Benghazi email controversy and embarrasses Karl and ABC News.  As Media Matters noted, "Karl's speculation is easily disproved."

How easy?  Well, one of their central points had already been explained by General Petraeus last year, in public: the CIA, White House and others had edited down the Benghazi talking points to exclude references to Al Qaeda / Ansar Al Shariah, so as to not tip off the terrorists that they were onto them.

No really, if you don't believe me, this is what a US intelligence officer told Foreign Policy's The Cable blog:

"Overall, the changes were made to address intelligence and legal issues...First, the information about individuals linked to al-Qaeda was derived from classified sources.  Second, when early links are tenuous, it makes sense to be cautious before pointing fingers to avoid setting off a chain of circular and self-reinforcing assumptions and reporting.  Finally, it is important to take care not to prejudice a criminal investigation in its early stages."

Two independent sources explained the emails with the same story: One with references to past comments by others, and the other with clear, explicit details about exactly what these changes entailed.

It's so embarrassing to think that the mainstream media simply latched onto Karl's story and ran with it without first taking time to ask, "Does this make sense?"