The Fog of--Well, Just the Fog

While supporters of President Obama can point to isolated, often ambiguous, early statements by the administration that held that the Benghazi attacks were deliberate acts of terror, this defense simply serves to damn the administration for the two weeks of blaming an obscure web video for the attack after having knowledge that the attacks were deliberate strikes by jihadis.

What did the administration know about Benghazi?

Two days after the Libya terror attack, representatives of the FBI and National Counterterrorism Center gave Capitol Hill briefings in which they said the evidence supported an Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda-affiliated attack, Fox News has learned.

The description of the attack by those in the Sept. 13 briefings stands in stark contrast to the now controversial briefing on Capitol Hill by CIA Director David Petraeus the following day -- and raises even more questions about why Petraeus described the attack as tied to a demonstration.

The real question is why did the administration shift to a more convenient explanation that just happened to justify political claims about "responsibly ending" wars in CENTCOM, putting al Qaeda on its heels, and pivoting to the "real threat" in the Pacific (as well as enabling a quick fundraising trip to Las Vegas), after having the information they needed to judge events correctly?

The administration can't claim the fog of war on this one. Their heads were simply in the clouds.

UPDATE: The administration could clear up some of the fog of explanations.