A NYT Benghazi report has been on the receiving end of much criticism for its fantastical, bought and paid-for vindication of both Hillary Clinton and the president. However, it could only be trumped by a follow-up column by Times editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal, who mocked Republicans and claimed they “ran screaming to television studios” to tell a false story.
It might be assumed that Rosenthal was talking about the Obama administration, but he went on to argue that those trying to claim Al Qaeda was involved were doing so for strictly political reasons.
“For anyone wondering why it’s so important to Republicans that Al Qaeda orchestrated the attack — or how the Obama administration described the attack in its immediate aftermath — the answer is simple. The Republicans hope to tarnish Democratic candidates by making it seem as though Mr. Obama doesn’t take Al Qaeda seriously,” he wrote. “They also want to throw mud at former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who they fear will run for president in 2016.”
In fact, “for anyone wondering” what the NYT Benghazi report was all about, “the answer is simple.” It was to protect Hillary Clinton from Sean Smith’s mother — who lost her son in the Benghazi attack — who will no doubt be all over radio and TV ads in the 2016 presidential cycle, if she so chooses to run.
Smith’s mother said on a Mother’s Day special for “The Huckabee Show” on Fox News, “if Hillary thinks she is going to be president, she has another thing coming.” Sean Smith, a foreign service officer, and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were also killed in the 2012 attack along with the late Ambassador Chris Stevens.
Andy Rosenthal is no stranger to our ‘Daily Dunce’ media bias award, yet there is always something he writes that boggles the mind. For instance, in Rosenthal’s integrity-lacking mind, does that apply to Democrats, as well?
California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff told Fox News that the “intelligence indicates Al Qaeda was involved.” Schiff would know, as would the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
“I do believe they did. It is clear that they participated,” Rep. Mike Rogers said Monday on “The O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel. “I am shocked that a major newspaper in the United States would have the same talking points that the administration had the week of the attack.”
The NYT Benghazi report not only conflicts with the paper’s own past reports, but also conflicts with testimony from Greg Hicks, the deputy to ambassador Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the attack. Hicks said the video was “a non-event in Libya” at the time of the attack, and not a trigger for the attack, at all.
The only ally of the NYT, unsurprisingly, was the liberal-packed State Department, who under the leadership of Hillary Clinton screwed the entire terrorist pooch in the first place.
“Much of what’s in this in-depth investigation … tracks with what the [internal review board] found and with our understanding of the facts,” spokeswoman Marie Harf said Monday.
While Harf wasn’t willing to go so far as to say the report vindicated the department, she outrageously still defended the idea that a video played a role in the attack.
“It was clear to anyone watching what happened around the Muslim world on that day that the video clearly in places inspired protests and violent protests in some places,” she said. “What role that played in the attack, that’s obviously all part of the ongoing investigation, but we certainly always said from the beginning that this was complicated, there was a lot at play here, that the video clearly inspired anger and in some places violence.”
The pathetic excuse for journalism has brought people out of the woodwork who typically remain in the shadows. Sources told Fox News that the NYT Benghazi report was ‘completely false.”
On the issue of whether or not a video had anything to do with the attack, they vehemently disagree.
“Guys were coming into the compound, moving left, moving right…and using IMT (individual movement techniques). … That’s not a spontaneous attack,” one special operator said.
“One guy was shooting, one guy was running. There are guys watching the gates. … The bosses on the ground were pointing, commanding and coordinating — that is a direct action planned attack.”
The NYT Benghazi report also suggests that Libyan militia leader Ahmad Abu Khattallah is the sole mastermind behind the attack, if anyone was, and he had no tangible connection to Al Qaeda or any terrorist organization. The operators call that nonsense.
“There is direct evidence linking him before the attack and after the attack to terrorist groups. An opportunity came, and Khattallah conducted an assault on the consulate. To say that it wasn’t tied to Al Qaeda is completely false. There is literal evidence in many forms and shapes, directly linking him,” one source said.
Once again, Andy Rosenthal was willing to throw any integrity he may have had left into the New York City sewer systems. For his despicable willingness to trade his journalistic ethic as a favor for whichever powerful liberal is on the other end of the phone when he puts down his latte to pick it up, Andy Rosenthal is the PeoplesPunditDaily.com “Dunce of the Year.”