The Benghazi story has turned a new corner and it is devastating for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.\u00a0 Up until now, the main stream media refused to acknowledge the lack of integrity from this administration.\u00a0 I think deep down they knew this, but they couldn\u2019t bring themselves to believe it.\u00a0 They were able to convince themselves that this was all just partisan politics.<\/p>\n
This reminds me of when Bill Clinton bombed Iraq, during his impeachment trial.\u00a0 Ted Koppel was on ABC News and he commented on the political convenience of the attack, but he said he would not consider the possibility of that because it would be \u201cunthinkable.\u201d<\/p>\n
The main stream media remains liberal and it remains anti-Republican.\u00a0 That is not going to change.\u00a0 But they have now been confronted with irrefutable evidence that this administration deliberately lied to them.\u00a0\u00a0No matter how one spins this, this administration conspired to deceive and they did it for purely political purposes.\u00a0 It is a breach of trust that has sent shock waves through the main stream media.<\/p>\n
Many people think that the print media is dead and buried, but that is not true.\u00a0 Ultimately, with regard to a story of this magnitude, the print media still matters.\u00a0 That is because television is severely limited by time and everyone knows that a creative editor can really distort things.\u00a0 A well written news story is much harder to ignore.\u00a0 We are starting to see major newspapers who are fully engaged.\u00a0 Following are just some examples from today.\u00a0 First, the New Yorker:<\/p>\n
http:\/\/www.newyorker.com\/online\/blogs\/newsdesk\/2013\/05\/benghazi-cia-talking-point-edits-white-house.html?mobify=0<\/a><\/p>\n But the mere existence of the edits\u2014whatever the motivation for them\u2014seriously undermines the White House\u2019s credibility on this issue. This past November (after Election Day), White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters that \u201cThe White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word \u2018consulate\u2019 to \u2018diplomatic facility\u2019 because \u2018consulate\u2019 was inaccurate.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n The media is shocked that the White House is still trying to defend this:<\/p>\n This is an incredible thing for Carney to be saying. He\u2019s playing semantic games, telling a roomful of journalists that the definition of editing we\u2019ve all been using is wrong, that the only thing that matters is who\u2019s actually working the keyboard. It\u2019s not quite re-defining the word \u201cis,\u201d or the phrase \u201csexual relations,\u201d but it\u2019s not all that far off, either.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Maureen Dowd has written a column in the New York Times that is beyond devastating:<\/p>\n http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/05\/12\/opinion\/sunday\/dowd-when-myths-collide-in-the-capital.html?_r=0<\/a><\/p>\n The following paragraph is particularly stunning in that she uses the term \u201cClinton Rules.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0 Note that the New Yorker also made reference to Bill Clinton’s definition of the word “is.”<\/p>\n Clinton Rules, defined by a presidential aide on the hit ABC show \u201cScandal\u201d as damage control that goes like this: \u201cIt\u2019s not true, it\u2019s not true, it\u2019s not true, it\u2019s old news.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n She even admits that some of the worst detractors on Fox News have a point:<\/p>\n The conservatives appearing on Benghazi-obsessed Fox News are a damage patrol with an approach that goes like this: \u201cLies, paranoia, subpoena, impeach, Watergate, Iran-contra.\u201d <\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n (Though now that the I.R.S. has confessed to targeting Tea Party groups, maybe some of the paranoia is justified.)<\/span><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n a simple truth: The administration\u2019s behavior before and during the attack in Benghazi, in which four Americans died, was unworthy of the greatest power on earth.<\/strong><\/em><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n She is forced to acknowledge that the State Department sent people into harm\u2019s way without coming close to providing adequate security:<\/p>\n Yet in this hottest of hot spots, the State Department\u2019s minimum security requirements were not met, requests for more security were rejected, and contingency plans were not drawn up, despite the portentous date of 9\/11 and cascading warnings from the C.I.A., which had more personnel in Benghazi than State did and vetted the feckless Libyan Praetorian Guard. When the Pentagon called an elite Special Forces team three hours into the attack, it was training in Croatia \u2014 decidedly not a hot spot.<\/strong><\/em><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n She then shreds the administration\u2019s claim that no military assistance was available:<\/p>\n The defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, insisted, \u201cWe quickly responded.\u201d But they responded that they would not respond. <\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n But perhaps most shocking is the following comment regarding Hillary Clinton.\u00a0 The main stream media has been pretending that Hillary Clinton was an outstanding Secretary of State and they were engaged in a full scale puff Hillary campaign.\u00a0 The liberal left had moved on from Obama and was now focused on replacing him with Hillary in 2016.\u00a0 Maureen Dowd punctured that entire balloon with the following sentence:<\/p>\n Looking ahead to 2016, Hillaryland needed to shore up the mythology that Clinton was a stellar secretary of state.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n In other words, the reason they lied is that the truth would destroy the myth that Hillary Clinton was a good Secretary of State.<\/p>\n I do not know the final outcome of Benghazi.\u00a0 It will definitely be bad for the President and it will be devastating for Hillary, but so far I don\u2019t see evidence of an impeachable offense.\u00a0 However,\u00a0the main stream media has been forced to recognize that the Obama administration looked them straight in the eye, and lied.\u00a0That really matters.<\/p>\n It won\u2019t stop at Benghazi.\u00a0 They are now going to challenge every statement made by this administration on every subject.<\/p>\n The first impact will be with regard to Fast & Furious.\u00a0 The media is going to take a second look at that story and it will be very skeptical of the story told by the administration.\u00a0 This may also\u00a0affect the next judge who is wondering whether all those supoena’s are necessary.\u00a0 The administration had given the courts probably cause to investigate everything.<\/p>\n I haven’t even commented on the new story about the IRS targeting the Tea Party.\u00a0\u00a0That has already generated bi-partisan outrage.<\/p>\n Ronald Reagan once said that when dealing with Russia, we should \u201ctrust, but verify.\u201d\u00a0 With the Obama administration we are now at a point where we definitely cannot trust\u00a0and verification is a first priority.\u00a0 Obama has been exposed as nothing more than a Pompous Prevaricator.\u00a0 The bully pulpit is more appropriately named the “BS” pulpit.\u00a0 He still lectures people, only now everyone knows he’s lying through his teeth.\u00a0 A lot of us already knew that.\u00a0 Now the main stream media knows it too.<\/p>\n TDM<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Benghazi story has turned a new corner and it is devastating for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.\u00a0 Up until now, the main stream media refused to acknowledge the lack of integrity from this administration.\u00a0 I think deep down … Continue reading