RUSH/EIB: What an absolute shock, ladies and gentlemen. It looks like no other news network, not even cable news, is covering the Benghazi hearings, except for Fox News. We live in an upside-down world, ladies and gentlemen, where most everybody is going to ignore what happens here in these hearings, and, when it’s over, they’re going to say, "What’s the big deal anyway?"
RUSH: What a shock. What an absolute shock, ladies and gentlemen. It looks like no other news network, not even cable news, is covering the Benghazi hearings, except for Fox News. We live in an upside-down world, ladies and gentlemen, where most everybody is going to ignore what happens here in these hearings, and, when it’s over, they’re going to say, "What’s the big deal anyway?" CNN has joined now. They have got Gregory Hicks and I guess it makes some kind of sense because Jacob Tapper has been front and center on this on many occasions.
Anyway, greetings, folks, El Rushbo here, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, doing what I was born to do from right here behind the Golden EIB Microphone, serving humanity. Great to have you here. Telephone number, 800-282-2882. The e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.
I know it’s a minor player, but it does have an audience. Salon magazine, a Web magazine, Salon.com, they have a story by a guy who actually is a paid hack from Think Progress, which is a think tank run by John Podesta, Center for American Progress, whatever it is. He’s disguised as a journalist and reporter over at Salon, and he said that nothing’s gonna happen here. Nothing at all is gonna happen because these hearings can’t possibly have any credibility since Fox is the only network that’s paid any attention to it.
In fact, Fox has already brought discredit to the witnesses because their reporting on this has been so terrible, Fox’s reporting on Benghazi has been so terrible that the witnesses are already discredited. Except for some reason neither Salon nor anybody else can point to a single significant point about Benghazi that Fox has gotten wrong. On the contrary, just about all we know about Benghazi comes from Fox News or Sharyl Attkisson at CBS (who has now been marginalized and is in negotiations to leave CBS before her contract is up).
But let me make a prediction here. When these hearings are over, no matter what’s revealed about Benghazi, the mainstream media is all gonna say, "What difference does it make now? There’s nothing to see here. This isn’t Watergate." And it isn’t Watergate. Nobody died in Watergate. Four people died in Benghazi. Nobody died in Watergate.
Now, what we’ve done, we want you, of course, to be as informed on this as possible. The Limbaugh Letter, the most widely read political newsletter in America today, published in our November issue last year a timeline of all that happened in Libya and Benghazi. It prints out in four color art to three pages. It was pages 11, 12, and 13 from our issue. What we’ve done, we’ve taken this timeline and we have separated it, made it a single file and we’ve put it at both our main Web page, RushLimbaugh.com, and also over on our Facebook page. I think we even tweeted it over there in the cesspool of Twitter. We tweeted a link to it.
It’s entitled: "What did Obama know and when did he know it?" It is the most comprehensive timeline for Benghazi and Libya that exists, and it’s available to you free. We’re not selling this. It’s not tied to a subscription to anything. You just go to RushLimbaugh.com and look at it, download it if you want, same thing at our Facebook page, and you can have it for posterity. We just wanted you to know that we have made it available to one and all so that you can follow this if you happen to be interested.
The Situation Room in the nerve center, it is the government’s nerve center for intelligence and crisis support. By the way, these hearings are gonna have three parts. They’re going to look at what was going on before the attack. They are going to look at what happened during the attack and the third phase will be what happened afterwards. Before it was a series of bad decisions. During it was a series of blunders. The after this is all over is as troubling as anything. The lengths that they went to, from the spin to the bottomless pit to the blackout on eyewitnesses, still don’t know their names, is the stuff that turns paranoids into prophets.
I mean, the cover-up, the attempted ways in which this was swept under the rug, all of it’s fascinating. And literally it’s hard to separate it out before, during, and after, but the during and the after is the real problematic area here. Now, The Situation Room is the government’s nerve center for intelligence and crisis support, deep down under the White House. Five thousand square feet. It has the most sophisticated high-tech. It has sensors to prevent bugging. It has the ability to monitor situations anywhere in the world. It has seating that accommodate the National Security Agency, Homeland Security, the White House chief of staff, the official White House photographer.
On May the 2nd, 2011, 15 officials and the White House photographer, watched the killing of Osama Bin Laden in the Situation Room. On September 11th, 2012, no one was there, apparently. The Situation Room was not used. Nobody went there, apparently, evidently, where four Americans were killed. You know, the old saying is that success has a thousand fathers and failure is an orphan. So we will see what happens here. I’ve got a whole series of sound bites that are related to Benghazi, flashbacks and current. We’re also rolling on the testimony today. Although much of it we were treated to, much of it has already been heard or at least previewed. Now it’s taking place for real.
Elijah Cummings, a Democrat, former chairman the Congressional Black Caucasians tried to preempt the whole thing by listing the charges and then refuting everything. I mean, it’s standard. The Democrats are gonna treat this as a partisan political issue and they are going to circle the wagons around everybody in the administration and the State Department to protect Hillary, because that’s what the objective here is, of course, to protect Hillary, and, of course, the president of the United States.
RUSH: Eric Nordstrom. This is this morning at the Benghazi hearings. A portion of his opening remarks.
NORDSTROM: What happened prior, during, and after the attack matter. It matters to me personally, and it matters to my colleagues — (choking up) to my colleagues at the Department of State. It matters to the American public, for whom we serve, and most importantly — (clearing throat) excuse me — it matters to the friends and family of Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods, who were murdered on September 11th, 2012.
RUSH: That’s the response to Mrs. Clinton saying, "What difference does it make? What difference it make now?" Eric Nordstrom, former regional security officer in Libya. That’s who he is. Eric Nordstrom: "It matters to my colleagues." He was breaking down. He was crying. He was sipping water. He was choking up here. It matters to the friends and family of Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods, who were murdered on September 11th, 2012. What difference does it make now anyway, though? Why do we care?
RUSH: I watched a little bit of the hearings during the break. It is, at least to me, riveting, devastating testimony. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen anything like this, because this is genuine. This is not scripted, made up, with a bunch of supposed victims being paraded in front of the cameras. It’s not some imaginary problem the Democrats have a magic fix for. You listen to these people so far that are testifying, I mean, it makes that video story…
I can’t tell you how insulted I was and really viscerally angry when I kept hearing Obama and Hillary talk about the video. I remember at the memorial service when the bodies of the dead arrived back at Andrews Air Force Base, or Dover, wherever it was. The flag-draped coffins were there and Obama and Hillary, Hillary and Obama, were promising the families, "We’re gonna get the guy that did this video!" Inside, I was fuming.
Telling these people we’re gonna get the guy that did this video?
The video had nothing to do with it. When you listen to the testimony so far, it makes that video story even more despicable than it was. Then you realize the media doesn’t even care about these people or their story. The media is already trying to impugn these people and their testimony. Salon.com is suggesting that these people who are testifying — these former State Department career diplomats — are not credible because Fox News has been the network to report what they’re saying, doing, and thinking.
So since Fox News has been talking about them, they don’t have any credibility. And that guy is not alone. Alex Something-or-other at Salon (I don’t care what is last name is), doesn’t occupy any ground by himself. He probably is voicing the thinking of a lot of people in the media who don’t care about this. This is just something that has to be endured. When it’s over, they’ll say, "What’s the big deal? It happened so long ago."
But here we are months and months later. We have career diplomats choking up, retelling a story that was of no interest to their commander-in-chief, no interest to the secretary of state, who did nothing to help these people. In fact, the next day the commander-in-chief gets up — after being out of touch for five or seven hours, nobody knew where he was — and he jets off to Las Vegas.
These are people that battled terrorists on the battlefield, at our consulate. They got nothing from the guy who put ’em in harm’s way, and now they’re up telling the story. Their testimony, so far, is unfiltered and uninterrupted. It’s powerful, it’s devastating, it’s tragic. Then the Democrats get hold of it after they finish and do their best to discount it, discredit it. But after watching a little bit of this, I understand why some Democrats are worried about this.
If the media picked up on this and actually made this a cause like they did Watergate, it would be a whole different dynamic. I can’t forget Hillary telling those people in that hangar — wherever it was, Dover, Andrews Air Force Base — when the bodies came back, over the flag-draped coffins, "We’ll get the guy who did that video." She was straight-face lying to them about why their family members died.
"We’ll get the guy in the video."
We live in an upside-down world, folks. We really do.
RUSH: So Hillary Clinton goes to Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods who was killed at Benghazi, and after apologizing, Woods said that Hillary told him that the United States would make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted. They’d make sure that the guy who did the video was taken care of.
It’s just amazing.
RUSH: I think that’s a good way of putting it. I think that’s an excellent way of putting it. Those four Americans returned to this country for the memorial service where Hillary and Obama and Biden… By the way, do you remember what Biden said to Charles Wood, the father of Tyrone Wood,? Do you remember what Biden said, among many other things? Remember this? And, folks, pardon my French here, but I’m just gonna quote the vice president and what he said.
"Did your son always have balls this big?" as cue balls or something like that. I mean the man’s son is lying draped in a coffin and in a lie. These four people’s bodies were in coffins draped by a flag and covered in a lie, and the lie was that some video was responsible for this. The Benghazi hearings, the congressional hearings looking into Benghazi are taking place now.
Fox News is carrying them wall-to-wall. CNN now and then jumps in. But no conventional over-the-air networks are joining in. Something that just happened, right near the top of the hour. We were in commercial break. Representative Trey Gowdy from South Carolina was talking to Gregory Hicks. He said, "You were the highest ranking official in Libya. Ambassador Rice did not talk to you before her appearance on the Sunday shows?"
Hicks said, "No."
So here’s Susan Rice. She’s about to appear on five Sunday morning shows to explain what happened, but she did not talk to the highest ranking American official in Libya. She was given talking points by the regime, obviously. Hicks was asked what he thought when he saw Susan Rice blaming a YouTube video for the Benghazi attack. Quote, "I was stunned, my jaw dropped, and I was embarrassed." Well, he’s not alone. We were all embarrassed and angry.
And it continued for weeks, that excuse about the video. I’m just telling you, folks, if you spend any time… If you’re not able to watch these now, you will later tonight, I’m sure. If you turn on cable news you’ll see excerpts. I wouldn’t be surprised if on Fox you see some full-length replays. You watch this and you’ll ask yourself, "How could anybody have ever said that a YouTube video was responsible for this?"
We have three sound bites that just happened recently, within the last 20 minutes at the House Oversight Government Reform Committee hearing on the Benghazi attacks. This is a portion of Gregory Hicks. He’s the Foreign Service officer, former deputy chief of mission. He’s the highest ranking American official on site.
HICKS: We began to hear also that the ambassador’s been taken to a hospital. We don’t know initially which hospital it is. But through David’s reports, we learn that it is in a hospital which is controlled by Ansar al-Sharia, the group that Twitter feeds had identified as leading the attack on the consulate.
RUSH: Now, the importance of this is that after the attack, if you’ll recall, President Obama made a big deal of praising the Libyans for trying to "help" Ambassador Stevens and getting him out of there and taking him to the hospital. So through the American media, the American people were told that the Libyans did us a great service. Gregory Hicks, the highest ranking American on the ground said, "The group that took the ambassador to the hospital was the group that led the attack, Ansar al-Sharia."
That’s at least according to their own braggadocios Twitter feeds. These are the people claiming they did the attack, and they are the ones who took our ambassador out. Folks, do you realize that very little of anything we were told was the truth? Even since, very little of what we have officially been told turns out to be the truth. Gregory Hicks next that says he spoke to Hillary Clinton at two o’clock in the morning, and it sounds like she didn’t do any leading. It sounds like all she did was listen.
HICKS: At about two a.m., the secretary — Secretary of State Clinton — called me, and along with her senior staff were all on the phone. And she asked me what was going on, and I briefed her on developments. Most of the conversation was about the search for Ambassador Stevens. It was also about what we were going to do with our personnel in Benghazi. And I told her that we would need to evacuate, and that was the right… She said that was the right thing to do.
RUSH: This is two a.m.
This is long over, and finally Mrs. Clinton talked to them. The last time these people talked to anybody was five p.m. when Panetta and Hillary were both told by Obama separately, "Look, you guys do whatever’s necessary," and he vanished and nobody to this day knows where he went or what he was doing. So next, Hicks says, "I spoke to her at two o’clock, and I told her what was going on in the search for Ambassador Stevens, and talked about what we were gonna do with our personnel. I said it looked like we needed to evacuate. She said, ‘Yeah, yeah, better evacuate.’"
"What difference it make now?"
At three a.m., Gregory Hicks, Foreign Service officer, former deputy chief of mission in Libya — at three a.m. — said he learned that Ambassador Stevens was dead.
HICKS: At about three a.m., I received a call from the prime minister of Libya. I think it’s the saddest phone call I’ve ever had in my life. And he told me that Ambassador Stevens had passed away. I immediately telephoned Washington that news afterwards, and began accelerating our effort to withdraw from the villas compound and move to the annex.
RUSH: Yeah, it’s the video that made all this happen. That guy who made a YouTube video, remember that, back in July? This happened in September, but this guy made a YouTube video back in July. Yeah, this had everybody fit to be tied over there, and it ended up with our ambassador and three Americans dead. Now, there’s Gregory Hicks. You’re hearing the voice of the leading America on the ground.
Do you hear the pain and the sadness? This was a real, real event and it’s been portrayed as something that happened to other people in a far-off land, late at night, early in the morning — and a video on YouTube made it happen. We worked really hard to find that guy and put him in jail! You know, things happen. "What difference does it make now?" You listen to these people. They were there; they were in the middle of it. It was a real thing, a real event.
But there weren’t any pictures of it at the time. There have been lots of pictures of the place going up in flames. After the fact there were a lot of pictures and video, but not at the time. They don’t carry nearly the punch. Okay, grab sound bite 23. This is January through April of 2013. We have a montage. Here’s then-Secretary of State Clinton, John Kerry, President Obama, and Jay Carney talking about the Benghazi investigation really wasn’t that important.
HILLARY: (screeching) Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided they would go kill Americans? What difference does it make?
KERRY: We got a lot more important things to move on to and get done.
OBAMA: I’m not familiar with this notion that, uhhh, anybody’s been blocked from testifying.
CARNEY: Benghazi happened a long time ago.
RUSH: So that was Hillary back in January, and she was really irritated. "Okay so we had an attack. We had Americans die. What difference it make who it was? What difference does it make why? Come on! What difference does it make now? A bunch of guys out for a walk decided to go kill Americans. What difference does it make now?" She was really irritated that people were trying to get answers to what really happened and why.
Look, when a kid walks into a school and starts gunning down kids or when a couple of guys blow up the Boston Marathon, the American left can’t wait until they answer why. Whenever there is anything that happens that they think they can further their agenda with, such as the Boston Marathon bombing, the only thing that matters is why. And the reason they care about the why in those circumstances is because they hope and pray that the answer to the question "why" will advance their political agenda.
"Why did these two guys blow up the Boston bombing?"
"’Cause they listened to the wrong people on the radio! ‘Cause they watched the wrong things on TV."
That’s what they hope for. So you can’t get them to stop being concerned about the why. But here in Benghazi, when people wanted to know why and who, Hillary got all irritated. "Was it a protest, or a bunch of guys out for a walk? What difference does it make?" Can you imagine if somebody would have said in the middle of the investigation into the Boston Marathon bombing, "Who cares why? What difference does it make?"
Can you imagine the fallout had somebody done a Hillary on that? Then there was John Kerry as secretary of state. That was April 7th. "We got a lot more important things to move on to and get done. We got gun control. We got a bunch of stuff that we’ve gotta fix." Obama, April 29th: "I’m not familiar with this notion that anybody has been blocked from testifying." Jay Carney, April 30th: "Benghazi happened long time ago."
Here is our montage of regime officials blaming that YouTube video. This is between September 20th and 28th of last year.
OBAMA: I don’t care how offensive this video was, it was terribly offensive and we should shun it.
HILLARY: (haltingly) This video is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose, to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.
CARNEY: Let’s be clear. These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.
OBAMA: You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character, who is — an extremely offensive video.
CARNEY: The unrest we’ve seen has been in reaction to a video.
OBAMA: A crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.
RICE: It was a spontaneous, not a premeditated, response — a direct result of a heinous and offensive video.
OBAMA: I know there are some who ask, "Why don’t we just ban such a video?" The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.
RUSH: Right, that’s Obama telling the Star Wars bar scene that is the United Nations General Assembly why he can’t just take everybody’s gun away. "Well, I got this obstacle in my way, you guys, called the Constitution. I’m not yet a dictator like the rest of you guys are. But we’ll get there, don’t sweat it." And then of course let’s go back one more time, January 23rd of this year, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Benghazi, secretary of state still, Mrs. Clinton testifying, Senator Ron Johnson, Republican, Wisconsin, says, "We were misled, that there were supposedly protests and an assault sprang out of that. That was easily ascertained that that was not the fact. The American people could have known that within days, and they didn’t know that it wasn’t a protest. They didn’t know that it had nothing to do with a video. They didn’t know that it was something random."
HILLARY: What difference, at this point, does it make?
RUSH: Words that will live in infamy. "What difference does it make?" Try that when a kids walks into a school and starts shooting. Try that at the next whatever Boston Marathon bombing event is. Try that the next time some kid walks into a movie theater with a gun. What difference does it make why he did it? Try that, see how far that gets you.
Sound bites 32 and 33, Gregory Hicks and Trey Gowdy. Congressman Trey Gowdy is from South Carolina, and Gregory Hicks, a Foreign Service officer, former deputy chief of mission.
Trey Gowdy says, "So Mr. Hicks, let’s find out the truth. The president of Libya responded to the attack and labeled it an attack by Islamic extremists, possibly with terror links, correct?"
HICKS: Yes, sir.
GOWDY: So hours after our ambassador and three others are killed in Benghazi, the president of Libya says it was an attack with possible terror links, correct?
HICKS: Yes, sir. That’s what I recall.
GOWDY: Did the president of Libya ever mention a spontaneous protest related to a video?
HICKS: No, sir.
GOWDY: When Ambassador Stevens talked to you perhaps minutes before he died, as a dying declaration, what precisely did he say to you?
HICKS: He said, "Greg, we’re under attack."
RUSH: Then Gowdy said, "Would a highly decorated, career diplomat have you told you or Washington had there been a demonstration outside this facility that day?"
HICKS: Yes, sir. He would have.
GOWDY: Did he mention one word about a protest or a demonstration?
HICKS: No, sir. He did not.
GOWDY: So fast forward, Mr. Hicks, to the Sunday talk shows and Ambassador Susan Rice. She blamed this attack on a video. In fact, she did it five … different … times. What was your reaction to that?
HICKS: I was stunned, my jaw dropped, and I was embarrassed.
GOWDY: Did she talk to you before she went on the five Sunday talk shows?
HICKS: No, sir.
GOWDY: You were the highest ranking official in the Libya at the time, correct?
HICKS: Yes, sir.
RUSH: Brief time-out, and we’ll be back. Don’t go away.
RUSH: Here’s Hugh in Jacksonville, Florida, as we head back to the phones. Hello, Hugh. Thank you for calling. Hi.
CALLER: Yes, good afternoon, Rush, thank you for taking my call.
RUSH: Yes, sir.
CALLER: Rush, my question to you is that what was Ambassador Stevens doing there in the first place? With all the prior runs, with the previous attacks, with the other countries pulling their diplomats out of Benghazi, what was he doing there in the first place without proper security? And if we knew the answer to that, would that not give us a clearer picture as to why the administration did not accurately recount what happened?
RUSH: Well, I think we know why they didn’t recount what happened. They don’t want anybody to know how basically incompetent — I mean, the answer to your question is incompetence. Incompetence, lack of foresight —
CALLER: What was he doing there without proper security in the first place?
RUSH: Well, they don’t think they needed security. We’re loved now. Bush is gone, Al-Qaeda’s on the run, and Obama’s president, we’re loved now, and —
CALLER: The facts of what happened prior show different.
RUSH: Well, those people were wrong. Remember, now, we’d also taken care of Khadafy. As far as the regime is concerned the people of Libya loved us. We got rid of their tyrant.
RUSH: I’m telling you it’s competence. If you want to look for a conspiracy, I heard that, you asked why is Stevens there. I mean that’s a good question. What the hell is he doing there?
CALLER: Without the proper security.
RUSH: Proper security?
CALLER: Without proper security.
RUSH: Without proper security. I can’t answer it for you. I have no idea why he was there without security. I can only guess like you can.
CALLER: All right.
RUSH: Incompetence. Didn’t think it was needed. Didn’t think anything was gonna happen.
CALLER: That’s scary.
RUSH: Well, what could it be besides incompetence? What are you thinking of?
CALLER: I have no idea. That’s why I asked.
RUSH: Yeah. Well, remember now, we liberated Libya, as far as this bunch thinks. They think everybody hated Khadafy, so we got rid of Khadafy. We’re loved. Obama’s a hero. There is no terrorism. It’s on the run. Ansar al-Sharia, what the hell is that? We got rid of Al-Qaeda, they’re on the run. I know, folks, it’s hard to believe. I said it yesterday, these people believe this stuff that they say. They’re not just saying stuff for public consumption. When they tell you that the election of Obama means the planet’s gonna heal, sea levels are gonna fall, the world’s gonna love us again, they believe that. Talk about a narcissist here, a thoroughly self-absorbed individual.
They believe the world must have hated Bush. Since they hated Bush, everybody hated Bush and indeed Obama won the election, so it must be that everybody hates Bush and the Republicans, and that everybody loves Obama. If it’s not incompetence, you know, why there wasn’t proper security. I think, when you get down to brass tacks talking about Hillary Clinton, incompetence is the number one word to describe her. Her public image is quite the opposite. Smartest woman in the world, incredibly efficient, very smart, strategically brilliant, knows everything in the world. She screws up everything she touches. Well, I know, I’m the only one who’s ever said it, and we’ve proved it, I know.
This video stuff that the regime blamed — do you realize, nobody but us cares about this? I mean, just like before the election, nobody cared for about this before the election, and nobody but us cares about it now. By us, I mean, whatever the number of us in America are watching this, paying attention to this, but nobody else does. Nobody cared about this before the election. Nothing’s happened since to make people care about. CNN’s totally bumped out of coverage now. They’re still in Cleveland showing balloons around the hero’s house, working on that story. MSNBC, who cares, nobody’s watching, but the networks aren’t covering this. Folks, nobody is going to care about this. Nobody is gonna hear that Elijah Cummings said, hey, people died, get over it. Nobody’s gonna hear it except us.
Nobody cares about any of this stuff but us. In fact, we are being called purists and problematic because we care about this because we are being so rigid, we’re making it impossible for people to see that the Republicans are flexible and adaptable and all that. We are making it impossible for the Republicans to ever win. Because we care about this. This is insignificant. This doesn’t matter. Nobody cares about this. Other than the families, other than the witnesses, other than the Republicans on the committee and five or six other people, nobody cares about it. We live in an upside down world. The challenge we all have here, folks, is staying emotionally and physically well in the middle of all this, because we live in a world where nothing makes any sense, and where it appears that everything that was the glue that held this country together is vanishing.
Nothing makes rational sense anymore. You ought to hear the Democrats questioning these witnesses. They’re contentious. These are people that survived that attack. These are people that witnessed their friends die. These are people that were in the middle of it. They’re being accused of nothing but advancing a political agenda opposed to Obama. They’re being treated contentiously by the Democrats. The Republicans, on the other hand, on the committee are being deferential and polite. But it’s clear, this is as bipartisan as any other issue that’s being discussed.
RUSH: They’ve taken a break a break now, I believe, but again Fox is pretty much it on this. CNN bumps in for, I don’t know, when Eleanor Holmes Norton is questioning somebody, or when Elijah Cummings is issuing profundities like, "Well, you know, death is part of life" or whatever he said. So during the committee hearing this afternoon, Mark Thompson — a former Marine, the acting deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism — testified.
The delegate to Congress from Washington, DC, is Eleanor Holmes Norton, and she said, "I’m quoting from this report: ‘They tried to cut the Counterterrorism Bureau out of the loop as they and other administration officials weighed how to respond and characterize the Benghazi attack.’ Now, that’s the end of the quote, Mr. Thompson. I’m asking you: Is that a quote? Is that quote accurate, that you believe that the Counterterrorism Bureau was intentionally kept out of the loop for political reasons?"
THOMPSON: I indicated that the portion of the Counterterrorism Bureau that responds to crises — i.e., my part of the office — was pushed out of that discussion. The Counterterrorism Bureau was represented in subsequent meetings after the night of 9/11.
NORTON: So… But do you believe you were kept out for political reasons?
THOMPSON: I do not politicize my job, Madam. I have served under three presidents starting with President Clinton, up to the present. I have served six secretaries.
NORTON: Uh, I’ve gotta continue, Mr. Thompson. (sic) I was just quoting the quote. So the quote isn’t entirely accurate, then?
RUSH: Yeah. The point of this is that the Democrats are desperate to portray these witnesses as partisans. Eleanor Holmes "Nawton," as the Reverend Jackson pronounces her name — Eleanor Holmes Norton, the delegate, was trying to say that this quote that this counterterrorism guy had been kept out of things, she was just trying to get that he was a partisan and he was making things up in order to harm the Obama regime.
The quote was inaccurate and she finally heard that. "So this quote is not really accurate?" "That’s correct, madam." So she barked up a tree that Defendant’s Exhibit exist. But they’re still trying, and they’re gonna continue to try to portray these people as partisan and these witnesses as having an agenda. So far, they have not been able to do that, but they will continue that effort.
WASHINGTON, DC – MAY 08: Family members of the four Americans killed in the September 11, 2012 terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, are joined by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) (3rd R) during the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s hearing titled, ‘Benghazi: Exposing Failure and Recognizing Courage’ in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill May 8, 2013 in Washington, DC. Credit: Getty Images
TheBlaze/TV: The highly anticipated and vitally important House Oversight Committee hearing on the deadly Benghazi terrorist attack resulted in several key pieces of information being revealed, bringing the country one step closer to knowing the truth about what really happened on Sept. 11, 2012, at the U.S. compound in Libya.
Three brave whistleblowers came forward on Wednesday and confirmed that there was, in fact, a firm “stand down” order given after the U.S. compound in Benghazi came under attack. Whistleblower Gregory Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya and the highest ranking official in the country at the time of the attacks, testified that he was “effectively” demoted shortly after questioning talking points that later proved to be demonstrably false. Hicks also revealed that he was told not to speak with an investigating Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) alone.
So, how did the mainstream media cover the story? Well, kind of like it has since the attack occurred — lightly. TheBlaze conducted a review of various outlets’ coverage on Wednesday night at around 8 p.m. CT and took screengrabs of several front pages and accumulated some video. Let’s just go outlet-by-outlet, print and TV, and analyze the coverage.
To its credit, the Huffington Post did have a Benghazi story relatively high on its front page. However, its headline read: “Benghazi Hearing Reveals Incompetence, But No Cover-Up.” The site had some of the important information included in its report, though it was not one of its lead stories.
CNN’s website led with the Jodi Arias trial and the Ohio kidnappings. There was no mention of the Benghazi hearing anywhere near the top of the front page. However, after scrolling down the page, a small photo and accompanying link was visible under “politics.”
Story on Benghazi hearing appeared near bottom of CNN.com’s front page. (CNN.com)
CBSNews.com also led with the Ohio kidnapping case. Despite the fact that its report headlined, “Benghazi ‘whistleblowers’ head to House committee,” was the most popular story, the top of its front page was dedicated to other stories.
Featured stories on CBS News’ website revolved around the Jodi Arias trial, “awkward moms,” the Boston bombings and several stories on the Ohio kidnappings. About halfway down the page there was a story on the sidebar about the Benghazi hearing. “U.S. diplomats describe night of Benghazi attack.” There was also an additional Benghazi story at the very bottom of the page under “politics.”
Notice the most popular story (CBSNews.com)
It should be noted that CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson has been reporting consistently on Benghazi. However, that doesn’t mean her stories always gets the front page treatment.
Further, Politico reported on Wednesday that CBS News is growing “increasingly frustrated” with Attkisson’s Benghazi reporting. Unnamed network sources told Politico that CBS News executives see the reporter “wading dangerously close to advocacy” on the issue.
Fox News was the outlier. Both the Fox News Channel and FoxNews.com provided wall-to-wall coverage for the first few hours of the hearing and continued with steady coverage throughout the day and night.
If you can believe it, out of all the news sites TheBlaze analyzed (other than Fox News), NBCNews.com gave the Benghazi hearing the most prominent placement at the very top of its front page. It wasn’t the lead story, but it was clearly visible at the top of the site. Like the other news sites, there was an additional link to a hearing-related story under “politics” near the bottom of the page.
Following the trend, ABCNews.com did not lead with the Benghazi hearing on Wednesday evening. Topping its website was the Ohio kidnapping and the Jodi Arias trial, much like its counterparts. About seven links down ABC had a story about the hearing in the “latest headlines” tab. Again, the news site also included a link near the bottom of the front page under “politics.”
TheBlaze.com, led with the Benghazi hearing throughout the day and into the night. Further, four of the top eight stories in terms of front page placement were about the House Oversight Committee hearing on the terror attacks at the same time we viewed the other news sites. TheBlaze TV also provided wall-to-wall coverage and analysis all day.
That brings us to TV coverage, which tends to be a lot less objective than online/print media. Though there are likely more, all of the clips we found in our initial sweep of networks downplaying the Benghazi hearings belong to MSNBC/NBC.
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow lumped Benghazi into several other GOP “conspiracies,” including concerns about the government stockpiling ammunition.
“The market for this stuff does not stop at the fringe,” she said.
Another MSNBC host, Chris Matthews, argued that Republicans just want to “blame President Obama and Hillary Clinton for this thing called Benghazi. Matthews and MSNBC led with the Ohio kidnapping case.
Watch a part of his Wednesday show via CNN/Washington Free Beacon:
Before the hearing, NBC’s Chuck Todd and MSNBC host Joe Scarborough agreed that the GOP’s Benghazi “conspiracy theory” is not the “holy grail” or the “pathway to victory in 2014.” Neither one appeared to consider that maybe politics is not the driving factor behind the pursuit of the truth in the Benghazi case.
“For this conspiracy theory that some people believe is out there — that the White House was trying to downplay a terrorist attack because of the election — then they did a really poor job of it. Because within three or four days, it was pretty clear to the entire world this was a terrorist attack from a group that had some sort of extremist Al Qaeda ties,” Todd noted.
Coverage and analysis after the hearing’s conclusion appeared to be scarce on the major TV networks.
How do you feel about the coverage given to the Benghazi hearings by the mainstream media? Did they provide enough?
The Benghazi Buck Won’t Stop Anywhere:
Conservative bloggers, politicians, and commentators have been all agog over the prospects of President Barack Hussein Obama being impeached and forced to leave office as a result of his administration’s and his probable personal involvement in the bloody debacle that occurred on September 11th, 2012 at the American consulate in the Libyan hellhole of Benghazi.
That shameful event which Obama’s press hack Jay Carney recently passed off as something that “happened a long time ago” (6 months) is very much on the public radar. Carney then added the baldfaced falsehood that he and his cohorts were “unaware of any agency blocking an employee who would like to appear before Congress to provide information related to Benghazi.”
Much to my regret, and despite the fact three so-called whistle-blowers testified under oath on Wednesday as to what they knew about that long night of horror in Benghazi, testimony that incriminated Carney’s boss and then-Secretary of State Clinton, the scenario of getting rid of Obama and his lackeys has as much chance of coming to fruition as Obama announcing he deeply appreciates Rush Limbaugh and the Drudge Report.
–Writing on Breitbart.com, Kerry Picket cited an authoritative source who claimed that only Obama or someone acting on his authority could have ordered our Special Forces to stand down in the face of pleas for help from our people at the consulate.
–Sen. Lindsey Graham
The Benghazi story is by far the most interesting thing going. On Fox, I was disappointed that they stopped the coverage to go to the story of the kidnapped women returning home and the Jody Arias verdict. Both are newsworthy but not in comparison to the compelling testimony about Benghazi. The women will still be home and Arias will still be a murderer but the Benghazi thing is way more interesting and evolving. Who would have ever thought a congressional hearing could be entrancing. The good news is that the train is now out of the station, the birds are singing…ran out of clichés but this story now has teeth. Can’t wait to see what comes next.
See: http://www.lonsberry.com/writings.cfm by Bob Lonsberry