Former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson: Emails Reveal White House Hid Truths About Benghazi Attack

|

"If we knew everything then that we know now, one week after it happened, I think that would have been really devastating to [Obama's reelection] campaign," says former CBS reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, referencing the 2012 Benghazi terrorists attacks. Recently revealed White House emails suggest that the Obama administration may have attempted to mislead the American public by placing the blame on an Internet video and not Islamic terrorists, which would have raised questions about Obama's foreign policy strategy.

Attkisson, an award winning investigative reporter, was one of the few journalists who continued pursuing the Benghazi story long after many in the main stream media lost interest. According to Attkisson, her bosses at CBS wanted her to drop the story. As a result, she left CBS, her employer for two decades, this past March over what she claims is "liberal bias" at the network and a lack of serious devotion to investigative reporting. 

She goes on to say that many in her field are frustrated by the decline of hard-hitting investigative reporting endemic at all networks and not just CBS. The congealing of corporate, news, and political interests at networks have made investigative journalism a relic of the past. 

"As one whistleblower put it to me: things have never been worse for people who try to speak the truth inside the government about illegalities and wrong doing. In their view, and I tend to agree, every administration is more clamped down and closed than the one before it. And the next one starts at the finishing point. It's very hard to make it go backwards. There are rules being implemented now against journalists and the type of work that we do that I think will be very hard to unwind." 

Attkisson sat down with Reason TV's Nick Gillespie to discuss her reporting on Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and the decline of investigative journalism in America.

About 20 minutes.

Camera by Todd Krainin and Joshua Swain. Edited by Amanda Winkler. 


Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube Channelto receive automatic updates when new stories go live.

NEXT: Thank You for Vaping: Libertarians vs. New York City's E-Cig Ban

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Attkisson should have known – CBS’s idea of a scoop is publishing fake letters, not investigating scandals involving the death of American ambassadors.

  2. “If we knew everything then that we know now, one week after it happened, I think that would have been really devastating to [Obama’s reelection] campaign,” says former CBS reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, referencing the 2012 Benghazi terrorists attacks. Recently revealed White House emails suggest that the Obama administration may have attempted to mislead the American public by placing the blame on an Internet video and not Islamic terrorists, which would have raised questions about Obama’s foreign policy strategy.

    Are you fucking shitting me? Could it have been any more obvious?

    Not only did the media forsake its principles because it was “their man” in the crosshairs, but Romney could have BURIED Obama a month prior to the election, yet elected not to out of some misplaced sense of loyalty to national security.

    Raise your hands…who didn’t know Obama was lying when they were still talking about a video two weeks after the incident?

    Please, don’t insult my intelligence.

    1. Here the right-wing “Think Progress” reporting on the 30,000 people in Benghazi marching against the militia that perpetrated the Benghazi attack mere days afterwards.

      http://thinkprogress.org/secur…..-benghazi/

      There are plenty of photos of protestors carrying signs that say things like “Chris Stevens was all of Libya’s friend”…

      The protestors subsequently went apeshit and chased the militia responsible out of town–and burned down their headquarters.

      …and the Obama Administration was still blaming the video. Somehow 30,000 protestors knew what the Obama Administration didn’t? Not only that it wasn’t about a video, but which militia was responsible?

      Why would anyone believe that?

      1. Careful. Don’t scroll down too far. The comments are a real doozy.

    2. I don’t know the time line but I noticed pretty early that the youtube videos had almost no viewers prior to the attack in Benghazi.

      So yeah the wide spread “protests” that the Obama administration claimed were happening over the video seemed implausible as no one had seen the video.

      1. I thought there was a protest in Egypt a week or two before Benghazi which actually was about the video. That made it easier for the administration to make the connection. Or was that BS (or my faulty memory) too?

        1. Cairo. It blurred the motive enough to give Susan Rice complete cover.

          Benghazi = Birtherism.

          1. Benghazi = Birtherism.

            This from someone who calls himself “Palin’s Buttplug” and wants to be taken seriously.

            1. What do you guys want out of this tempest in a teapot?

              Do you want an apology from Susan Rice? What is the end game here?

              Please don’t say anything idiotic like a new election. No undecided voter would have switched their vote to Romney because of this feigned outrage from Fox News types.

              1. Do you want an apology from Susan Rice?

                err…

                I think you are confused. It was the Obama administration that coached Rice’s talking points not the other way around.

                1. It was the Obama administration that coached Rice’s talking points not the other way around.

                  Well what do you want then?

                  Obama called it a terrorist attack immediately. He is untouchable.

                  WHAT … DO … YOU …WANT?

                  1. Why is it always about defending Obama with you?

                    That’s not very libertarian at all, knee jerk defense of political operatives.

                  2. Obama called it a terrorist attack immediately. He is untouchable.

                    And then proceeded to blame it on a video. For weeks.

                  3. The truth would be nice for a change.

                    “Obama called it a terrorist attack immediately.”

                    That’s not the truth, Candy Crowley.

                    He is untouchable. Not because he immediately called it terrorism but because he didn’t he is untouchable because he is black and his pet media give him a pass on everything because of it.

                    That might all change after the mid terms. He’ll still be black but he’ll no longer be untouchable.

                    I bet that slimy mother fucker has trouble sleeping at night worrying about a Republican takeover of the Senate.

                  4. I want to see Obama take responsibility for exploiting bigotry just to get himself reelected.

                    I want Hillary Clinton to apologize for exploiting bigotry for personal gain.

                    If I can’t get either of those?

                    I’m willing to settle for a reduction in the legitimacy of either one of them–especially if Hillary is running for president.

                    She has no credibility on any issue involving race or bigotry forever.

                  5. Unbelievable. There is written evidence that the administration participated in the cover-up of a terrorist attack in order to avoid trouble during an election year and sidestep any culpability and you still can’t stop cheering for the team. Does “Bush lied–people died” ring a bell? How’s that hypocrisy working out for you? I hope it pays well.

                  6. WHAT … DO … YOU …WANT?

                    For the US to stop playing policeman in far flung parts of the world and for politicians who do play policemen to get punished for it when their plans inevitably fail.

                    Would be a whole lot easier if idiots like you stop being useful idiots for scum bags like Obama by making excuses for them and perpetuating their lies.

                  7. WHAT … DO … YOU …WANT?

                    For you to go out like David Carradine.

                  8. Despite what you and Cindy Crowley say he has NEVER called Benghazi a terrorist attack. He did refer to “acts of terror” but never insinuated he meant Benghazi.

                    But cum-stains like you took that as an out.

                  9. Your response is nonsensical though it seems you’re taking the same position as Clinton when she demanded “What difference does is make!” Both of you are pretending that because something is over, that we should simply forget about it and move on.

                    Clearly what people want is for administration officials who blatantly lied about the murder of an Ambassador and others, to be required to acknowledge their role in a coverup. And to be prosecuted if they broke any laws.

                    How can this be so difficult to understand?

                  10. Palin’s Buttplug:

                    WHAT … DO … YOU …WANT?

                    Really, I know.

                    What difference at this point, does it make?

              2. Anybody involved in lying about the video and pressuring Google to censor it should be fired.

          2. Benghazi = Birtherism

            To a certain degree, that statement has merit (not that PB isn’t a complete fucking idiot).

            If the rightwing media (FOX, Limbaugh, Hannity…) hadn’t spent so much time and energy on bullshit issues like birtherism, they might have had some credibility when it came to actual scandals.

            1. Let’s face it.

              They lost their credibility back during the Bush Administration.

              And the angle that really sticks is the bigotry angle. They’re not really exploiting that angle–because they don’t know how.

              1. Ken, I have no idea why you have such a hard on for this bigotry meme. It’s a fucking retarded way to go about this, because to push a bigot meme you need the full fledged support of the media machine, and there’s no way anyone criticizing Obama will get that.

                You have this insane idea that progs actually hold themselves to their own standards. If they actually hated bigotry, they would have already called out the administration over this.

                They aren’t stupid, they’re true believers.

        2. The link to the Egypt protests and the video turned out to be bullshit as well.

          But yeah the administration blamed those protests on the video as well.

          I don’t think there was a week or two between the “protests” If i recall the administration claimed they happened at about the same time.

          None the less the stats on the youtube video show nearly no views prior to Benghazi attack and even less views one or two weeks before that.

          Kind of hard to protest something no one saw.

          1. The White House is STILL claiming there were international protests over that video.

            Tommy Vietor got absolutely neutered by Bret Baier yesterday, partially because he’s still claiming there were mass protests in Egypt about a video that had like 130 views before the protest occurred.

            1. Sidenote: This isn’t in the article I linked, but in the actual video of this argument, the following exchange occurred:

              Baier: Did you change the word ‘attack’ in the email to ‘demonstrations.

              Vietor: Dude, this was like two years ago. We’re still talking about the most mundane processes.

              Baier: Dude, this is what everyone is talking about.

              Vietor: We’re talking about the processes of editing talking points, that’s what bureaucrats do all day long.

              I was shocked when he said that last part. How much of a little troll do you have to be to basically acknowledge your job is entirely meaningless, and yet continue supporting the expansion of government which allows for such a worthless and parasitic existence?

              Court eunuchs had more self-respect than this guy.

              1. I thought that line needed more focus also.

                “all bureaucrats do is sit around and edit talking points all day to support the administration’s spin ?

                Then they should all be fired.

                I thought they at least pushed paper from one desk to another writing regulations for the rest of us to follow on subjects they often know nothing about.

            2. Tommy Vietor got absolutely neutered by Bret Baier

              Ha! Vietor gave Baier no respect and spoke down to him like he would a kid caught wetting his bed.

              “Dude, this is two years old. Grow up. That is what bureaucrats do – edit talking points all day. OF course I don’t remember if I put that in.”

              And Vietor looks 15 years old.

              1. Acts that way too. Which explains why you think he came out ahead.

                1. Acts and talks that way. Here is a serious news man getting scolded by him fro friviolities.

                  Veitor won that exchange.

                  1. “”Dude…”

                    It was over there, and Vietor looked like an impotent stoned child.

              2. Dude, this is two years old. Grow up. That is what bureaucrats do – edit talking points all day. OF course I don’t remember if I put that in.

                So, the fact that it happens all the time justifies it? You need to go back to that informal logic class.

              3. Ha! Vietor gave Baier no respect and spoke down to him like he would a kid caught wetting his bed.

                He spoke down to him because Vietor isn’t intelligent enough to realize he just got butchered on national television.

                Talking down to someone who just intellectually outclassed you is not evidence of intelligence. It’s evidence of a noxious mix of stupidity and arrogance.

        3. The “blame the video” ploy was just as much bullshit for Cairo as it was for Benghazi. Yes, the Grand Mufti in Cairo had denounced the video two days before the attack there, but few, if any, Egyptians, had seen it, let alone heard about it. Days before the Sept. 11th attack in Cairo, members of Gama’at al-Islamia were threatening an Iran-style attack on the U.S. embassy. Hostages would be taken to leverage the release of the Blind Sheik from U.S. prison. Other jihadists wanted to burn it to the ground. They did storm the embassy, replace the American flag with the jihadist black flag, and set fire to the complex.

          In truth, President Obama’s pro-Muslim Brotherhood policies in Egypt had actually strengthened al-Qaeda. The attack on the embassy in Egypt (and Benghazi) undermined the campaign rhetoric that he had “decimated” al-Qaeda. Blaming the video was designed to paper over Obama’s foreign policy failure in face of an upcoming election.

    3. What insults the intelligence is comments like yours, and lame and limp accusations of vague malfeasance by the president or his advisors around the Benghazi fiasco, which was simply a minor and somewhat bloody foreign policy fiasco. Nick Gillespie, you should sit down for a minute and read Jane Mayer’s very pointed Benghazi/Beirut 1983 piece in this week’s New Yorker, the one she call’s Reagan’s Benghazi. http://www.newyorker.com/onlin…..ghazi.html Was 1983 a wiser time? Was Tip O’Neill a better man than Boehner or Issa? I don’t know, but I do know that Benghazi conspiracy theories should simply be beneath Reason and beneath Gillespie. As for Reason’s increasingly irrational and depressing readership/commentariat, I simply despair.

  3. “The Benghazi emails revealed earlier this week show a deliberate attempt by the Obama administration to mislead the American public about the September 2012 attack.”

    The Obama Administration’s behavior was disgraceful.

    They exploited anti-Muslim bigotry for the purpose of deflecting criticism away from President Obama mere weeks before an election–and all the Democrats who neglect to demand a full apology from the President for his bigoted behavior are, themselves, participating in Obama’s disgusting bigotry.

    Watch them scream about Donald Sterling and the host of Top Gear! What the Obama Administration did was much worse than them, and the very least Obama should do is apologize for his Administration’s bigoted statements. And “the Obama Administration” means Hillary Clinton.

    “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”

    She exploited anti-Muslim bigotry to deflect criticism away from herself and President Obama–in the name of tolerance. The least she can do is apologize for her bigotry, but she won’t. Because she’s not sorry. After all, what difference does it make?

  4. I really don’t get the obsession with Banghazi. Should anybody be surprised that the Administration tried to put their own spin on it? I wasn’t. Government (and businesses) have been doing that since time immemorial.

    Just like Snowden’s NSA revelations. No surprise to me, thus no outrage.

    I’ll agree it is a shame that investigative reporting seems to be on its way out.

    1. 1) Of course, spin has always been a thing. But one might also reasonably think that at some point “spin” becomes layers of blatant self-serving cover-up bullshit that should called out as such.

      2) “I really don’t get the obsession with World War III. Should anybody be surprised that the Administration tried to put their own spin on it?”

    2. I really don’t get the outrage over the Waco siege. Governments have been killing innocent people since time immemorial.

      1. I thought the Prez promised that the Benghazi perpetrators were going to be brought to justice ?

        Yet no arrests ?

        Maybe they don’t want the attackers speaking about it either ?

        1. Arrests? HAHAHA. Good one. Justice is dispensed from the skies.

        2. The maker of that stupid video was arrested and jailed. Case closed.

          //sarc.

          1. “The maker of that stupid video was arrested and jailed. Case closed.”

            And the chorus of Obo and Hilary sang:
            “Look over there!”

    3. No surprise to me, thus no outrage.

      Then, respectfully, you are part of the problem.

    4. I really don’t get the outrage over Benghazi.

      The left has been trying to discredit libertarians as racists for decades using all kinds of lies. What difference does it make if the Obama Administration itself purposely exploited bigotry just to further their own political interests?

    5. fredtyg|5.3.14 @ 10:51AM|#

      I really don’t get the obsession with Banghazi.”

      What ? Four American were killed while serving their government, one a US Ambassador, as a result of decisions made for political considerations.

      They refused to even try and help them during an attack that went on for 8 hours for political considerations.

      Then they lied about what they did and why they did it for political considerations.

      And you don’t understand why some people insist on the truth coming out ?

      Do you think that it was so important for the well being of the Country that Obama get reelected that the ends justify the means ?

      You have to be a troll. Just because we aren’t surprised by the administration actions doesn’t mean we just lay down and accept them.

      No one can be that stupid.

    6. Their spin included not sending in troops or help. They did this because they didn’t want anyone to think there was anything big going on, as that wasn’t their message. They did this to help Os election. In other words, they sacrificed people so it wouldn’t look like a big incident.

  5. Good grief, Nick — *Please* get her name right! 8-(

  6. Benghazi? Still? Lambast that deceased equine!

    1. Until Hillary Clinton either apologizes for exploiting bigotry for personal gain or announces that she will never run for president, I don’t see this as flogging a dead horse.

      They’re going after Donald Sterling for having done much, much less than Hillary did.

      1. What Sterling vs. what the administration did is like a fart compared to Little Boy.

  7. Too bad her book won’t be out before the election. What’s up with *that*?

    1. I’m waiting for Shirley Jones to complain that they’re using her picture on the cover of H—–y’s book.

  8. wow, the Huffington Post Derp board are a sight to behold over Attkisson

  9. FAKE SCANDAL! BOOOOOSH!

    Hey, look over there; some fat old white guy said something crazy!

  10. By being fired for criticizing the administration, she is in a great position to have guest spots on things like Fox News and Glenn Beck for years to come. And those right-of-center shows have much greater ratings than CBS.

  11. she left CBS, her employer for two decades, this past March over what she claims is “liberal bias” at the network and a lack of serious devotion to investigative reporting.

    I’m sure Vox is dangling a sweet deal in front if her. They’re totally all over that serious investigative reporting gig.

    1. Yeah I noticed Nick mentioned Vox when listing “independent” news organizations.

      Fuck an A they have pro-Obama pro-obamacare bias on their friggin Polygon video game news site let alone their political news sites.

  12. “a lack of serious devotion to investigative reporting.”

    Because your mainstream media employer will fire you for telling the truth … or worse – you may even have to move to Russia to avoid prison. Free country. my @ss!

  13. Buttplug has the day off?

    1. apparently “american socialist” has the derp duties today.

      1. Do they have to slap hands when they trade places in the ring like pro wrestlers in a tag team match ?

        What happens if both get in the ring at the same time.

        Would Reason’s servers blow up ?

        1. Tupla only has so many hands with which to puppet.

  14. Fake scandal. They have a job for your kind of investigative journalism at FoxNews or one of the many right-wing websites that gets its money from the Kochs.

    Who the fuck cares if the WH blamed this attack on a crappy video or a planned attack by extremists? You mean its a scandal when 4 people die in an unstable country in North Africa and the Middle East? Where the fuck was CBS investigative journalism when thousands were dying in Iraq?

    1. It should be noted that the Obama Administration’s exploitation of bigotry, here, led to a wave of censorship fans, on various fronts, banning any speech or advertising that might offend Muslims–and we can’t have that, you know, ’cause Obama says they’re all so crazy.

      In fact, one of the things that continues to irk me about this is that there are plenty of people out there who are upset about Benghazi–but still seem to believe that we can’t let people say bad things about Muslims for fear that they can’t control themselves and will start killing us indiscriminately.

      It’s all disgraceful. The Obama Administration is a fucking disgrace on this.

      1. I didn’t like the way the administration handled the video situation either. I think they should have explicitly supported free speech end of story. But … One and a half years of this, presidential debate questions over these heroes in the dreaded government who risked their lives to improve a poor country? No… The true scandal here is the pimping of this story by the Right to push a political agenda. That is what is disgraceful.

        1. “The true scandal here is the pimping of this story by the Right to push a political agenda.”

          You really need to take off those partisan glasses.

          What the Obama Administration did was disgraceful–no matter what “the Right” does with it.

          I wish “the Right” were pushing the bigotry angle; unfortunately, so many people on that side of the fence actually believe in the bigoted ideas that Obama was exploiting…

          Doesn’t change anything for me if the right uses this to their advantage. I’m arguing this from my own perspective. I’m not a Muslim, but I’ve spent time in mosques. I’ve had Muslim friends that I worked with everyday. Hillary was a disgrace on this. Obama was a disgrace on this.

          They exploited bigotry against Muslims just to further their own political interests, and they should be made to apologize for what they did.

          When the right does the same thing, I’ll call them out likewise–just as I always have.

        2. Pimping = talking about things I am uncomfortable with and raising questions I don’t want answered. Please don’t call me on my lies and misdirections.

        3. They could have sent in troops to help. But, they didn’t. And, they didn’t because that would have damaged their message. So, they sacrificed a few people. They let them die. On purpose. That is the scandal.

          1. And then there’s the part where they framed a man and put him in prison over it…

            1. Did he actually go to jail? Holy cow! I didn’t know that. Is he still there?

              1. Yeah; they charged him with a probation violation related to his work on the movie. I think he’s out now, but IIRC he spent 12 months in jail.

                1. He’s the egg, and Obama’s second term is the omelette.

                  Honestly, I’m kind of surprised there hasn’t been an armed rebellion yet.

                  1. Came pretty close with the Bundy incident.

                    1. Yup. And another Waco would look pretty bad for the Democrats, what with an election coming up this year and all.

    2. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 11:57AM|#
      …”Who the fuck cares if the WH blamed this attack on a crappy video”…

      Only people with ethics and a degree of honesty.
      So obviously slimeballs like you don’t care.

      1. You are the one pimping these deaths so you can push a political agenda, slimy one.

        1. Yup my political agenda is to keep the US out of stupid wars (Arab spring) for the very reason that American’s (like ambassadors) die in them needlessly.

          Such a slime ball I am.

          1. Keep pimping. It’s classy to hock this bullshit.

            1. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:38PM|#
              “Keep pimping. It’s classy to hock this bullshit.”

              Far better than 100,000,000 innocent murders, slimeball.

            2. Keep pimping.

              For now on you shall call me the Pimp of Peace.

              I will keep it up.

            3. safe to say, you’ve nothing to say and the irrational phase of the exchange has begun.

        2. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:16PM|#
          “You are the one pimping these deaths so you can push a political agenda, slimy one.”

          I see your handle promotes a certain political economy:
          “HOW MANY DID COMMUNIST REGIMES MURDER?”
          […]
          ” It failed utterly and in doing so it killed over 100,000,000 men, women, and children, not to mention the near 30,000,000 of its subjects that died in its often aggressive wars and the rebellions it provoked.”
          http://defeatcommunism.com/pro…..st-regimes

          Now, what was that, slimebag?

          1. Another 100 million deaths post? I love those. What’s a few more bankers and members of the bush administration? A rounding error to be sure.

            1. So, “moral high ground” then.

              (golf clap)

            2. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:40PM|#
              “Another 100 million deaths post? I love those”

              Yep, you’ve proven to be a slimeball without the slightest hint of self-knowledge or shame.
              You have yet to even question the number (which is out of date and entirely too small), but simply glance at it and keep promoting it.
              Stalin at least admitted that one death is a tragedy; you can’t be bothered with that.

            3. If I was a fan of the Bush administration or bankers, you may have a point. Since I don’t, you’re a fucking idiot.

    3. Fake scandal: Check
      Fox News: Check
      Koch Brothers: Check
      What difference, at this point does it make: Check
      But BOOOSH: Incomplete

      Just mentioning Iraq is not enough for a proper Tu Quoque. Think Progress will be holding your next payment until this oversight is eliminated.

    4. You’re such a clown.

      1. Scratch that. A pathetic clown without a shred of decency or interest in finding out what happened.

        Jesus Christ, what is wrong with these people? I’d say left-wingers but I think this goes beyond ideology. They’re just…idiotic.

        AS, all you did was offer the usual vapid screeds and irrational talking points about Koch, Bush and Iraq.

        1. You are right. I don’t care. This scandal– the unfortunate result of an ambassador that was hands on in a poor and unstable country-/ is a snoozer and fake as a 3 dollar bill

          1. So go do something productive. Why the fuck are you wasting your life discussing something you admit you don’t care about?

            We get it. You don’t care about it.

            Why do you insist on fucking repeating yourself.

            1. “Why do you insist on fucking repeating yourself.”

              If slimeballs didn’t spend their time propagandizing, why, they might have to look in a mirror.

            2. Sociopaths don’t care. I think that is his point.

            3. “We get it. You don’t care about it.”

              Yes, but he really does care. He just doesn’t have an argument to stand on, so he’s throwing emotion laden ad hominem attacks (“pimping“, etc) around. It’s a desperate attempt to derail the argument and degenerate any logical discussion down to name calling.

          2. I try to be as tolerant and patient as possible with people that disagree with me, but at a certain level of hypocritical idiocy and utter lack of integrity I just find myself wishing I could give people cancer by concentrating really hard.

            Hey amsoc, go play with a plastic bag. The grown-ups are talking.

          3. You forgot to add the Matthews argument that ‘Stevens put himself in that position.’

          4. You do realize the situation was brought about by President Obama bombing the prior regime ?

    5. Who the fuck cares if the WH blamed this attack on a crappy videoTHE JEWS

      Yep. Still sounds stupid.

      You mean IT’S a scandal when 4 people die in an unstable country in North Africa and the Middle East?

      And why did they die? Couldn’t have had anything to do with smuggling weapons into Syria? Nah, it’s all about the video BAYBEE.

    6. Where the fuck was CBS investigative journalism when thousands were dying in Iraq?

      They were blaming Boooosh!

      My you have a convenient memory.

    7. Where the fuck was CBS investigative journalism when thousands were dying in Iraq?

      Where was Hillary?

      1. Where the fuck was CBS investigative journalism when thousands were dying in Iraq?

        Probably the same place it was when it was driving off Sharyl Attkisson: Dutifully advancing the goals of the state while cynically pretending to be objective.

    8. I know four people doesn’t seem like much of a scandal when compared to say… 100million, right?

  15. The reason why the media is so loath to cover this is because they are part of the scandal. There are two parts to the scandal; the administration’s incompetence and Obama’s flat out dereliction of duty as President when this thing happened and the appalling lying about it afterwards.

    It is expected that an administration that fucked up this badly would at first try to lie about it. Had it been any other administration, the “it was the video” lie would have been completely destroyed in the media in about a week and the administration would have ended up admitting the truth. The only reason that didn’t happen is because the entire media ensured that the administration’s lie was left unchallenged. They went so far as to have Candy Crowley stick her fat ass into the breach and interrupt Romney to insert the lie ensuring that the lie was believed.

  16. The Benghazi situation is a perfect excuse for people, en masse, to say “bring all US troops home and close all bases on foreign soil”, but instead most people, even on libertarian sites, are playing he said she said.

    Who cares just bring the damn troops and diplomats home and cut spending!

    1. I’m with you. Who the fuck needs half trillion dollar defense budgets. Maybe if you libertarians would stop voting for Republicans who raise defense spending and go to war at the drop of a hat to protect oil fields in the Middle East we wouldn’t have to tax people so much.

      1. I’ve never voted for a Republican (or Democrat) in my life. Last election I voted for Gary Johnson and in 2008 I almost wrote-in George Phillies or Steve Kubby but ended up leaving it blank. I also voted for a Constitution Party candidate for Sheriff because he opposed the War on Drugs.

      2. stop voting for Republicans who raise defense spending

        The Obama administration blamed the success of the attack on republicans cuz they cut defense spending.

        Fake scandal with an agenda indeed.

      3. I’ve never voted for Republicans. How about you stop voting for people who bomb wedding parties and execute American citizens?

      4. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:19PM|#
        …”Maybe if you libertarians would stop voting for Republicans who raise defense spending”…

        Maybe if socialist slimeballs stopped lying…
        Maybe if socialist slimeballs stopped murdering people…
        OK, you got one lie in, I got two facts.

      5. american socialist:

        Maybe if you libertarians would stop voting for Republicans who raise defense spending and go to war at the drop of a hat to protect oil fields in the Middle East we wouldn’t have to tax people so much.

        It’s funny when you pigeon hole libertarians into the republican camp, especially when you go out of your way to defend democrats. Concern troll.

        If you didn’t notice, we’ve had a democrat president, who started his term with a democrat-controlled congress. I don’t remember the use of that perfect moment to dismantle to military industrial complex.

        All we got for that was Obamacare.

        But, go ahead, let’s pretend that democrats are out to take down the military industrial complex.

        1. What’s the military budget now versus what it was in 2009. Obama is presiding over one of the fastest decreases in military spending in post-war history. One of the primary expenditures is dedicated to the withdrawal of u.s. Troops in Afghanistan. Happy about that?

          I’m not saying all Democrats are out to take down the military industrial complex just that they are far better than most Republicans. Is it ok with you that I’m satisfied with my vote for Obama over John McCain, a man who would have kept u.s. Troops in Iraq until cow calfing time? Why would someone like you vote for a Republican when they keep proposing to raise u.s. Military budgets. You’re right– we should get out of the business of military intervention– so o.k., why not start supporting people like Dennis kucinich?

          1. Why would someone like you vote for a Republican when they keep proposing to raise u.s. Military budgets

            Again you’re accusing people of voting for Republicans when you know nothing about them.

            and there’s a difference between cutting spending and spending at a slower rate, and drones are cheaper than soldiers. America is no less aggressive than it was ten years ago.

          2. “What’s the military budget now versus what it was in 2009.”

            As a percentage of GDP, the US military budget has indeed dropped from where it was in 2009. On the other hand it’s far larger than it ever was under Reagan or even under George W Bush’s first term.

            http://www.sdvfp.org/wordpress…..yspend.gif

    2. It’s kind of a big deal when the government lies NewBo. Especially when those lies are used to justify censorship.

      The Benghazi situation is a perfect excuse for people, en masse, to say “bring all US troops home and close all bases on foreign soil”

      Um. Nope. It was an attack on an embassy. If anything this an argument for more troops at embassies in dangerous places. NewBo really needs to think this through better.

      1. No, it was not an attack on an embassy, it was an attack on a CIA facility that was promoted as a consulate.

        Consulate and embassies are different.

        Under international rules governing diplomatic installations Embassies get to have their own country’s troops as guards.

        Consulates that are separate from embassies have to rely on the host countries police and security services plus hired local private security.

        1. Touche. But there were still mob-attacks on American embassies at the time. It still demonstrates the need for troops that these facilities.

        2. The fact is that the Ambassador Stevens was either misled about the likelihood of violence during his visit to Benghazi or underestimated the threats himself.

          Either way he was woefully under-protected for such a visit.

          Mind you, it’s bad form to visit “your friends” (one story has it that he was actually in town to open a new American funded wing at the local hospital) surrounded by armed force. But it’s also prudent to have reinforcements waiting out of sight if things go wrong.

          I really do believe that the people really do have a right to know who made the decision to have him in Benghazi with so small a security team even if he only wanted to take a handful of guards to the hospital that day.

      2. America’s interventionist foreign policy is nothing but lies.

        Embassies cost money to run and with modern technology there’s no excuse to have them anymore, and if an American gets in trouble somewhere else it should be their problem not the problem of American taxpayers who haven’t left US soil.

        I’m an American who pays taxes and is forced to pay them with the ever skrinking American Dollar and you’re a Canadian so my wallet finds it offensive that you want to strain it more for your psychopathic Hollywood/video game-influenced foreign policy views especially when you’re not even in the same country as me.

        And i’m not a black multi-millionaire under 40 so I don’t know why you called me a NewBo.

        1. *shrinking

  17. Ballyhoo!

    The optics of politically motivated gun owners threatening the lives of other citizens over their business activity will likely prove off-putting to a lot of Americans, especially given wide-ranging concerns about the armed standoff between government agents and rancher Cliven Bundy in Nevada over grazing rights and fees. Armed militiamen are still patrolling Bunkerville, Nev., after Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid called them “domestic terrorists.”

    Which is why they will beat this drum mercilessly for days.

    Surprisingly, they add this genteel aside:

    But fears that smart guns will lead to more gun ownership restrictions aren’t completely unfounded, either.

    Pffft, what a bunch of worry warts.

    If some dope wants a gun which will more likely than not be inoperable when he needs it most, I have no objection.

    1. The German-made Armatix iP1 won’t fire unless it’s in proximity of a special watch, thus making it useless if stolen.

      Unless you steal the gun WITHOUT stealing the watch, you mean.

      Armed militiamen are still patrolling Bunkerville, Nev., after Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid called them “domestic terrorists.”

      What? Were they supposed to disperse to the four winds after Lord Harry denounced the peasants as heretics, I mean, terrorists?

    2. “That’s the antithesis of everything that we pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment people should be,” he said. “You are not supposed to say a gun should be prohibited. Then you are being no different than the anti-gun people who say an AR-15 should be prohibited.”

      Apparently criticizing a vendor for his choice in wares is no different than using the violence of the state to strip people of their means to defense. Good reminder of the first problem of politics, namely that even when people are on your side, they’re almost always dumb.

      The optics of politically motivated gun owners threatening the lives of other citizens over their business activity will likely prove off-putting to a lot of Americans

      No doubt reasonable Americans will stay up nights because a business owner claims that some whackadoo made an anonymous death threat against him. I still stay up nights worrying about that death threat that Hank Aaron received 40 years ago, and this triggers those same terrible memories and makes me think there’s some racial angle here. Outside of those two cases, whoever heard of anyone making a death threat over something trivial?

      1. Anybody who has ever owned a car with a “smart key” has immediate and personal experience with how unreliable devices that rely on radio signals or NFC can be even when working as intended. The other versions I’ve heard of all use biometrics, another technology which is notoriously unreliable in most consumer applications. Hence why your laptop and your phone have regular password backups for when the facial recognition or fingerprint scanner doesn’t work.

        I cannot imagine why on earth someone would actually want to purchase a “smart gun” unless they wanted to hack it or didn’t actually want a gun in the first place. People concerned with gun safety will safely store regular guns; people who would leave a loaded Sig next to their homicidal teenager’s Haldol aren’t going to have the presence of mind to go out and buy a “smart gun” anyway.

        The proof, really, is in the pudding; how many police departments or militaries use smart guns? Not a single one. They’re too unreliable.

        What’s being lost in the discussions about people flipping out on this dude is that the New Jersey law mandates smart guns in NJ as soon as any come on the market ANYWHERE in the US. So if some dude in Wakaduckgut, Alaska decides to sell a smart gun, all of New Jersey suddenly is required to use them or nothing at all. Unless they’re the police, of course.

  18. Routinely it takes about five seconds to debunk nick gillespie’s right wing obsessions. This time it took 4.

    http://mediamatters.org/mobile…..for/199077

    Mrs. attkinson, they have a job waiting for you at breitbart.com where you can join the rest of the staff and conduct investigative journalism on how the Secretary of Defense is a Hamas fellow traveller. There ‘s good money involved in confirming the biases of right wing loons

    1. Routinely it takes progs about 10 posts to go tu quoque and ad hominem. This time it took almost 50. You’re slipping.

      1. Did you read the article or does your head explode when you check out websites that don ‘t confirm your biases.

        1. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:26PM|#
          “Did you read the article or does your head explode when you check out websites that don ‘t confirm your biases.”

          Among the dumpth spread by slimeball this morning, this is near the bottom.
          We get that which ‘dont’ confirm our biases’ in gallon quantities from the time we get up until late at night.
          Slimeball here heard about the firts chapter of Atlas Shrugged from a drunken uncle at a family dinner and now he knows all about libertarianism.
          Just ask him!

          1. No… I read the first 350-or so pages before the turgidity enforced my insomnia. What was the ending–somewhere around 1,200 long pages?Does Dagny get humped up the butt by James again? Just fill me in about the sex parts. Thanks,

        2. Speaking of confirmation biases, mediamatters.org…

        3. Did you read the article or does your head explode when you check out websites that don ‘t confirm your biases.

          Clearly self-awareness isn’t your strong suit, dumbass–just like basic math.

        4. Nothing is funnier than a proggie dipshit stomping its precious little feet when no one wants to read the garbage spewing out out of mediamatters.

    2. Because when I think of Nick Gillespie, right wing obsession is what comes immediately to mind.

      1. Ha!

        Yeah, Maybe this troll is really trying to beef up Gillespie’s right wing cred!

      2. He sounds like every fucking right-winger i have ever met who self-righteously claims that he isn’t a conservative. Just a little more bitchy.

        1. But the conservatives here often denounce him for not being a conservative.

          How do you imagine he’s conservative?

          Opposed Iraq.
          Opposes our continued presence in Afghanistan.
          Has been on the record in favor of gay marriage, open borders, drug legalization, and abortion–all for more than a decade!

          Are you saying he’s a conservative just because he’s critical of Obama?

          During the Bush Administration, he was accused of being a liberal.

          Libertarians are always critical of the emperor–no matter who’s sitting on the throne. You think he goes from being liberal to conservative based on the party of the emperor?

          Take off your partisan glasses.

          1. Ken

            “Are you saying he’s a conservative just because he’s critical of Obama?”

            No Ken, opposing “The Enlightened One” makes him a racist.

            Although I suppose he could mean racist conservative and just left off racist because he considers it a given.

          2. Take off your partisan glasses.

            Those aren’t glasses, Ken…

        2. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:30PM|#
          “He sounds like every fucking right-winger i have ever met who self-righteously claims that he isn’t a conservative.”

          You sound like every slimy proggy I’ve ever met, except dumber than most.

          1. Is American Socialist Tony?

            It could be. You never know because socialists all sound alike to me.

        3. He sounds like every fucking right-winger i have ever met who self-righteously claims that he isn’t a conservative.

          If he says his isn’t then he must be.

          Methinks that all who disagree with you are THEM, while all who agree are US. Your team spirit is showing.

        4. Bitchy? Sexist pig.

        5. He sounds like every fucking right-winger i have ever met

          And you sound like every fucking left-winger I’ve ever met–still bitter over not getting to fuck the head cheerleader/starting quarterback in high school.

          Stop trying to make the rest of us pay for your daddy issues, loser.

        6. You should change your handle to American Asshole because it’s obviously the only thing you have in life.

          Your poor parents.

    3. Methinks that progressives do not know what “debunk” means, or they just deploy it hoping that their reader doesn’t know what it means. So the Rhodes email is “debunked” because it doesn’t reveal anything that Media Matters didn’t already know? That would be “confirmation” not “debunking.” And the Senate Intelligence Committee, the one controlled by TEAM Blue? Of course, you can expect nothing but honesty where TEAM is concerned.

      1. Yeah as opposed to the Star Chamber being run by Rep. Issa.

        1. Sense motherfucker. Can you make it?

        2. I’m sorry, I’m sure in your mind you wrote something witty and biting. All I got from was that you’re an idiot wearing a bicycle helmet flipping his juice box and fingerpaint set over.

      2. I was about to write this very post. Proggies are going nuts and now they can’t think anymore. Under pressure, their thought processes are short-circuiting such that they leap very prematurely to ‘debunked’, even though no debunking took place. MediaMatter’s wanton ignorance does not a debunking make.

    4. Yup.

      Media Matters. The news site where all socialist go to get their unbiased talking points about Fox.

      HaHaHaHaHa.

      I find it hard to believe that people like you have absolutely no shame. None at all. No self respect whatsoever.

      I once thought it was because of internet anonymity but have come to realize that you people are really that stupid and would do and say most of the same even using your real names.

      1. Media Matters is a fact checking site.

        They link to a video of some wingnut lying about something then they link to a serious news source proving said crazy-fuck was lying.

        There is no original content there.

        1. Media Matters is a fact checking site.

          Let it never be said shreek doesn’t have a sense of humor. The is one of the funniest things ever posted here.

        2. Palin’s Buttplug|5.3.14 @ 12:47PM|#
          “Media Matters is a fact checking site.”

          Shreek is a lie-generating site.

        3. Buttplug you are proof that America’s biggest problem isn’t that Obama is President, it’s that so many Americans are stupid enough to have voted for him twice.

          So no original content means Media Matters is a “fact checking” site but no original content means Drudge is a right wing hate monger racist war on women loving children starver who wants poor people without insurance to die in the streets from dirty water and poisoned air as the temperature from global warming heats the concrete.

          I get it now.

          There is also no original content between your ears is there ?

        4. Media Matters is a fact checking site.

          Yep. Checking facts to make certain they conform with Revolutionary Truth.

        5. fact checking site…and you said that with a straight face.

    5. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Your citation is fucking Media Matters. Yeah, hell of an objective source you’re rolling out there.

      Media matters is a Democratic propaganda organism. Eric Boehlert and Oliver Willis are two of the most vile and sickening people in modern politics, but if they say it American Socialist will mindlessly believe it is so.

    6. Also, Sharyl Atkisson was a highly respected reporter who suddenly became a slobbering wingnut when she criticized The One and began reporting on subjects detrimental to the Democratic party.

      The fact that you can look at that and, with neither decency nor shame, ignore the obvious fact that people who disagree with the Democratic Party are essentially being blacklisted by the media is staggering.

      Let’s be honest. The only reason progressives had a problem with Joseph McCarthy is because he went after the wrong people. If he’d gone after right wingers, you sniveling narcissists would be advocating for a statute in his honor.

      1. you sniveling narcissists would be advocating for a statute in his honor.

        Advocating? Hell, they would have already built one. FDR put people in concentration camps based on their race, and they worship the fucker.

      2. “Highly respected”? By who?

        She is a fucking Vaxxer.

        1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharyl_Attkisson

          Attkisson received an Investigative Reporters and Editors (I.R.E.) Finalist award for Dangerous Drugs in 2000. In 2001, Attkisson received an Investigative Emmy Award nomination for Firestone Tire Fiasco from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences. … That same year, Attkisson won a 2002 Emmy Award for her Investigative Journalism about the American Red Cross. … Attkisson was part of the CBS News team that received RTNDA-Edward R. Murrow Awards in 2005 for Overall Excellence.

          … Attkisson was part of the CBS News team that received RTNDA-Edward R. Murrow Awards in 2008 for Overall Excellence. During the George W. Bush administration she exposed funding problems and in 2008 discovered that Hillary Clinton’s claim that she dodged sniper fire in Bosnia was unfounded. In 2009, Attkisson won an Investigative Emmy Award for Business and Financial Reporting for her exclusive reports on the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the bank bailout.

          That same year [2010], Attkisson received an Emmy Award nomination for her investigations into members of Congress, and she also received a 2010 Emmy Award nomination for her investigation into waste of tax dollars. In July 2011, Attkisson was nominated for an Emmy Award for her Follow the Money investigations into Congressional travel to the Copenhagen climate summit, and problems with aid to Haiti earthquake victims.

          1. In 2012, CBS News accepted an Investigative Reporting Award given to Attkisson’s reporting on ATF’s Fast and Furious gunwalker controversy. The award was from Accuracy in Media, an American, non-profit news media watchdog group, and was presented at a Conservative Political Action Conference.[19] In June 2012, Attkisson’s investigative reporting for the Gunwalker story also won the CBS Evening News the Radio and Television News Directors Association’s National Edward R. Murrow Award for Excellence in Video Investigative Reporting. …Additionally, in July 2012, Attkisson’s Gunwalker: Fast and Furious reporting received an Emmy Award nomination for Outstanding Investigative Journalism.[21]

            She’s won multiple Emmys and other press awards, some of which for her critical reporting on the Bush administration. Sounds “highly respected” to me.

            1. Yes, Shrike resorts to ad hominem. Shocking. I guess we won’t have to hear about his pimping of Bill Maher any longer – an anti-vaxxer himself.

            2. No Peabody or Pulitzer Awards?

              1. Palin’s Buttplug|5.3.14 @ 6:57PM|#
                “No Peabody or Pulitzer Awards?”

                PUSH those goalposts, shreek!

              2. Palin’s Buttplug:

                No Peabody or Pulitzer Awards?

                The Pulitzer Prize:

                Only published reports and photographs by United States-based newspapers or daily news organizations are eligible for the journalism prize.

                If you’re going to move the goal posts, why not move them somewhere impossible? That’s the spirit!

              3. That was fucking weak.

              4. No. Your mom’s hard hitting series on sucking cock was really well researched.

    7. Mediamatters.

      Mediafuckingmatters?

      1. In response to Palin’s Buttplug.

        “Media Matters is a fact checking site.”

        Now it all makes sense why he’s such a putz.

        MM is a fact checking site as much as I have Viking blood in me.

        Palin. You can’t be this retarded.

        1. “Palin. You can’t be this retarded.”

          There’s a statement I’d never feel comfortable making. For several reasons.

        2. “Palin. You can’t be this retarded.”

          No, let’s face it he’s not really that stupid. He’s just throwing muck and seeing what sticks.

          It wouldn’t surprise me if he has more than on web sites he regularly posts to, and this is probably one of the toughest from his point of view.

  19. If we multiplied the amount of outrage that people have about the deaths of 4 people in Libya by 1,250 and applied it to the bush administration’s murder of 5,000 Americans in Iraq, we would have had George bush being drawn and quartered on the WH lawn. A happy thought indeed.

    1. You’re awfully vocal in your desire to annonuce how much you don’t give a fuck about htis.

    2. So your thought process is that if someone committed murder yesterday and got away with it, that someone who commits murder today should just get a free pass ?

      Do you actually get paid to post such stupidity or are you just an enthusiastic volunteer ?

    3. Update.

      But BOOSH: Check
      Call for the public execution of political opponents: Bonus Time, Baby!

      Your account will be credited with the agreed upon number of Victory Dollars immediately. You are free to redeem them for either Carbon Credits to the Party Approved provider of your choice or any of our fine selection of President Obama memorabilia. Alternately you may donate them all to our campaign to repeal the obvious blight on the fabric of America that is the 22nd amendment, which would be our choice and therefore will obviously be yours.

    4. I thought you didn’t care. By confirming what we already know, you are debunking yourself, according to Media Matters.

    5. Pretty sure Reason magazine lamented American deaths during the Iraq war and cover the lies of the Bush administration over the war from day one.

      And yes Nick (who you called a republican stooge) was editor and chief for Reason for the full duration.

    6. american socialist|5.3.14 @ 12:34PM|#
      “If we multiplied the amount of outrage that people have about the deaths…”

      Nothing compared to the one hundred million you promote, slimeball.

      1. Socialists caring about lives is rich. We all know they’re expendable to them and must serve the state.

        Slimeball for real. Honestly, AS, your arguing skills are weak. Very.

    7. If we multiplied the amount of outrage that people have about the deaths of 4 people in Libya by 1,250 and applied it to the bush administration’s murder of 5,000 Americans in Iraq, we would have had George bush being drawn and quartered on the WH lawn.

      Hillary voted for it. So did Biden. And Kerry, too. Nobody voted for any kind of Libyan intervention, much less Benghazi.

      Next.

    8. If we multiplied the amount of outrage that people have about the deaths of 4 people in Libya by 1,250 and applied it to the bush administration’s murder of 5,000 Americans in Iraq, we would have had George bush being drawn and quartered on the WH lawn. A happy thought indeed.

      And the socialist starts advocating the brutal torture and murder of political opponents.

      Shocking.

    9. And certainly no outrage about all the Americans killed in Afghanistan in the 3+ years after Bin Laden’s death, right, dumbass?

  20. The Jacket is apparently Not Talking with Nick right now. He’s trying to casually get away with this ‘Members Only’ thing and hope no one notices.

    1. He did stumble over his words a bit.

      Nick is weakened without the power of the Jacket.

      1. His hair starts falling out on Day 3. he will be begging for mercy soon.

  21. “There’s an effort to “contrversalize” reporting that might be damaging to certain interests, and its their (those interests) effort to make it appear as though legitimate lines of criticism and fair reporting are in fact somehow ‘controversial’, and by saying it often enough they’ve convinced people that somehow it is”

    This is a good point.

    No one on the left like the Tupla puppet here ever actually talks about the actual ‘lying’ part of Benghazi, or questions why the events took place = but takes issue with *questioning* itself.

    These are the people who ostensibly consider themselves champions of ‘free speech’ and ‘truth’, but will insist upon censorship and groupthink at the first possible criticism of their Favored Politico. They’ll even admit he lied! They do all the time, under the cynical, smug comment, that “everyone does it, stop pretending its not part of politics”…. (meanwhile reserving their stock outrage for BOOOSH in reserve). They don’t criticize any reporting about the story = they criticize people doing ‘the story’ AT ALL.

    1. they criticize people doing ‘the story’ AT ALL.

      Everything in the TEAM, nothing outside the TEAM, nothing against the TEAM.

    2. To disrupt the Narrative is a greater crime than any committed to advance the Narrative.

  22. A thought for the Independents =

    When it comes to taking on pretty Heavyweight guests, a la Wolfowitz et al = Why not bring in The Nick to do actual interviews?

    Because the Jacket never gets shook.

    Just a thought.

  23. Of all the Americans who have died in dangerous parts of the world in the past few years, including at embassies, Republicans care about exactly four. The outrage is, on its face, false.

    1. Yeah Republicans are awful, can we get back to the investigation of the response now?

    2. So lying about a video for weeks and trying to have it censored is totally cool, right? I mean if it pisses off Republicans, then it is by definition justified, right?

    3. Republicans care about exactly four. The outrage is, on its face, false.

      Democrats don’t seem to care about the ones who died in Afghanistan and Iraq since Obama took office either.

      So in fairness republicans care about four more American deaths then the Democrats.

      Anyway you are on a libertarian site talking about an interview between a former CBS journalist and Nick. Is it OK that they and those of us who comment here to care?

      Or should we take the Democrat’s path and not care simply because the Republicans might care?

    4. Tony|5.3.14 @ 1:15PM|#
      …”The outrage is, on its face, false.”…

      The misdirection is par for the course.

    5. “Tony|5.3.14 @ 1:15PM|#

      Of all the Americans who have died in dangerous parts of the world in the past few years, including at embassies, Republicans care about exactly four. The outrage is, on its face, false.”

      1) Republicans? Who here is a ‘republican’? Or is that your word for ‘anyone who isn’t a TEAM BLUE’ shoe-shine boy?

      2) and You Care. Really. You do. You care about ALL the dying and death and killing. Like the troops in Afghanistan you’re always moaning about, or the children in Pakistan killed by drones, or the…

      …wait, now that I think about it… I don’t ever hear you complaining about ‘War’ at all? That’s odd.

      What is it you DO care about, Tony? Besides TEAM?

    6. Tony’s ‘snap, snap look over here’ tactic makes its appearance.

      Psh!

      1. Tony’s ‘snap, snap look over here’ tactic makes its appearance.

        I would like to take this moment to remind everyone that Tony supported Obama’s intervention during the “Arab spring” right here at hit and run.

    7. None of Obama’s apologists can directly address the fact that he and members of his administration lied repeatedly before Congress, to the press, and to the American public in order to cover up a terrorist attack that occurred to close to the election for comfort. Not one. All these sockpuppets can do is throw out some tu quoques and blame someone who hasn’t been president for six years. It’s just pathetic. It kills me that these people vote.

      1. No one is covering up a terrorist attack.

        1. The Obama administration claimed the the attack was not a terrorist attack but a spontaneous protest gone bad.

          That is a cover up.

          I only mention this because it is obvious you are having trouble with the meaning of the words “cover up”

        2. Re: Peter Caca,

          The Obama administration did not want it known that it was a coordinated, well thought-out attack by an Al Qaeda-affiliated militia. That is why they spent several weeks talking about a video nobody watched. Now you may want to hide your head up your butt but the rest of us ain’t that committed to king Obama I “The Handsome”.

        3. No PB, it is way worse than that. The attack went on for 8 hours. No help was sent. This was so it could be reported as an isolated incident and not indicative of a policy failure. Obama sending in troops would have looked like Al Qaeda was back, of course it had never gone away and everyone knows that, but it wasn’t part of the election stance the Dems took.

          Troops were told to stand down to keep up the pretense. In other words, they sacrificed the 4 Americans. It was a blood sacrifice, in order to keep a charade going.

          That’s the scandal.

        4. Palin’s Buttplug|5.3.14 @ 4:18PM|#
          “No one is covering up a terrorist attack.”

          Yeah, since Obo and Hil have been busted, they can’t.

  24. Republicans care about exactly four. The outrage is, on its face, false.

    You’ll never get to be a real boy that way, Pinocchio.

    1. Lol! +1

  25. “Travon Martin gets shot and liberals go nuts. Meanwhile, millions of young black men’s lives are destroyed by Obama’s consistent refusal to consider reform of US Drug Laws. Therefore = all liberal angst over this one stupid kid getting shot isn’t just patently FALSE, it is moronic and pure theatre to distract from their blatant, systematic, institutionalized support of Racist policies which keep black people poor and subservient, and therefore reliable voters for government patronage systems”

    1. I think the real story of the Trayvon Martin affair is a brand new ethnicity was discovered – White Hispanic. Right now 100 PhD candidates are writing their dissertations on this discovery.

      1. Probably, but it’s not a complicated idea.

        If someone is Hispanic, but not obviously so and they do something that it outrageous to the Left then they are White.

        If someone is Hispanic, even remotely, and they do something that it outrageous to the Right then they are Hispanic. And the Right’s outrage is based on Racism, of course. And Right for this definition, is anybody who’s not distinctly on the Left.

  26. More important than Benghazi is the complete co-opting of the media by the political class. The media has never been more cozy with power interests and never has it failed so completely to do it’s primary job.

    The media/political/academic/celebrity/big business circle jerk is destroying us.

    1. This.

      It’s hard for me to imagine where the POTUS was caught red handed lying to the public, 4 weeks prior to an election, and the media simply ignores it.

      1. “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. If you like your insurance you can keep it.”

        Repeatedly. He’s lied and gotten away with it repeatedly. It’s not one case of the media being asleep at the wheel. As Attkisson points out, it is systematic.

        I wonder if the ghettoization of conservatives at FOX hasn’t contributed to the other networks feeling justified/able to promote Obama and Dems more openly because they can simply say it’s a fringe thing let FOX cover it.

        1. It absolutely has. The insidious thing is that a prog will trot out “See, the three networks, plus CNN, plus MSNBC all agree it’s a phony scandal. Consensus!”

          Honestly, I can only think of one way to make them honest.

          1. Shoot one every 15 minutes until they admit the error of their ways?

          2. “See, the three networks, plus CNN, plus MSNBC all agree it’s a phony scandal. Consensus!”

            Plus The Comedy Channel and HBO of course. There are more than a few people that consider Bill Maher and Jon Stewart as primary news sources.

        2. Fox’s unseriousness is a serious problem that exacerbates this dynamic.

          1. Agreed. Fox does nothing to help itself be taken seriously. I think it would be much harder to accuse Fox of bias if they avoided the human interest stories, outrage porn, and culture war hysterics.

            1. That’s what sells. From the Book Of Solo, Chapter 6:

              Look, I ain’t in this for your revolution, and I’m not in it for you, Princess. I expect to be well paid. I’m in it for the money.

            2. I think it’s a problem of style. Their style is so tacky. Those stories do sell but Fox should do really important and different reporting too like exploring the Favalas of Brazil or something.

          2. Fox News is no more unserious than the Big 3 network newses.

            And of course the younger generation gets most of its TV news from friggin’ Comedy Central, so I’m not sure unseriousness is a bad thing.

      2. There is a possibility once he retires the truth will come out. If that happens I think, not sure, but I think the press will turn on him as a pack, and be ruthless.

        I still think O will end up in jail.

    2. This does scare me. Is this going to end soon? Will the internet make it better? I think the internet hugely improved people’s perceptions and responses to the Bundy, Trayvon, and Newtown incidents. Could you imagine what would have happened in the bad old days?

    3. Lady Bertrum|5.3.14 @ 2:23PM|#
      “More important than Benghazi is the complete co-opting of the media by the political class.”

      Today, in the Chron, we have a Tom Toles cartoon depicting the GOP as the failed executioner in whatever state blew it.
      The intended ‘victim’ is “O-care!” doing jumping jacks.
      1) Toles is an idiot who is really dumb enough to think that even the reported ‘sign-ups’ constitute success.
      2) Toles is a liar who hopes others are that dumb.

      1. Anybody dumb enough to buy the Chron for any reason other than the coupons is dumb enough to trust the intellectual honesty of a Tom Toles cartoon.

        1. Hey! It keeps the coffee off the table top.

      2. Er, didn’t the executioner succeed?

    4. The media has never been more cozy with power interests and never has it failed so completely to do it’s primary job.

      I take it you weren’t around during the FDR administration?

      In actuality the MSM’s influence is lower than it’s ever been in the age of mass communications. To a large extent the Big 3 network news teams are not driving opinion, but rather catering to their audience, which is beginning to consist purely of old liberals — old conservatives having fled to Fox News and young people not watching traditional news.

      The main problem is that people are getting more and more gullible and dependent on government largesse as time goes on, and the professional politicos are getting better and better at exploiting that fact. That’s much harder to do if you’re not handing out free money. I have no doubt the GOP will get back on its feet soon, but it’s going to be the party of Huckabee (God, guns, and government checks), not the party of Ron Paul when it does.

    5. Also, journalism academia has moved away from prizing objectivity as the ultimate goal of journalism. This is a BFD that gets very little play even among critics of the MSM.

  27. OT

    So I’ve been thinking about Sterling. Actually, about Sterling’s side piece. I was thinking about why she decided to tape him and bait him into saying that shit. Doesn’t make any sense to burn her meal ticket. But then I thought it through.

    1. She’s 31, and the sugar daddy thing is probably losing its luster/she’s aging out of it.
    2. He’s 81, going to die soon. Apparently has cancer.
    3. When he dies, the money stops. Now maybe he claims she’s in the will, but she doesn’t believe that. Or worries she’ll get lawyered out of it. Or the bequest isn’t big enough.

    Now, the NBA is huge, and getting bigger. The shittiest franchise in the league sold for more then half a billion. So it’s something worth pursuing. Big time. It’s also unique in that it is an incredibly valuable asset that can, under the right circumstances, be forced onto the market. Unlike other big ticket items, you can’t just make someone sell it.

    So I think a secret billionaire or group groomed the woman, coached her, set Sterling up and ignited a PR nightmare that would force him to sell. They’re going to come out with ownership of an NBA team, he’s going to get a really big check, and she gets to retire from the mistress game and go live on a beach somewhere.

  28. If two year old news fresh from the press is what you’re seeking then you’re in luck because CBS has got you covered.

  29. I think it’s becoming more and more evident that we’re living in the swan song years of America. The dominant political parties are just flip sides of the same coin. The press might still be largely free, but it matters not if their corporate masters pull puppet strings and only allow an approved version of news to be delivered. The debt exceeds GDP, and the service on it is bigger now than the entire federal budget was not that many years ago. So many people are dropping out of the labor market that the unemployment rate is in free-fall, even as more Americans than ever are out of full-time work. It’s time to call a spade a spade. America has one foot in the grave and the other is about to come down on a banana peel.

    1. We could make a complex Venn diagram of the interconnectedness and overlapping interests of various media/political/business/celebrity/academic groups and individuals. This diagram would perfectly illustrate the group-think, consensus wisdom, and money interests of the most powerful people.

      This frequently unconscious dependency is smothering the rest of us.

    2. Nah. America will go through troubled times, which have not yet begun, and emerge stronger than ever.

      The desire to improve is greater there than anywhere else in the world. Granted, it has diminished greatly over the past 20 years. But, it is still there. It is still the most creative country ever to exist. IMO.

  30. Re: Peter Caca,

    Obama called it a terrorist attack immediately. He is untouchable.

    That’s a lie. He didn’t call this attack a terrorist attack. He was talking about terrorist attacks in general.

  31. Maybe if you libertarians would stop voting for Republicans who raise defense spending and go to war at the drop of a hat…

    Who are we supposed to vote for? Democrats who raise defense spending and go to war at the drop of a hat?

    Name a single “iner-circle” Democrat who has not voted to raise defense spending and for every single military intervention in the last forty years.

    The difference between military spending proposed by the two major parties amounts to rounding errors.

  32. Like a Twilight Zone episode, apparently Bengazi will NEVER go away —until, presumably, the GOP is in the WhiteHouse. It is an exception to the news cycles that normally carry away stories with a certain ebb and flow like the detritus of the sea. A story that will never die. Bengazi Everlasting.

    After all, there are no other problems vexing this country.

    1. Yes, it’s perfectly fine for the President of the United States to engage in a cover-up four weeks prior to an election…

      Why wouldn’t it be?

      It’s also perfectly fine for the media to not show any interest in such an event. I mean, why report the news when there is an election to win?

      1. It’s frustrating, isn’t it? Just imagine how many more tractors we could produce is these fake scandals would just go away.

        I mean, it’s not as important as Romney talking about the 47%…

    2. “After all, there are no other problems vexing this country.”

      You mean like Obo lying about his policies?
      IOWs, *this* problem repeated weekly?

    3. Like a Twilight Zone episode, apparently income inequality will NEVER go away —until, presumably, a Democrat is in the WhiteHouse. It is an exception to the news cycles that normally carry away stories with a certain ebb and flow like the detritus of the sea. A story that will never die. Income Inequality Everlasting.

      After all, there are no other problems vexing this country.

  33. 4 Americans died because the government ignored pleas for increased security in the face of mounting threats. But that’s not a scandal.

    If a group of racists lynched an raped a block girl, and a Republican governor insisted that it should be characterized as something other than a hate crime, will progressives not get outraged?

    What if 4 people died in a gas explosion and it was revealed the company ignored requests for safety inspections? Oh, fake scandal! Invented by right wingers!

    1. “black girl”

    2. The scandal is not “what happened” = the scandal is that the president and his entire administration knew exactly “what happened” and decided, for political reasons, to lie repeatedly about it and do whatever it took to cover up the lies, including destroying people’s careers and likely committing perjury in front of congress.

      1. Well Obama did say US involvement in the Arab Spring would produce nothing but love and puppies.

        It is scandalous that US involvement exposed the US to attack and emboldened and enabled terrorists and produced none of that love and none of those puppies that we were promised.

  34. Guess we’re at end of the thread. Go back and read AmerSoc and PB’s response to blatant lies by team blue. More lies. That is who we are up against the immoral positions they will take.

  35. …………. Well what do you want then?

    I want the decision makers to hang their head in shame over the fact that they didn’t lift a finger to try to save those 4 people.

    THEY LEFT THEM THERE TO DIE

    Our leaders have no sense of honor whatsoever. I have no expectation that they would ever even feel shame.
    I would settle for the public learning the truth.

    Maybe REASON could interview the top military and ask them how they feel about leaving people behind to die.

  36. It seems obvious some of you still harbor the delusion that we live in a free society governed by the consent of the governed.

    The key truth here is an old one:
    He who controls the past controls the future.
    He who controls the present controls the past.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.