Posted on 01/01/2014 8:24:22 AM PST by raptor22
Benghazi: The attempt to rehabilitate Hillary Clinton begins as the New York Times revives the long-ago debunked "video clip" excuse for the well-planned Benghazi massacre while denying documented al-Qaida involvement.
These days it's all the news that is fit to be made up that graces the pages of the once-proud Gray Lady that has morphed from a self-proclaimed "newspaper of record" to the house organ for the Obama administration.
The latest example is a piece on the Benghazi terrorist attack of Sept. 10, 2010, titled, "A Deadly Mix in Benghazi." It resembles the infamous White House talking points — on steroids.
The Times tries to present a truth from a parallel universe that it claims is somewhere between the Obama administration's long-repeated claim that "the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand" and the version "favored by Republicans, (that) holds that (U.S. Ambassador Chris) Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by al-Qaida to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before."
Then, in a spasm of journalistic doublespeak, the Times proclaims "Benghazi was not infiltrated by al-Qaida, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
It will work. Can’t tell women anything.
Benghazi Ping
Seems the New York Times has shamed themselves one more time...
Under Hillary’s reign at State, we alienated our friends in Israel and Great Britain. We lost one of few Muslim countries that would play ball with us in Egypt. Libya got worse, Syria got worse. Iran continued its nuclear development. Russia and China became more antagonistic. Resurrect Hillary. Even the good Lord couldn’t do that.
"Enough of Benghazi, the NYT put that issue to bed".
How are they explaining that Egypt wants the Hildabeast up on criminal charges? Associating with the MB is frowned upon.
LOL
"Death is riding into town with armor"
I read on FR yesterday that a Chinese billionaire is exploring a purchase offer of the NYT. The paper business is awful—maybe it’s more a reward for propaganda performance than an investment?
Let’s say that during World War II, the American Secretary of State decided to give the Japanese government ten million dollars to pay for insecticide for the beautiful cherry trees. Would that be treason? What if the Japanese never bought insecticide, but instead used the money to purchase ammunition to kill Americans? Would the Secretary of State be guilty of treason? Would there be an expectation that the American Secretary of State should know that once that money was given to our enemy, he could no longer control its use? Would the Secretary of State be guilty of being stupid as well as of being a traitor? What if the President did it?
The paid Democrat liars at the New York Times wish that the Benghazi story would just go away. There is nothing good in that story for the Democrats, so why would the New York Times bring the story up and in a big way? To provide cover for Hillary Clinton? Please, let me debate Hillary Clinton when she says that the New York Times said the attack wasn’t Al Qaeda. I’d hang her with that very story. And how does saying it wasn’t Al Qaeda provide her any cover in a campaign? It doesn’t. There’s another reason why the paid Democrat liars are all of a sudden bringing this story back up for the purpose of claiming that Al Qaeda wasn’t involved in the murders of Americans in Benghazi. Treason is a hanging offense.
I assure you this: in Hillary Clinton's mind, as well as in the minds of most Democrats, every one of those things is an accomplishment.
If things get worse when they are running things, they simply re-define the terms "better" and "worse" and declare victory.
They're betting that when a nuclear bomb goes off in a major city, there'll be a Republican close enough to the disaster that all the blame can be dumped on. With the MSM and the universities in their pockets, they'll get away with it.
Liberalism is too big to fail. They actually believe this.
BENGHAZI PING
Where was the little islamist and what was he doing?
Senator should have responded to Hillary:
“The difference, Madame Secretary, is THE TRUTH!”
“And the American people and this Senate deserve and DEMAND THE TRUTH!”
“The difference, Madame Secretary, is that this was important enough for Susan Rice, The President, and YOU, TO LIE ABOUT SOME BOGUS VIDEO!”
“The difference, Madame Secretary, is that in spite of the fact nobody had any way of knowing how long the attack would last, and yet FORCES PREPARED TO EFFECT A RESCUE WERE ORDERED TO STAND DOWN!”
“Madame Secretary, because you come before this body, and arrogantly and loudly proclaim that you do not recognize what difference it makes, I DEMAND THAT YOU SUBMIT YOUR RESIGNATION, IMMEDIATELY!”
Benghazi Ping
Where was the little islamist and what was he doing?
####
He was recovering from the required events of his least favorite day: when he has to pretend that he supports the Military, attending ceremonies at the Pentagon and visiting Walter Reed patients.
He could not bear to be bothered with more ‘military’ occurrences.
“Take care of it,” he said, as he went off to his private quarters.
Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.
1. Ignore.
2. Lie, obfuscate, belittle.
3. Dismiss as old news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.