Posted on 12/31/2013 8:11:00 PM PST by servo1969
The New York Times had a reporter talking to attackers on the ground during the Benghazi attacks that killed four Americans in September of 2012, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, and may know the identity of some the murderers and perpetrators.
David Kirkpatrick, the Times reporter who wrote the story that forced the paper's Editorial page editor to defensively declare on Monday that it has not chosen to endorse Hillary Clinton for president in 2016, said that the paper had a reporter on the ground who was witnessing the attacks.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The reporter was probably CIA and coordinating the attack.
And all of this was happening and the Times come out with a report years after? What the hell is that?
Did it really take them this long to create the right story about the attack? Are they incompetent or are we just all idiots for even thinking that they are being truthful? Really...
Now why don’t I believe them?
Let me guess... the reporter had nothing to do with fueling the murders but that youtube video provoked a sudden fund and blood raising for global jihad independent of State Department foreign aid to terrorists.
Me think blaming the video was part of Obama’s fund raise terror plan from the beginning.
The Country’s greatest threat.
If they’re telling the truth, the “reporter” was most likely a hired stringer that wound up being part of the group carrying out the attack.
yeh right....
President Obama will soon get to the bottom of this.....
Operation: Protect Hillary is in full swing.
Bingo.
said that the paper had a reporter on the ground who was witnessing the attacks.
Probably had a reporter on the ground instigating the attacks.
He said he would NOT endorse Hillary in. The NY Times article.
The New York Times is going to run interference for Her Shrillness. A fish gotta swim, a bird gotta fly and all that.
Anyone remember the early, early claim of a camera across from the mission that captured the attack? Could that be the NYT reporter?
I mean how engaged could the enemy be with this “brave” reporter and wth could the enemy gain by yakking with him during an attack? Methinks the Times has entered themselves in a real public relations rodeo.
Show us that reporter’s FBI interrogation transcript.
Yep, he was giving the Al Queda Muslim terrorist attackers intel the whole time.
Andrew Rosenthal alleged that it is important to Republicans "that Al Qaeda orchestrated the attack" because they want to "tarnish Democratic candidates by making it seem as though" President Barack Obama "doesn’t take Al Qaeda seriously."
Inquiring minds posit far more than that, and Rosenthal knows it. His implausible theory belies an attempt to shut down debate on Beghazi.
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.