#Benghazi — There are still a few genuine reporters left
**Posted by Phineas
The dead would like answers, too.
Some of you may recall that I’ve in the past praised Sharyl Attkisson of CBS for her work on the Fast and Furious scandal. For a long time, she was almost the only MSM reporter asking serious questions about what happened in that “felony stupid” fiasco
Sharyl’s also been digging into the massacre at our consulate in Benghazi last September 11th, in which our ambassador and three other Americans died at the hands of Al Qaeda-aligned terrorists. While she’s had plenty of questions for the White House, the most transparent administration ever has given no answers. Frustrated with the stonewalling, Attkisson yesterday took to Twitter to ask her questions before the public. Here are is a series of particular interest to me:
A Benghazi victim’s family member stated that Mrs. Clinton told him she would find and arrest whoever made the anti-Islam video. ..
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) January 22, 2013
Remember that guy who was rousted out of his home by the LA Sheriffs in the dark of the night because he had the temerity to exercise his right to free speech? (Please, the parole violation was just a fig leaf of an excuse, if that.) That’s who Attkisson is talking about.
To continue:
. Is this accurate? If so, what was Mrs. Clinton’s understanding at the time of what would be the grounds for arrest?..
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) January 22, 2013
…and…
The Administration is reported to have asked that the anti-Islamist YouTube video initially blamed in Benghazi be removed from YouTube…
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) January 22, 2013
Love this next one:
.. If true, what is the Administration’s view regarding other videos or future material that it may wish were not published, but are legal?
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) January 22, 2013
And finally…
What is the Administration’s criteria in general for requesting removal of a YouTube or other Internet video?
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) January 22, 2013
Naturally, the mooks of Chicago-on-the-Potomac have refused to answer any of these or Attkisson’s other questions.
Secretary Clinton is scheduled to testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee today on the Benghazi massacre… assuming she doesn’t have another concussion. I would right a fat check to any congressman on the committee who asked Clinton these questions, refused to let her dodge answering, and demanded to know how, in her opinion, the video maker’s arrest and imprisonment comports with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and his natural right of free speech. (1)
Meanwhile, I’ll continue hoping for more real reporters like Sharyl Attkisson, instead of the progressive cheering section that comprises most of the MSM. (Not that I’ll hold my breath; none of these questions are difficult to think of. The media’s shame is that there are so few willing to ask them.)
via Ace, who has a great post on “old school journalism.”
Footnote:
(1) Again, don’t try to tell me this was all over a parole violation. If you believe that, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you.
UPDATE: Clinton has begun her opening statement — no mention of the video maker’s arrest. As Bryan Preston concludes, it’s either “stunningly incomplete, if not blatantly dishonest.”
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
Categories: Benghazi, Journalism, Libya, Media Watch, Scandals, State Department
….another “pretty in pink” appearance and testimony by Hillary. She’ll do anything to protect her “political viability.” Bet on it.
by Tango on Jan 23, 2013 at 11:01 am
There will be enough material come from these hearings that, coupled with Shrillary’s earlier statements on the Benghazi attacks, will make for some very damaging campign ads. What she says from now on makes no difference; she has already been trapped by her own words. To this day, it turns the stomach to recall her standing within “slapping distance” of those four flag-draped coffins yammering about “an internet videooooooo.”
by Drew the Infidel on Jan 23, 2013 at 1:47 pm
Whoaaaa! Clinton didn’t do herself or her future presidential campaign any favors with her explosive “What difference, at this point, does it make?” tirade in front of the Senate in response to the suggestion she and Obama misled the American public (with the aid of the MSM of course).
Translation: “How dare you try to hold me or Obama responsible for any errors in judgement!” She set a new historical apogee today of arrogance for an U.S. administrative official!
by Tex on Jan 23, 2013 at 2:49 pm