The wingnuts are pissed at the New York Times.
Down the Times’ Bengahzi Rabbit Hole
Nitpicking over which jihadists did what lets the Obama administration evade the real questions.
By Andrew C. McCarthy | National Review | January 4, 2014
So Andrew McCarthy takes another crack at BENGHAZI!!1!! The Republican obsession is harder to kill than a vampire, although David Kirkpatrick’s in depth reporting comes close to driving the stake. Months of investigation in Benghazi revealed the violence came about spontaneously, as much a response to the Innocence of Muslims video as anything else. Dozens of young men from a number of militias participated in it. In short, it was a street riot, with armaments. But that sort of thing doesn’t really stoke the fear of mastermind Musselmen in America’s quaking hearts, does it? So McCarthy will do what he can to revive the menace of it all.
Of course, if it had happened in Chicago that would have been alright too. Andy would have called for better Stand Your Ground laws and the rollback of affirmative action. But since it all went down in Libya he’s got to work a different angle. Try a little something else. Anti-Americanism. Mass murder. Conspiracy. Jihad.
What was the commander-in-chief of the United States armed forces doing through the night of September 11, 2012, while he knew Americans were under jihadist siege in Libya?
Then he calls aloud: Hillary Clinton! And Vince Foster rolls over in his grave.
The Times report is a labor of love in the service of President Obama and, in particular, the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign ramp-up. Former secretary of state Clinton, of course, was a key architect of Obama’s Libya policy.
Also Muslims. And terrorists.
She was also chiefly responsible for the protection of American personnel in that country, including our murdered ambassador, J. Christopher Stevens, and the three other Americans killed by Muslim terrorists…
It’s a horror film that sells itself. The only thing missing is the buttered popcorn. Well, a little popcorn and the slightest bit of anything that refutes Kirkpatrick’s reporting…
…why do I say, “Mission Accomplished”? Because the objective of Kirkpatrick’s novella is not to persuade; it is to shrink the parameters of newsworthy inquiry to a punctilious debate over nonsense: The cockamamie trailer and the dizzying jihadist org chart.
Cocklefish and bodskins! You’re screwing it up! I laughed so hard at this paragraph, then I stopped reading. I wonder why he didn’t just yell poopyhead.