When analyzing the Benghazi hearings, Shakespeare’s famous line from Hamlet, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”, seems to be playing out in front of our eyes.
I’d humbly add my own corollary, as well: “Methinks the Media doth protest too much, on behalf of the lady…”
That’s because, despite some tremendous revelations as to what actually transpired in Benghazi on 9/11/2012, the Media has decided upon their narrative and are sticking to it with their usual cultish zeal. Below, I’m including two examples of just how the Main Stream Media plans to portray these proceedings, for as long as they’re able.
The first is from NPR, that bastion of non-partisanship that we subsidize with our tax dollars. Does this look to you like a non-biased headline of an inquiry into American deaths and the apparent cover-up which followed?
“Do GOP’s Benghazi Charges
Harm Hillary Clinton In 2016?”
Yeah: that just SCREAMS “impartiality”, doesn’t it?
But that’s going to be the story, for as long as the Media can manage. Benghazi is to exclusively be about Hillary’s political viability in the next presidential election, rather than four Americans dying as a result of Barack Obama’s campaign narrative and his political viability leading up to the last one.
This was seen even more clearly in this clip from Democrat Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton of D.C., as she gave the DNC’s her view of the hearings:
In case you didn’t get all that, I’ll translate for you: “Will you Bitter Clingers stop with your insane Benghazi fetish already?? How many times do we have to tell you women-hating, right-wing nutjobs that there’s nothing to see here?!?”
But of course, there were new revelations which were learned, and the Dems most certainly have reason to be anxious about Hillary, since she figures in them prominently, albeit not flatteringly.
What’s new, Kessler points out, is Hicks’ testimony that he spoke directly with Hillary Clinton on the night of the attack and briefed her:
“So it is not new that there was no protest. That’s been officially well established. It is also not new that many officials knew it was a terrorist attack.
What is new is that Hicks has put a human face on previous reporting. He also disclosed he spoke directly to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton the night of the attack, presumably relaying his conclusions.”
Hey, that sounds suspiciously as if Hillary did, in fact, know what was happening that night, despite her blaming an obscure internet video three days later:
“This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with.
It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”
So the media has one aspect of this correct: this entire sordid tale is most assuredly political in nature. But they have the ‘when’ and the ‘who’ wrong: its ORIGIN was political, not its investigation. And it was HILLARY (along with Obama and who knows who else) who were the practitioners, not the Republicans conducting these hearings.
Charles Krauthammer did his usual spot-on job of summarizing the Leftist’s narrative here:
“…this didn’t start today, with Hillary as the lead candidate in the next election. It started in September, October, and November when there was still an election. Obama was the President; Hillary’s election in the future was never an issue.
So to pretend this is all about Hillary and her presidential campaign as Democrats are doing is preposterous.”
Benghazi is now, at the very least, an example of prioritizing political mendacity over the safety of our Libyan consulate. Lives were lost, trust has been squandered, and the last echoes of ‘Hope-N-Change’ now ring hollow with irony.
Or to paraphrase another famous Shakespearean line:
Two Heads are Better Than One 
To quote Fat Bastard in Austin Powers: “Even stink would say that stinks”.
We’re dealing with a subspecies of humanity that puts their election hopes OVER the lives of other Americans. I can hear them saying: “Well, those 4 are dead. Nothing we can do about it…….It would make no sense to ruin our election hopes now….”
Kind of like a President who PURPOSEFULLY inflicts inconvenience on the Citizenry to make a political football out of HIS sequestration.
Now WHO would ever try to inflict maximum pain and inconvenience on the citizenry, just for their own selfish pride & political gain?
Dude, get real: NO president has ever been that much of a narcissist.
😉
To your first point, though, yeah…I can hear them reason it out that way, after the fact. It’s just beyond my understanding how they’d risk everything BEFORE the attack, knowing the risks.
Maybe it’s a good thing I can’t understand it.
Anyway, keep trying to put this info in front of folks with whom you disagree, Pgh.
If we can have just ONE person “see the light”, it’ll be a good day.
I’m surprised they haven’t tried this line yet….”Okay, we lied, but everyone knew better than to believe us.”
Which is of course, not true either. I had a knock-down drag out argument with my idiot sister about Benghazi a couple of days after it happened. She actually believed It Was The Video.
Well, if she’s as big a lib as you insinuated earlier, than she was just believing what the Media was telling her: everyone from Candy Crowley to Chris “Permanently Drunk” Matthews repeated that line, whenever the subject was raised.
As I’ve mentioned previously, I was raised in Liberal Land. Thus, I do try to be patient with some of these folks, as they often don’t know any better, …sad as that is to say. They’ve been steeped in Liberalism for so long, it’s all they know. Plus, it has a culture that feeds it constantly.
You have to possess a certain level of common sense to see through the fairly obvious lies, and unfortunately such thinking is being stamped out at an early age in school.
Reason #4,519 as to why we homeschool.
Keep after her; perhaps she can be saved…?
😉
Well, I have five sisters, so I’ve probably groused about two of them. They’re both big on the free stuff, even though they have jobs. The other three lean more conservative, but they are all retired government bureaucrats, so that conservatism is not too deep. I should try harder to keep my mouth shut at family gatherings. 😉
You could always try to become overly fascinated in some benign, non-partisan activity, I suppose, and just redirect the conversation when necessary:
you know, like Macramé …
Heck, that may shut down conversation altogether!!
Low Information Journalist, have already anointed her King.
Pingback: How the Media covers a story: #Benghazi vs. Valerie Plame and Abu Ghraib | Two Heads are Better Than One
“Cultish zeal” – now that explains it. I’ve been searching for descriptors for it.
Wait, I know, she may be running for higher office so you cannot (I repeat) criticize her job performance. I think I got it.
JT: I’ll get used to these rules one day.
Well, I have often compared the zombie-like nature of the Press to a cult.
Upon reflection, that may be a bit harsh… towards the cult.
I mean, people DO leave and renounce cults, after all.
But who ever leaves the Press? No one.
And no, going into Democrat politics does NOT count…
JTR:
Eleanor Norton Clinton said, “…we had a SCATHING report, what are we doing back here?” Sorry, I can’t contain myself. Surreal in the 8th dimension,
Folks like Eleanor just make me roll my eyes.
There’s no thought in there: she and her ilk have been trained to repeat this blather, and she’ll oblige, until told what else to blather about next…
JTR: Heiress Hillary said, “It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”
Bravo, its about the only thing she said that made ANY sense.
Pingback: Two short videos on WHY the #Benghazi, #IRS, and #AP/Fox News scandals matter… | Two Heads are Better Than One