On Thursday's New Day on CNN, as a panel discussed the Republican National Convention, CNN political commentator Errol Louis suggested that "angry" convention crowds and their "mob chant" could put Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton "back in her sweet spot" so that she can argue that she is preferable in the White House in contrast with the "craziness" on the other side. For her part, CNN correspondent Maeve Reston declared that the conventon so far is appealing to the "Fox News crowd" by focusing on issues like Benghazi.
My 12-year-old son couldn't remember the phrase "take a walk down memory lane" last week, instead describing a stroll through "nostalgia road." I knew it would come in handy. Put on your hiking boots and join me for an educational trip down good ol' nostalgia road. It seems like yesterday when Champion of Wimmin Maureen Dowd, bemoaning the lack of sympathy for anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan, declared in The New York Times that "the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute."
On Wednesday's New Day, during a discussion of Chris Christie's speech at the Republican National Convention and audience reaction, CNN panel members used words like "vitriolic" and "pretty ugly" to describe the GOP gathering. Co-anchor Chris Cuomo warned that Republicans are helping Hillary Clinton by "going too far," and also worked in a rationalization of his claim from Tuesday that Clinton did not send classified information by email "in any real way." And there was also some jabbing at "the conservative media" for allegedly spreading misinformation through "repetition."
From the moment that Pat Smith concluded her Monday night speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC) about how her son was murdered in the 2012 Benghazi terror attack, MSNBC had their marching orders to annihilate, demean, and smear Smith for her attacks on Hillary Clinton that left the assembled cast of liberals confused at the “gross accusation” that’s “ruined” the entire night.
In a Thursday post, Talking Points Memo editor and publisher Josh Marshall previewed the Republican convention. He was especially upset that the first night of the convention reportedly will center on “a new rehashing and re-exploitation of the 2012 terror attack in Benghazi…The Benghazi 'scandal' itself has been a four year running gob of hate and derp sticky enough to grab on to it an almost limitless number of conspiracy theories, bogus hearings and almost all the residue 'stab in the back' revanchism available on the American hard right, which is quite a lot…It is also fundamentally based on a series of lies about what happened almost four years ago.”
No stranger to being the topic of discussion on the pages of NewsBusters, MSNBC writer and Rachel Maddow Show producer Steve Benen was at it again on Friday as he bemoaned the House Select Committee on Benghazi as the “longest congressional investigation in the history of the United States” despite even liberal sites like Politifact debunking this talking point.
On Tuesday's CNN Tonight, after CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin agreed with Michael Isikoff of Yahoo News that FBI director James Comey was right not to push for indicting Hillary Clinton, fellow guest and former supervisory federal prosecutor Marc Mukasey argued in favor of Clinton's indictment, recalling that prosecutors do not have to follow precedent like judges. Toobin got in a jab at congressional Republicans at the end of the segment as he derided them as "a bunch of incompetent publicity hounds" who "chased Secretary Clinton around a desk" while investigating the Benghazi attack.
In the wake of Congress's official report on the Benghazi massacre, the front page of the New York Times Wednesday eagerly absolved Hillary Clinton of any fault in the attack in Libya that killed four Americans: “Benghazi Panel Finds No Misdeeds by Clinton.” The paper’s inside-the-paper analysis by Mark Landler and Amy Chozick found further vindication, not addressing Hillary Clinton’s moral culpability in the attack but merely treating it as a partisan victory for the Democratic Party’s nominee, just one more hurdle to get past on the way to the presidency: “An 800-Page Report Down, and a Server of Emails to Go.”
Conservatives can’t stand Hillary Clinton, but do they have reasons for their antipathy? No, suggests pundit Paul Waldman, who indicates that detailed accusations about such matters as emails or Benghazi are mere pretext for the right’s “visceral loathing” of Hillary, which would be expressed more genuinely via sexist insults, or maybe primal screams.
In a Tuesday Post web piece, Waldman wrote, “Even those who long ago gave up hope in the absurd conspiracy theories swirling around Benghazi (like the idea that Clinton issued a ‘stand down’ order that directly led to the four deaths) now say that it’s the email server that demonstrates the true depths of her villainy. ‘She oughta be in jail! Because, you know, that email thing!’ they say (and Donald Trump says it too), which sounds a lot more like a substantive critique than ‘God I just hate that b-tch.’”
Making his latest appearance on the Fox Business Network (FBN), the Media Research Center’s News Analysis Director Tim Graham slammed the liberal media early Wednesday evening for using “the old Clinton playbook going back to 1992” in their reaction to the House Select Committee on Benghazi’s report and peddling Clinton talking points to absolve her of responsibility.
Wednesday on Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough finally got mad over the report released by the Select Committee on Benghazi. The report outlined the colossal failure of Hillary Clinton’s State Department for the death of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, in September 2012. Even Jon Meacham joined in the angry chorus as the two vehemently disagreed with Hillary Clinton’s position that “it’s time to move on.” According to Scarborough, Clinton “got it completely wrong.”
After the terrorist attack in Libya on the anniversary of 9-11 that left four Americans dead, the Obama administration at first falsely blamed the attack not on terrorism, but on a spontaneous mob erupting about a film on YouTube portraying the Prophet Muhammed. The White House’s story about the video, put out on all five Sunday talk shows by then-U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, was later discredited, a fact that reluctantly filtered out into the media, even the New York Times. But apparently some Times journalists still haven’t gotten the news.