The question on the minds of many of us on the right was whether or not the mainstream media would even cover the Benghazi hearing. Would only FoxNews, Jake Tapper at CNN and
Sharyl Attkisson at CBS report the story? In the previous post I mentioned that the New York Times had actually written a balanced article on the hearing. Now from the Washington Post;
But in expanding the narrative of the intensely politicized episode, the witnesses raised fresh questions about whether then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and her deputies were sufficiently engaged in assessing the security posture of diplomatic posts last year.
Speaking before the panel, they also reiterated criticism of the administration’s initial reluctance to describe the attacks as premeditated terrorist acts. The Libyan government had labeled the attacks a terrorist assault, and the absence of similar descriptions from the United States made it more difficult for Libyan officials to assist the FBI’s investigation of the incident, according to the former deputy chief of the U.S. mission in Libya....
...Hicks, a 22-year veteran of the department, said senior U.S. leaders, including President Obama and Clinton, lauded his performance during the crisis. After he questioned why Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, had delivered talking points that linked the attack to a demonstration, his superiors turned on him, Hicks testified. He specifically alleged that Clinton counselor Cheryl Mills and Assistant Secretary of State Elizabeth Jones criticized him harshly.
Early in the hearing, Hicks delivered a detailed account of the events of that night, keeping spectators in the crowded hearing room riveted.
Not a good day for Obama!
No comments:
Post a Comment