The New York Times is taking heat today for some revisionist history on the Benghazi attacks. Four Americans, including our ambassador to Libya, died when the U.S. consulate in Benghazi came under siege on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and the Obama Administration abandoned them.
In a massive 7,000-word report, the Times declared that there is "no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault," which the paper asserted, "was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam."
This latest Times rewrite on Benghazi contradicts its prior reporting, and even the Obama Administration's belated admissions. Fox News reports that "sources who were on the ground that night" are blasting the New York Times' essay as "completely false."
Benghazi is a huge stain on the credibility of the Obama Administration, including the credibility of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. With speculation about 2016 growing every day, perhaps that is why the Times felt the urgent need to attempt to expunge the record.
By trying to resurrect the "blame the video" lie, perhaps the lefties at the New York Times thought they were doing Hillary Clinton a favor. Instead, they have only stirred up a hornet's nest. Congressional Republicans pushed back yesterday on the Sunday talk shows. Even one California Democrat conceded, "…the intelligence indicates that al-Qaeda was involved."
But if the New York Times wants to have this fight, bring it on. Let's empower a select committee to issue subpoenas and hold public hearings. No more stonewalling. Let's hear from the CIA and State Department witnesses who have been bullied into silence. Let's finally get the answers that the families of Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty deserve.