The American Spectator : Media Bias 101: Benghazi vs. Watergate and Iran-Contra

Text Size

Special Report

Media Bias 101: Benghazi vs. Watergate and Iran-Contra

By Paul Kengor on 11.2.12 @ 6:09AM

Who’d have thought that hyenas could turn into lambs.

Question: How is Benghazi different from Watergate and Iran-Contra? The obvious answer: the media. Liberal journalists turned Watergate and Iran-Contra into gigantic national scandals by their consistent, relentless pursuit of both stories; to the contrary, they are consistently, relentlessly ignoring Benghazi.

The media’s treatment of Watergate needs no explanation here. The press detested Richard Nixon unlike any modern president. Sure, the liberal media went after George W. Bush, but nothing like the way it attacked Richard Nixon. Liberals’ hatred of Nixon was pathological. It dated to Nixon’s work in exposing Alger Hiss. As Nixon would say at the end of his life, the Hiss-Chambers trial forever forged a legion of unwavering Nixon enemies on the left. I’m not saying that Richard Nixon was an angel, but if you want to understand Watergate, you need to understand the hatred of Nixon by the liberal media.

The media’s feelings about Ronald Reagan were not quite the same, but nasty nonetheless. Liberal journalists demonized Reagan, calling him everything from an idiot to a nuclear warmonger. They caricatured Reagan as a dawdling old fool who wanted to blow up the world and who disliked the homeless, the poor, minorities, and on and on. They blamed Ragan for everything from greed to AIDS. And they searched diligently for a Watergate-like scandal to run Reagan out of the White House, as they had Nixon.

The operative words are “searched diligently.” CBS, NBC, ABC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, NPR, and the usual suspects looked everywhere for something — gee, anything — to hurt Reagan. Being political partisans first and journalists second, they dug furiously for their Watergate. And they thought they had it in Iran-Contra.

It’s fascinating, however, to see how the Reagan team immediately reacted to the Iran-Contra allegations. The president and his attorney general wanted prompt and full disclosure. As soon as Attorney General Ed Meese learned of the situation, he brought it to President Reagan, and they together publicly disclosed the details to a hysterical media on November 25, 1986. They wanted to come clean immediately, to avoid even the slightest whiff of a cover up.

The media, however, was ferocious in its lack of charity and understanding, and ditto for its party, the Democrats, which ran Congress. In mere weeks, Lawrence Walsh, a former federal judge, was appointed Independent Counsel to determine whether the deal was illegal and which individuals should be prosecuted. For the press, the big question was the president’s personal knowledge and involvement: What did Reagan know?

The media wanted Ronald Reagan in handcuffs, and was relishing the prospect of prison terms for a whole host of Reagan officials — Cap Weinberger, Bud McFarlane, John Poindexter, Ollie North, to name just a few. They wanted blood. There was no way they were going to miss a Watergate opportunity for the Gipper.

Congressional Democrats scheduled dramatic hearings, broadcast all day long by the networks. The nation was riveted, especially by the sight of NSC figures like Col. North, testifying in his Marine uniform, and Admiral Poindexter, speaking slowly to glaring interrogators in between pauses to puff his pipe and to listen to whispers from his attorney Brendan Sullivan. The evening news broadcasts provided wall-to-wall coverage.

It was relentless. Bill Clark, one of Reagan’s closest aides in taking down the USSR, who by this time had returned to his ranch in California, told me about a trip he made to Washington that December 1986, after Iran-Contra broke. He was there for a ceremony honoring his previous work as secretary of the interior. Reporters didn’t give a damn about Clark’s work at interior. They came and hounded him about Iran-Contra. Wherever the president and his men went, they were tailed and peppered by aggressive reporters who ensured a constant stream of questions about Iran-Contra. It was unceasing — the complete opposite of what we’re seeing now with Obama and crew over Benghazi.

And think of how history would have been different if the media had run Reagan out of office: No Berlin Wall speech, no Washington or Moscow Summit, no INF Treaty, and surely no collapse of communism in 1989. Michael Dukakis would have probably won the presidency in 1988.

Here’s the big picture:

The way the Reagan team reacted to initial reports on Iran-Contra is precisely the opposite of how the Obama team has responded. But even more telling are the opposite media reactions. For Iran-Contra, the media refused to be satisfied with the initial response of Meese and Reagan. Liberal reporters went absolutely bonkers, all hands on deck, a full-court press to find incriminating information. Today, under Obama, it’s the exact opposite.

What we’re witnessing right now is how the media’s liberal bias truly works. Liberal journalists can be like men and women possessed when a Republican is in the Oval Office, but for a liberal Democrat, they are as compliant as lambs. Being political partisans first and journalists second, they are now silently complicit when faced with Obama’s scandal, one potentially more disturbing than Watergate and Iran-Contra combined. After all, Americans died in Benghazi.

For liberals in the media, however, corpses in Libya get in the way of their primary duty: getting Barack Obama reelected.

About the Author

Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He is author of the new book The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor. His other books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (128) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.2.12 @ 6:51AM

Paul,
our media has been labeled corupt..... That is way too soft a term. "Traitors" certainly comes to mind.

John Navratil| 11.2.12 @ 7:55AM

Ken,

In Britain, the papers are openly partisan. It's not a bad thing, per se. At the end of the day, the problem is people who vote their pocketbook by raiding mine, encouraged by the propaganda machine which our MSM has become.

The good news is that the MSM is steadily losing its influence. We'll measure their influence on Tuesday.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 9:05AM

The Great Uniter has finally finished the job that his predecessors started 50 Years Ago.

He has divided this Country right down the middle.

Divide and Conquer.

A House divided.........

I wonder what kind of Country the descendants of all of these White Liberals and these White Progressives will inherit, as more and more of America takes on the appearances of Haiti, Tijuana, and Calcutta? When Law and Order no longer exists, like Detroit, Chicago, Oakland, Camden, and Baltimore after the Sun goes down.

When their Children's Schools become Fort Apache.

And, when they need to PUSH A BUTTON for English.

If the African wins, then The Rubicon will have been crossed, and, as it was in Rome?

Our REPUBLIC will be forever gone.

Our Fool's Errand of trying to Civilize Savages, and Domesticate Wild Animals, will have come to its Logical Conclusion.

Like the Guy that was living with those Grizzlies, right up until they Killed him, and Ate him.

Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 11.2.12 @ 7:04PM

"Liberal journalists demonized Reagan"

But there were many Reagan Democrats who ignored the viscerality and contributed toReagan's winning 49 out of 50 states in '84.
It worked out better than Bush because Reagan was a better person and president than Bush-- either Bush.

Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 11.2.12 @ 7:46PM

But you are correct on Nixon, he inherited a bad situation from LBJ; there was nothing Nixon could do with it.

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.2.12 @ 4:25PM

Confucius say: .22 is answer to many illnesses. Stock up."

Drunken Sailor| 11.2.12 @ 5:06PM

Winchester says 30-30 even better. Stocked up.

Alan Third Party Voter Brooks | 11.2.12 @ 9:02PM

At any rate, even Reagan couldn't hit back right away against those who bombed the Marine barracks in Lebanon '83-- There was a retaliation, but it took a long time to arrange, many months.

C Smith | 11.2.12 @ 10:29AM

Frank Gaffney in a recent column in Townhall explains the dynamics and logistics of the media-complicit cover-up now known as "Benghazigate":

"The evidence suggests that the Obama administration has not simply been engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have now taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East. Starting in March 2011, when American diplomat Christopher Stevens was designated the liaison to the "opposition" in Libya, the Obama administration has been arming them, including jihadists like Abdelhakim Belhadj, the leader of the al Qaeda franchise known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group."
http://in-the-name-of-truth.bl.....mn-in.html

C Smith | 11.2.12 @ 11:23AM

Washington Post, Sunday, November 18, 1973: " People have got to know whether or not their President is a crook..." On November 6, 2012: " "People have got to know whether or not their President is a traitor..."

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 11:46AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 1:12PM

C Smith.............Gaffney is raising some questions for sure but who is the crook/traitor.

There are more players in this than the normal fools. Gun running you say I smell the work of the CIA.

Don't they have a base there ?

Rhoetus| 11.3.12 @ 11:39PM

Propagandists in cahoots with ObaMao.

bison cookie| 11.2.12 @ 7:00AM

WHITE HOUSE KNEW ABOUT LIBYA ATTACKS... Watch here: http://bwcentral.org/2012/10/w.....a-attacks/

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 9:08AM

It doesn't matter anymore.

Everyone who cares about such things, already knows that. As do the Democrats.

And they don't care.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.2.12 @ 9:58AM

I've been looking for the hints for where the contest is today, but I haven't found it yet. I'll be away for a while today, but I'll be back this afternoon.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:20AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

Is the Bangkok House in Dover?

Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.2.12 @ 2:01PM

I had looked there earlier, figuring it was the best spot.

The Bangkok House is in Wilmington. Off to Beirut.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 3:43PM

That's where it is.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 7:21AM

Hillary was right about Obama being unable to handle the 3:AM phone call, or the 3:PM phone call that involves protecting Americans. He must have been busy with his writers preparing for Letterman, the View, and the Las Vegas fundraisers. The MSM has failed miserably to investigate simple questions of:

Why did Obama fail to provide the requested security to our people in Libya?

Why didn't Obama convene the counterterrorism group during the attack to respond?

Why didn't Obama respond to the attack to help the Americans?

If Obama has a good explanation for his conduct, or lack of it, then why has he not told us?

You can bet that if the info helped his re-election campaign Obama and MSM would have splattered it across the tv screens, as they did with the Osama kill.

chuck| 11.2.12 @ 8:29AM

Hillary was unable to handle the call as well. She is in charge of the State Dept. The Ambassador serves under her. Extra security was requested, and denied. She is every bit as responsible as the empty chair.

She should have resigned, or been fired.

c. j. acworth| 11.2.12 @ 8:38AM

If Romney wins, the paper shredders will be working 24/7 at the DOJ (Fast & Furious, New Black Panthers) and State Dept. (Lybia), right up to Jan. 20.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 12:55PM

I agree Hillary is as bad if not worse. One good thing about email is the sender cannot control and delete the email received by the recipient. It seems Fox is getting emails from people at State, Defense, etc.
I do not think Hillary and Barry will get away with this. I am surprised that General Petraus, at the CIA, has not spoken out, unless he is leaking the emails, and will speak later.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 9:43AM

This is a magic trick........you have to watch the other hand.

In the end barry will be TEFLON.

Suzyqpie| 11.3.12 @ 10:45AM

Melanin is better than Teflon. Better than kavalar, better than anything.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:21AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

Rhoetus| 11.3.12 @ 11:41PM

Because he is callous, indifferent and has an agenda to subvert the constitution. Any questions?

Hardcard| 11.2.12 @ 7:40AM

Thank you Mr. Kengor !!!

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 6:59PM

Suckup.

SUBVET| 11.3.12 @ 8:35AM

Tim....you sound like Richard Gere in Pretty Women telling the store owner to use a "major suck up" because they were going to buy an "obscene" amount of clothes.

Stephie| 11.2.12 @ 8:11AM

Geraldo on FOX is defending the administration on it's handling of the Behghazi scandal.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 8:25AM

I understand that, but what about Jerry Rivers?

What is he saying?

KennesawJack| 11.2.12 @ 9:55AM

Now that you mention it, Tim, has anyone asked Jerry what he thinks of Obamarx's Israel policy? Would love to hear what the "please don't tell too many folks I'm Jewish" sycophant has to say.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:23AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

Maybe Jerry's at The Contest, and you can ask him?

Rhoetus| 11.3.12 @ 11:43PM

Looking for Geraldo's integrity is like looking for stuff in Capone's vault. ;-)

fmm| 11.4.12 @ 11:21AM

Geraldo's head is as empty as the Capone vault. If FOX were truly a factual news network, Geraldo would have been fired long ago.

Interested| 11.2.12 @ 8:23AM

In the future the hyphenated label for government scandals should be changed from "-gate" to "-ghazi " to signify lying government officials and media acquiescence.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 9:45AM

You mean like "false flags".

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:23AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

Interested?

R Martin| 11.2.12 @ 8:31AM

Reports of leftist media bias are about as newsworthy as stories of “Dog bites man”. I’m more amused than angered by the shallowness of the media, but I am bothered that so many people (voters) still seem to be influenced by them. Mr. Kengor cites Iran Contra/Benghazi as an example of the media political bias dichotomy, but I prefer Benghazi/Valarie Plame. Benghazi is a real story of government failure and personal incompetence on many levels, while Plame was a nonentity who simply became a vehicle for the media to froth over George W. Bush. The frenzy over one and the apathy toward the other is illuminating.

PolishKnight| 11.2.12 @ 10:02AM

A leftist policy wonk in DC tried to argue with me about the Plame incident. "Did you know that scooter libby was convicted of exposing an undercover CIA agent just to get us into a war with Iraq?" I asked him to put up $100 if that was true after we went to wiki to look it up. He immediately withdrew the claim!

So he was lying. And he knew it. He then changed the subject and launched on something else looking for something to stick. That's how they work.

This wasn't someone in the media though but an ordinary leftist. They are openly disingenuous. They get caught in a lie by someone, they change the subject, and then they try telling it to someone else. They live in a world of continuous outrage, OUTRAGE (ALL CAPS) that the world doesn't agree with their message of all these OUTRAGES which they know to be hot air.

For all of their talk about how evil "religion" is, and by "religion" they mean Christianity (since the other religions are in their special interest/privileges groups so they have to respect them), leftist/marxism is similar to a middle ages inquisition.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:24AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

Where were You, last Friday?

Both of ya, in fact.

R Martin| 11.2.12 @ 11:18AM

I went up to Kennebunk for a Halloween party and dressed as Paul Ryan--six pack abs muscle shirt and paper mask. Had a wonderful time pimping two pathetic gay guys who seemed not inclined to vote for me. There actualy are some Republicans up there.

R Martin| 11.2.12 @ 11:43AM

Forgot to add that I probably won't be in this week either, as we've got a bunch of flood refugees here and I'm pretty much on full time KP duty.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 11:48AM

Maybe during a break.

Good luck, and God Bless you for helping your friends.

Rhoetus| 11.3.12 @ 11:45PM

Exactly to the nth degree. Bravo!

gene| 11.2.12 @ 8:58AM

President Obama states he will make sure everyone knows what happened. However, that will take place after the Election. He has always known where he was and what he was doing and saying those first critical hours. He does not need a month long investigation to know the answer to that question and be open with U.S. citizens. He lied and people died and the media is ignoring it. But they may turn savagely after the election. The MSM are like that when it comes to "losers". They can be very savage and treasonous.

fmm| 11.4.12 @ 11:23AM

Bush did it.

PCC| 11.2.12 @ 9:26AM

I'm not a Benghazigate fanatic at all, and I also accept that people, even the president can make mistakes, but it is increasingly clear that the only logical explanation of the events surrounding the Benghazi disaster is that President Obama was in the room and personally made the decision to refuse support to the embattled Americans under attack in Benghazi.

No other conclusion fits the facts as we now know them, and all of the administration's subsequent words and actions lend credence to this conclusion.

Shame on the president for making that decision, and even more shame on him and those around him for lying about it.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 9:51AM

Anyone that thinks barry makes the decisions is a fool. He is just a front man and I bet when the dust settles he and the lesbo will walk.

Think big picture..............

KennesawJack| 11.2.12 @ 9:57AM

On this one, Vet, you might just be correct.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:28AM

What Jack means is: You're always wrong, but today, MAYBE, there's a one in a Million chance that you might finally be right for once.

Frankly, I'm shocked.

I thought that he was nicer than that.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 1:22PM

Tim....thanks brother for the props.

I usually don't partake in the contest because I never passed 5th grade....but have fun, I usually do reading all the entrys.

Got some talent here on TAS.

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 3:45PM

Every Entry is Appreciated.

Even the Stupid ones.

Join us.

Butch| 11.2.12 @ 1:59PM

Subvet, I expect that decision was made by President Valerie Jarrett. I understand she vetoed the Bin Laden raid twice before allowing it to happen. I agree with you: Jarrett is the boss, Axlerod is the mouthpiece, and Obama is just the front.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 4:50PM

Butch my friend I think it goes much deeper than that. The dancing queen and the rest of the morons are not smart enough to come out of the rain.

You see the players that were stearing the ship the last 4 years and know that they are not qualified to even take out the trash.

So who put them in..............?

They were put there to do the bidding of the family, their reward is to be taken care of after the other side assumes control.

Think big picture...........

Bob Grant| 11.2.12 @ 10:00AM

They say that nature abhors a vacuum and because king obummer believes he's above explaining his actions (or inactions) to his subjects, we must fill in the blanks ourselves.

So, yes, you are correct! The only possible explanation is obama ordered security forces to stand down. Understanding the basic Chain of Command, this is the only plausible explanation.

He could, of course, schedule a press conference and clear all of this up, or even cooperate with the congressional investigation, but why do that when you can just send Jay Carney or Susan Rice out there and give conflicting, confusing stories?

Besides, he's too busy on the stump gracing us with his wit..."Romnesia" WTF??

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 10:28AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

Stan Redmond| 11.2.12 @ 1:30PM

Valerie Jarret makes his decisions. And who knows where she gets her marching orders.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 4:52PM

Who Knows.......is on here ask him.

Rhoetus| 11.3.12 @ 11:49PM

Putin or George Soros?

Anthony| 11.2.12 @ 10:37AM

The defeat of Obozo on Tuesday will also be the final nail in the coffin for the leftist media who have lowered themselves to prostitutes.
That said, prostitutes earn their money the hard way, whereas the elite leftist media have besmirched their Constitutional obligations beyond repair, while sitting around the posh salons of media studios in fancy clothes with manicured nails.
It will take generations and men and women of superior talent and moral standing to restore the integrity of the media to their proper place in a Constitutional Republic.
In the mean time, they, like their leftists brothers and sisters, have pushed America to the edge of the abyss.
All these bastards need to go, starting with Obozo.

Who Knows?| 11.2.12 @ 10:59AM

Come on children, sing it again---

We are the world,…..

It’s an illusion that America has free elections, and that the president is the leader of the free world, congress makes laws, judges choose which ones are legal, on and on and on.

The media, in particular the mainstream (meaning the socialistic leftist “group’s on for dinner” crowd) of it, THEY are our true masters, and the “elected” humans are just their enforcers. So, when are “the people” going to recognize THIS, and can they even do anything about it?

C’mon man!

Do YOU see air?

People either know what they are doing, or not. I think the elite drivers of the MSM, our actual masters, couldn’t have become the top dogs they are, unless they are very aware and ruthless. Surely they know what they are doing, and NOT doing!

When (probably, IMHO) Obama wins, since Narcissus IS US ALL, including the MSM, one by one, the pressure will be too great for them to keep up the NOT doing---the race will be on, by some go-getters, to exploit Obama’s massive faux pas, especially Benghazi.

Don’t think, for a minute, they won’t enjoy the glory THEY will reap, using BHO as a foil. Narcissus DOES rule.

The MSM---it’s all about THEM.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 4:56PM

Who Knows ? wow I thought for a minute you had it...close but no clinton.

Bigger picture.......

Anthony| 11.2.12 @ 11:04AM

Many of us here at TAS observed Watergate and Iran- Contra as young adults or older. Mr Kengor is correct, the feeding frenzy by the media against both Nixon and Reagan was, by any objective standard, fueled by their fanatic leftist bias and hatred for anything R or conservative. That is an indisputable fact, don't even try to refute this, unless you're a troll.
Placing a 3rd rate burglary, and an honest but misguided attempt to free Americans, in juxtaposition to the death of 4 Americans, who begged for help, while Obozo and his cabinet watched in real time, is beyond comparison.
Had Benghazi happened under a R incumbent president with 3 weeks to go in a close election, it would be all over for him/her. It would have indeed been a 24/7 media frenzy, especially with Harry Reid as senate majority leader holding 3 hearings at a time. Daily press conferences would have been demanded, special prosecutors appointed, criminal charges alleged, and resignations would have been forthcoming in days.
If you doubt this, look how the media tried to use Bush's 25 year old DWI, exquisitely timed and exposed, days before the 2000 election to help get Gore elected. And of course, there was Dan Rather and the TANG sham.
This election goes way beyond the repudiation of Obozo and his extreme leftism; it goes to the heart of the entire rotten leftist apparatus.
All these bastards need to be defeated and removed. On Tuesday, we begin to reclaim America.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 1:33PM

Anthony.......your a smart guy you can see that it's the other sides turn.

We are being played like a fiddle while the beat goes on.....

RCV| 11.4.12 @ 11:50AM

And on Wednesday, Anthony, you get a little dose of reality.

cicero| 11.2.12 @ 11:13AM

Truth of the matter was that the 2 SEALS were ordered by their superiors to stand down - but they went in anyway, and rescued those they could, and died trying to do more. Truth is that one Gen. Ham ordered a rescue team in, after he was also told to stand down. He was relieved of duty, and the rescue was called off. If I know this, and am not an investigative reporter, why is this not front page stuff? It is out there, just not on the front page.

In America, in a saner time, the cavalry always, at least tried to, ride to the rescue. Have we sunken so low in such a short period of time? Will this country allow itself to be led into weakness and degeneracy, not to say cowardice? For shame...

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 11:49AM

The Contest is at TUESDAY's Civil War In Lebanon.

I afraid it's another one of those "Hit the Previously Button" deals. But, I have to find an Empty Comment Section to use, and Kaminsky never wrote anything yesterday. So I had to go to Tuesday.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 1:06PM

cicero and anthony
In 2004 Rather released the phony military record to sabotage GWB.

In 2000 the MSM released GWB's DUI arrest record the weekend before the election.

In 1992, the Friday before the election, with the polls showing a slight Bush I lead or tie, Lawrence Walsh, the phony Republican prosecutor, indicted Caspar Wineberger. We got Bubba,eight years of incompetence that led to 9/11.

There is no question that if a Republican president left Americans to die,and did not provide the requested security, the MSM would be on 24 hours demanding answers and flooding the airwaves and news media. It would be saturation would no other news.

For example, with Katrina we were bombarded with stories about GWB not caring. Yet people in New York are scavenging for food in dumpsters, while the idiot Bloomberg,who endorsed Obama, wants to spend money on a race. And Obama is out campaigning.

Anthony| 11.2.12 @ 2:30PM

CJW, More proof of the total corruption of our culture by the left.
The cure starts Tuesday.

SUBVET| 11.4.12 @ 11:06AM

Anthony.........corruption by the LEFT you say.....and the cure starts Tuesday......dream on.

It's the other side's turn ya..... Mitt is in but the beat goes on.

When you think CONTROL you will get the big picture.

I pray that in some way the Lord will have mercy on us mortals....he knows how off track we have become. Just like the chosen ones we have been wandering in the desert of life.

As always He gives us one more chance thru his mercy and love...maybe just maybe this time we will get on track.

but I doubt it...............in the end for me .....hurry up I can't wait to see HIM.

Jack London| 11.2.12 @ 12:17PM

How long did it take to research and publish on Watergate and Iran-Contra? Quite some time. If there is a scandal in Benghazi no doubt it will come out but you can't really expect it to happen a few weeks. And of course, the evidence so far is that there is no scandal.

Oldefarte| 11.2.12 @ 12:38PM

BS! This occurred 9/11/12 and there has been NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH within the MSM, who are nothing but PROSTITUTES with an ink pen and/or a computer. "the evidence so far is that there is no scandal"? WTF are you living, on Mars? There is not evidence because the MSM has produced none; and they've produced none because they know the truth and are covering up same. Read Frank Gaffney and others, fool as to your evidence! It's simply a shame that these MSM reporters and Democratic politicians can't be thrown in jail for their treasonous activities regarding this!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 11.2.12 @ 12:40PM

PS: Either you're lying like they are or you're stupid and no one gives a rat's ars which!!!!!!

Jack London| 11.2.12 @ 12:43PM

Nonsense. I've seen plenty of searching articles about it in places such as the WaPo and NYT. Information is coming out all the time - the latest is about the swift involvement of a significant CIA presence:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11.....ck.html?hp

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 1:39PM

CIA.........presence you say..........

Just what was their roll there ?

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 1:50PM

Jack can you connect the dots......

The account given by the senior officials, who did not want to be identified, provided the most detailed description to date of the C.I.A.’s role in Benghazi, a covert presence that appears to have been much more significant than publicly disclosed.
My question would be what was the CIA base there for in the first place.

The real reason........

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 1:10PM

Commie Jack
We got the photos and story about Osama's killing within days, and some of the infor led to the arrest of the Pakistani doctor that helped us, and led to attacks on Seal teams. But that is not important because we needed to hear news that helps Obama win.

You can bet that if Obama had any helpful news of how he acted about Benghazi, it would have been released immediately.

This is not politics. He let four Americans die without helping before and during the attack.

Jack London| 11.2.12 @ 1:18PM

How long did it take to track Bin Laden down?

You say there was no help but CIA personnel were there in 25 minutes and it looks like many more could have died.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 1:48PM

What does the time it took to find Osama have to do with the requests made in August 2012 for additional security?

What does it have to do with sending in help during the attack while the State Dept employee testified they were viewing the attack in real time?

Since you mentioned tracking Osama, give thanks to the enhanced interrogation and Guantanamo, both of which you and Obama opposed, and without which, we would not have found Osama.

Maybe more could have died, and maybe not, but the point is we do not abandon our fellow Americans. But Obama did.

Jack London| 11.2.12 @ 2:20PM

Read that story from the NYT - it shows that help was mobilized. The one think I find absurd about this is accusations that no help was given.

And it does say, as you do, that questions remain about the security arrangements - so much for MSM ignoring this. And there are three Congressional enquiries.

By the way - about 9/11 - the big one that I'm sure you recall - are you aware that some intelligence memos Bush had in advance are not public?

See:

The Deafness Before the Storm

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09......html?_r=0

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 3:50PM

The lefty claim that Bush knew or should have known about the attack is ridiculous, even for you. Given the MSM hatred of Bush if there was any substance to the charge it would be front page news 24/7.

But you ignore Bubba's total incompetence during the repeated terrorist attacks on WTC, USS Cole, Khobar Towers , and the two embassy attacks, all of which led the terrorists to beleive we were weak and led to 9/11, the big one, remember.

Our embassies and consulates are not safe during Dem presidents, such as Carter with Iran, Obama with Benghazi, and Bubba with the two embassies in Africa.

A couple of stories in your favorite paper, finally, after two months, and Fox had to embarass them into printing the stories. Where are today's investigative reporters like Woodward and Bernstein?

You do not care about the four dead Americans. You want to protect obama. You are not serious. You are obsessed with Bush. Get over it, your fellow comrade, Obama, has lied and is covering up. Won't work.

He will lose next week, and the truth will come out.

SUBVET| 11.4.12 @ 11:12AM

Intrlligence......you say I smell CIA

Everyone getting the picture...................think pupit show.

John Navratil| 11.2.12 @ 2:36PM

Jack London,

The break in was in the early morning of Saturday, June 17, 1972. The stories began the next day. Here is a link to the Washington Post story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....227_2.html

Jack London| 11.2.12 @ 3:03PM

Hi John,

but I'm quite sure you are aware that the timeline that led to Nixon's resignation was more than two years.

vtwin| 11.2.12 @ 3:16PM

True, Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 3:51PM

How many Americans died in Watergate?
Did any Americans request additional security from terrorists during Watergate?

John Navratil| 11.2.12 @ 4:24PM

You question was: "How long did it take to research and publish on Watergate and Iran-Contra?" I was in Germany at the time and the International Herald Tribune was covered in it. By the time I entered university on August 20, the world was aflame.

Ralph Novy| 11.2.12 @ 2:36PM

You really can't discern the difference between Watergate/Iran-Contra and the Benghazi thing?

You don't think there's a difference between sneaky, illegal conspiracies and reaction to a surprise attack?

We may yet discover, through ongoing investigations, that some degree of incompetence and ass-covering may have gone on with respect to the Benghazi attack.

But comparing the Obama administration's handling of the Benghazi event to Watergate/Iran-Contra is spurious -- UNLESS you're also alleging that the administration nefariously planned or facilitated that attack in the first place.

ARE you insinuating that?

If not, abandon the comparison.

Butch| 11.2.12 @ 2:56PM

What surprise? The ambassador warned of an attack in a cable in August. His request for more security was denied. After the warning proved true, the administration watched it transpire in real time, with plenty of assets nearby to intervene in time. They did not.

vtwin| 11.2.12 @ 3:50PM

So, the President conspired directly or at least indirectly with Ambassador Stevens killers? To what end?

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 3:54PM

Do you two , Ralph and vtwin, believe that Nixon planned the breakin of Watergate? Not even the most deranged lefties believe that.
You two are trying to change the issue. The issue is failure to provide the requested additional security, and failure to provide help on the day of the attack. Obama knows why he did not authorize either. We do not need a long investigation. We just need Obama to tell the truth.

Jack London| 11.2.12 @ 3:04PM

Ralph - well said.

Drunken Sailor| 11.2.12 @ 3:20PM

And you can't see the similarities? In the first two cases it wasn't that act itself that hurt the administration, it was the attempted coverup. I believe such will be the case in this one as well.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 3:55PM

DS
They know. They are just trying to divert attention from the issues. They cannot be that dumb.

Drunken Sailor| 11.2.12 @ 4:01PM

CJW, I hate to argue with you but, but yes they can be. How else to explain the popularity of Reality TV?

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 4:25PM

I see your point, DS. But these "purps" are clever and trying to divert attention from the scandal.

Drunken Sailor| 11.2.12 @ 4:38PM

That is their M.O. afterall. Divert, Deny, Denigrate and Decieve.

DRed| 11.2.12 @ 5:04PM

So what is it you think that the administration is covering up? Let's talk about the scandal, not divert attention to denigrating vtwin's grammatical competence.

Drunken Sailor| 11.2.12 @ 5:15PM

What's wrong. Did I insult your alter ego? How about why security was so lax to begin with? There had already been multiple attacks. On top of that we know learn the consulate was concerned about Al Quida training camps in the area. Once you can give a rational explanation for that then try explaining why no help was sent even though the attack took 7 hours. A gun ship from Sigonella could have been there in a matter of a hour or two. Not buying for a second Leon Panetta's piss poor excuse either. In the military, we do not leave men behind or a call for help unaswered if it can be at all avoided. If they could get drones there and watch the attack, they had time to get a gunship there.
And don't even try the recently announced CIA measures in the area. It took them this many weeks to remember that happening? In fact explain why the story kept changing and continues to change about pretty much every detail of this fiasco.

Carter = failed hostage rescue
Clinton = Black Hawk Down
Obama = Benghazi.
See a trend here?

vtwin| 11.2.12 @ 6:11PM

Yes I see a trend, your willingness to accept ANY narrative from ANY source which places the blame, for what I broadly label here as a nationally security failure, on ANY Democratic administration.

Reagan: Lebanon; 246 dead Marines
Bush: 9/11
Bush: Iraq no WMD
Bush: Abu Ghraib

DRed| 11.2.12 @ 6:13PM

No, it's just funny when people aren't remotely self aware.

As far as I understand, security was lax because they thought it was best to have a minimal American security presence in Libya.

Help was sent, but you refuse to believe that-I don't know what else to tell you. As for a gunship from Sigonella, do they even have gunships at Sigonella? As I understand it, there was an attack at the embassy, in which the ambassador and one of his staff were killed. The remaining staff was rescued and taken to a CIA safehouse. Hours later, that house was attacked. What military measures would have saved the SEALS at the safe house that weren't taken? It's easy to second guess now, but what are you saying-there was a way we could have saved those men and Obama intentionally didn't take it? Is that what this is about?

vtwin| 11.2.12 @ 6:31PM

No, this is about the election.

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 5:51PM

GUNS.........dip shit

vtwin| 11.2.12 @ 4:04PM

What do "believe" the administration is covering up?

Drunken Sailor| 11.2.12 @ 4:24PM

Try English. I don't speak mental midget.

vtwin| 11.2.12 @ 6:16PM

OK, what do you "believe" the administration is covering up?

TLP| 11.2.12 @ 7:14PM

You're Nigga is covering up EVERYTHING, Douchebag.

Rhoetus| 11.3.12 @ 11:54PM

Nixon was not part of the Watergate burglary while Obama watched Americans die and orders were given not to defend against the attack in real time. Was this cowardice, incompetence or treason?

SUBVET| 11.2.12 @ 5:21PM

Ralph....I am insinuating that.....and who would do such a thing ?

Not the administration.........who was already imbeded there...?
Who always shows up to these catastrophes....?
Their hands are all over it....it's like a magic trick the answer is right in front of you.

Everyone want's to talk about the 4 dead.....yes tragic but it's part of the "end justifies the means".

Everytime the magic trick is pulled the people fall for it.

cicero| 11.2.12 @ 4:02PM

You don.t have to go so far afield. Assume for sake of argument that the attack was a suprise. So what? They knew it was going on as soon as it started - they were watching it. They were watching it for between 7 and 8 hours. They had armed and trained help less than an hour away. They let those 2 guys fight for their lives for between 7 and 8 hours, and watch them lose the fight without trying to help. What kind of Americans are they. We should be outraged, not trying to see what was worse, Watergate or Iran Congtra. Nobody died in those incidents. What is the excuse for letting those guys die? But don't get me started . . .

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 4:24PM

Don Cicero
Good point.
Assuming arguendo that Obama was somehow correct for not providing the requested security and not providing help during the attack, then what is the excuse for the Las Vegas ffundraiser after we have been attacked? Then followed up by joking around on Letterman, Lenno, John Liebowitz Daily Show, the View, and other tough media outlets.

He is laughing and joking as if we were not attacked and the four Americans were not killed.

And if Obama did have a good story to explain his inaction, it would be news 24/7.

pogybait| 11.4.12 @ 10:29AM

Besides all the info that is coming out from Blue Mountain, CIA or other administration snitches, given the fact that this took place within a 7 or 8 hr time frame I have a bigger question....Why would Woods paint the target with a laser and give away his position to the enemy, the only way he can actually paint the target is that the system was engaged. The only way it can be engaged because there was an asset in the air. Most likely the drone was armed as there wasn't an asset nearby. So the administration basically watched video feed and denied help for pure political reasons or watched the entire episode happen and nobody wanted to take responsibility as if this was some sort of video war game? This is substantially different from Watergate or Iran Contra.

RCV| 11.2.12 @ 5:41PM

The Media is Biased! The Media is Biased!

I've never seen such a sniveling bunch of whiners in my long life. Pathetic.

CJW| 11.2.12 @ 6:03PM

Right, like you and your pals with Bush Derangement Syndrome blaming everything on GWB. Did you hear Bush caused Hurricane Sandy and will also cause Obama to lose? You guys keep whining about Bush .
Do you honestly believe the MSM has covered the Benghazi scandal under Obama as it would have covered it under Bush?

RCV| 11.2.12 @ 11:58PM

The Press is allowed to have a point of view, the Press has always had points of view, since the founding of the Republic. That's the point of a free press. Publish your own damn newspaper or be like Limbaugh and Murdock and Hannity and get your own opinions out. Just stop complaining that everyone else doesn't see things the way you want them to.

CJW| 11.3.12 @ 3:35PM

No kidding, everyone knows the press can have a point of view, but that is not the issue. You guys cannot admit the point of view of the MSM is a lefty liberal view. Just admit, and stop the denial.I do not care if they do not see things as I do, you lefties just seem unable to admit the MSM is lefty liberal.

RCV| 11.3.12 @ 4:29PM

Your definition of "lefty, liberal" CJW encompasses anyone to the right of Michelle Bachmann. You guys believe people like John McCain, Richard Luger and Orrin Hatch are "liberals". If that's the definition, then I guess CBS, NBC and CNN are "liberal". Otherwise, in the real world, they're pretty centrist, mainstream moderates.

CJW| 11.3.12 @ 8:10PM

No, you are wrong. I was once a Dem but changed so I am very familiar with the typical responses you make. I heard your responses and made them myself . You do not deal with facts but seem to use labels and stereotypes, especially in judging here. I never said McCain, Luger, and Hatch are liberals. They are conservatives on most issues, and moderate on some, and liberal on a few. On the other hand, can you name any Dems that you consider moderate? NO. Your definition of real world seems the people who share your politics.

obadiah| 11.2.12 @ 9:50PM

That crummy liberal conspirator John Sirica framed Nixon. Then the commies got Jaworski in as special prosecutor, just to destroy America. Same with Ollie North, what a great American and a genuine patriot, who the commies tried to railroad on phony charges. They'll cover up Obama's vicious crimes against America, killing our ambassador and CIA agents.

SUBVET| 11.4.12 @ 11:23AM

OBADIAH.......who is THEY ?

When you know that answer then you will be able to unravel the true story......

Robert17| 11.3.12 @ 12:17PM

The media has been pathetic on this. Thank goodness for youtube.
http://youtu.be/dnnExRYQ9CY

topcat52| 11.3.12 @ 10:40PM

Richard Nixon was not a sympathetic victim of Watergate. He essentially got what he deserved. Oliver North was convicted, and got off on a 5th amendment self incrimination mistake by the prosecution. He did not get what he deserved. But in each of those scandals, and they were certainly scandals, no Americans died. Obama is now into his second scandal where Americans died - the first in "gun walking" and now in Benghazi. Either of those is far more serious than Watergate or Iran-Contra. We will see if Obama gets what he deserves on November 6th - retirement.

pogybait| 11.4.12 @ 9:58AM

November 6th should turn the 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. into the office of the President Reject

WaffenSS| 11.4.12 @ 9:44AM

Counting the number of administration officials convicted and sent to prison, Pres. U. Grant held the record, untill Pres. Reagan. Oh yes. The reblublic is in its last throes. Press 1 for english.

C. S. P. Schofield| 11.4.12 @ 1:52PM

I have followed politics since Nixon's resignation. In that whole time, the political Right has always schweemed about media bias.

The media is biased. The media will always BE biased. The reason the media is consistently biased to the Liberal side is that - THE WHOLE TIME I HAVE BEEN INTERESTED IN POLITICS - the Right has apparently preferred to whine rather than go out and BUY SOME NEWSPAPERS AND TELEVISION STATIONS!

There are, or course, exceptions. But I am sick to the teeth of Conservative pundits who buy into the 'the media should be neutral' narrative. That was always idiocy.

RCV| 11.4.12 @ 4:58PM

Good news, GOPers! You can now add Hurricane Sandy to the usual "Biased Media" and "Voter Fraud" excuses for your loss this coming election. Haley Barbour just tried it out today, saying it was the reason Romney's campaign "lost its momentum" this past week.