Accuracy in Media

One major aspect of the Benghazi cover-up has been to denounce the words of witnesses in favor of higher officials’ assertions. This is true not only for those CIA contractors who responded to the attacks, but also for the families of the victims.

In a recent interview with The Conway Daily Sun of New Hampshire, journalist Tom McLaughlin asked Hillary Clinton who, from among the attendees at the Andrews Air Force Base “transfer of remains ceremony,” was lying. He was referring to the family members of the four Americans killed during the terrorist attacks in Benghazi on September 11 and 12, 2012. Mrs. Clinton responded, “Not me, that’s all I can tell you.”

“Not, ‘no one is lying,’” criticized Megyn Kelley of Fox News in a segment with members of the CIA’s Global Response Staff, the quick-reaction force whose story is the basis of the book that inspired this month’s forthcoming film, 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi. “Not, ‘let’s not impugn anyone’s motives here,’” added Kelly. “Not, ‘I reject the premise of your question.’”

Given that she has lied about virtually every aspect of Benghazi and her private email server, reporters ought to approach Mrs. Clinton’s claims with skepticism. Instead, The Washington Post continues to avoid calling Hillary Clinton on her lies even within its own Fact-Checker columns.

In October, Post Fact-Checker Glenn Kessler assigned two Pinocchios to presidential candidate Marco Rubio (R-FL) for calling Mrs. Clinton a liar for blaming the attacks on a YouTube video while simultaneously telling her daughter, Chelsea, the Egyptian prime minister, and Libya’s president that it was a terrorist attack.

“She certainly spoke about the video, but always in the context of the protests that were occurring across the Middle East,” wrote Kessler in October. In his latest fact check on January 4th, Kessler refused to assign blame to any party at all. The truth, he argues, cannot be found in the dispute between the families of the deceased and Mrs. Clinton.

“Perhaps it all started with a comment made by Rice (who two days later would famously go on national television and make a direct link between the video and the attack, thus spoiling her chance to become secretary of state),” writes Kessler. “Perhaps the question of who said what at what moment got jumbled over time. Or perhaps Clinton mentioned the video privately to just two people—and not to others.”

“Clearly we cannot come to a resolution that would be beyond dispute,” Kessler writes. Kessler is trying to insinuate that the family members of the victims have faulty memories of what happened when they met Mrs. Clinton. True, memories do shift over the years. That is why Charles Woods, father of Tyrone Woods, has perhaps the most convincing story.

Woods provided Kessler with photographic evidence of his September 15, 2012 calendar entry about Mrs. Clinton’s statements. Woods also called in to the Lars Larson show just over a month after the attacks, on October 23, 2012, and told the radio host: “And she did not appear to be one bit sincere at all, and, you know, she mentioned that thing about, ‘We’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video.’” Shortly thereafter, he appeared on The Blaze making similar comments.

Woods also went on the One America News Network this week and challenged Mrs. Clinton to take a lie detector test, along with him, to determine which one is telling the truth.

Townhall cites not two, but four, family members claiming that Mrs. Clinton is an outright liar. But, according to Kessler’s account, the family members claiming she told them about the video are only two: Patricia Smith, the mother of information officer Sean Smith—who died along with Ambassador Chris Stevens at the Special Mission Compound—and Woods.

The other family members—Barbara Doherty, Cheryl Croft Bennett, and Jan Stevens—Kessler writes, told him that Mrs. Clinton did not mention the video.

Kessler does admit that he did not speak to all of the family members. However, his treatment of Kate Quigley raises suspicions as to his overall method.

To add to the appearance of ambiguity, Kessler’s January 4th article casts Quigley, sister of the other deceased security contractor, Glenn Doherty, as having told him that Mrs. Clinton “made no mention of a video, but did refer to a ‘spontaneous protest.’”

In the previous month, according to Mediaite’s Alex Griswold, Quigley directly accused Mrs. Clinton of lying about blaming the attack on the video during the funeral.

“I know what she said to me and she can say all day long that she didn’t say it. That’s her cross to bear,” Quigley told Boston Herald Radio, according to Griswold. Patricia Smith also told the House Government Affairs Committee that a number of administration officials, from President Obama to Susan Rice to Hillary Clinton, all told her that the video was to blame.

What Kessler casts as anecdotal conjecture amounts to far more substance: it is congressional testimony, photographic evidence, and contemporaneous accounts. Yet Mrs. Clinton emerges unscathed from the Post not because she has admitted the truth, but because the liberal media remain loath to challenge her.

Instead, news organizations such as The Hill continue to claim that pursuing the truth behind the Benghazi attacks is a wasteful partisan anti-Hillary vendetta.

“Committee Republicans have long denied allegations that they are bent on a purely political mission to smear former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, rather than being motivated by a desire for the facts surrounding the 2012 terror attack in Benghazi, Libya,” reported The Hill’s Julian Hattem in his January 4th article covering the Select Committee on Benghazi’s latest round of closed door hearings. The Select Committee interviewed former CIA Director David Petraeus for the second time on Wednesday, and will interview former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Friday.

“Democrats have opposed the existence of the special committee since it was created in 2014,” Hattem reports. “Two GOP lawmakers and one former Republican committee staffer added fuel to the fire last year, by claiming that a core goal of the committee was to tear down Clinton’s presidential ambitions.” We challenged that claim at the time. Hattem also claimed that there was no “damning evidence” against Mrs. Clinton’s job performance and integrity from the October hearing.

No further evidence is necessary to implicate Mrs. Clinton in the Benghazi cover-up. She has deleted half of her emails, provided the State Department with altered messages, lied about having classified information on her private email server, and worked with the White House to blame an attack on a YouTube video while fully aware that this video had nothing to do with the Benghazi terror attacks. But the mainstream media are more concerned with ensuring that Hillary Clinton attains the presidency than vetting her as a candidate.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, appeared on Fox News on January 7th talking about the status of the hearings, the work of the Select Committee, and when he expects the committee to complete their work. Gowdy said that he is eager to wrap it up, having already interviewed 65 witnesses and received about 100,000 documents. He said, “I am waiting on documents from the White House, the CIA and the State Department.” He said that he believes he’s getting close, that he has about a dozen more witnesses to interview, and that he wants to wait for the remaining documents. In the end, Gowdy said that “I trust my fellow citizens to judge the full body of our work.”

I can assure Chairman Gowdy that we at the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi will be judging the full body of their work. But if they are waiting until all relevant documents are handed over, the Obama administration will surely run out the clock on them. As we have repeatedly documented, the key aspects of this multi-layered scandal are already well established and on the record. The challenge for the Select Committee is to effectively explain the Benghazi narrative in an environment where a hostile and corrupt news media will be attempting to dismiss and discredit their final report in an effort to protect and defend President Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


  • robert prir

    Hillary wouldn’t know the truth if the truth bit her in the ass…..obama should be impeached….. Hillary for prison 2016 obama her cell mate

  • Ron

    WaPo’s Kessler as a “fact checker” on Hillary??? Hahahahahahahahahahha!

  • Dean

    Why do I get the feeling investigation of Hillary is going to take as long as the investigation into the Kennedy assassination? The White House isn’t going to allow the investigation to highlight the incompetent leadership of the Obama administration. Doing so would upset the plans of the Democrats to remain in the White House.

  • rebeccadewhirst

    Talk about injustice….justice is not served when the whole administration including the justice department is corrupt and this proves it

  • Ted

    Let’s assume, as illogical as it is (since it’s not borne out by the facts), that we do blame Clinton 100% for the four American deaths in Benghazi … PLUS … we also blame her for an attempted ‘cover-up’ or ‘obfuscation.

    THEN … the question legitimately arises … what about Bu**sh** and Cheney and their responsibility their ‘Big Lie’ to the American public in an attempt to justify their unjustifiable invasion of Iraq … where something approaching 5,000 Americans have been killed?

    Who has the far greater amount of blood on their hands … and who told the bigger lie in the process???

    If Clinton is guilty of all the bu**sh** Issa and Gowdy claim she is … it doesn’t even begin to compare to what Bu**sh** and Cheney are guilty of … so … let’s throw Clinton in jail for life for ‘murder’ … and then execute Bu**sh** and Cheney for some 5,000 ‘murders’. That would sounds about right, wouldn’t it?

  • Rob B

    It’s all too convenient to completely disregard documented history on justification for action against Iraq. If Ted was intellectually honest – or at least informed – he would consider that Bush instructed his generals to be absolutely sure of the WMD issue, and not take action otherwise.Ted would also assume that global leaders from the U.K., France, Germany and other allies were also “duped”.

    Ted also ignores the fact that democrat leadership the likes of Clinton, Kennedy, Biden, Kerry, Reid, Feinstein, Pelosi and over
    100 other democrats, supported the Iraq action based on the same evidence. Furthermore, recent discoveries in Iraq have confirmed that Hussein did have chemical weapons. But, we would not want facts to interfere with the denial and B.S. that pours from liberal mouths, would we?

  • sox83cubs84

    Hitlery is on the same level of pathological liar that oVomit is.

  • Austinniceguy

    Since the only court any of this will ever see will be the court of public opinion, I hope she gets crucified there. In a sense, the worst punishment for this evil C U Next Tuesday WILL be to keep her from the presidency. She spent her 4 years as sec of state selling us out to foreign governments in exchange for “donations” for her “foundation”. She made promises to them that WE MUST keep her from being able to fulfill. There will be no place she and her rapist “husband” will be able to hide.

  • DannyDan

    Please tell me you’re not actually trying to justify overlooking the crimes of Hillary Clinton because of your feelings of Bush to the extent you would vote for her to represent the U.S.A.. Surely there’s somebody that’s not a pathological liar and suspected criminal that you could cast a vote for.

  • jg collins

    Careful not step on WaPoo…

  • jg collins

    A simple tu quoque argument, therefore worthless. Also a red herring, tedious finger-pointing, trying to blame everything on Bush. That was weak in 2008 and hasn’t improved in 7 years, merely gotten more Ted-ious.

  • armydadtexas

    Folks, the socialist-democRATS of America celebrate liars and frauds. William Jefferson Clinton, Jimmy Carter and B.H. Obama come to mind. And the Hilda-beast is chief amongst liars. And the socialist-democ-RAT celebrates every moment of it. Just a group of MINDLESS, SLOBERING left wing zealots. And nothing more

  • The Kulak

    Hey Roger apparently you and Cliff’s NSA superheroes were giving Clinton crony Sid ‘Vicious’ Blumenthal lotsa juicy and highly classified reports on Sudan oil for the Clintons’ and their globalist handlers.

    Still want to insist that everybody at Ft. Meade is so sqeaky clean and a super patriot who would never violate NSA laws or procedures to serve the New World Order or obey big Commie Barry’s illegal orders? Where’s your old chuckling aw shucks South Carolina good ole boy NSA shill to explain this one? How about Prof. Junk Pics John Schindler contradicting himself, now saying NSA leaked to Hillary when he used to insist fanatically on Twitter in 2013 when Snowden first leaked this could never happen?

  • Americadies

    The media has covered for the Clintons for thirty years why stop now?

  • Americadies

    Kessler has been slime since birth.

  • Americadies

    Only a revolution will clean out the cockroaches from our government. Democrats are beyond vile.

  • Americadies

    Same old tired liberal mantra

  • LaTisha Jackson

    Americans are spiritually inferior, therefore unable to grasp the truth. A historic lack of Spiritual Guides (Socrates, Cicero, Tolstoy…) and the overwhelming multitude of the Narrow Specialists contributes too. The overfed, overentertained and the purposeless will do ANYTHING for comfort…oops, I’m sorry, it’s called “The American Dream”. One of the things they avoid by any means is the truth, as it is uncomfortable. Check out any blogs…does anyone speak of the REASONS? No, not really. Because discussing the consequences is more comfortable for the comfort junkies. Does anyone say that hitlery is a kay-gee-bee agent, and so is her hubby, and the chieftan himself…and many more in the government? Does anyone understand that Benghazi was a way to get rid of the withesses of the illegal weapons transer, and the the chieftan himself ordered Stevens and the crew to be killed? This nation has to go through 1,000 years of suffering, therefore exercising and growing the spirit. Death to COMFORT!!! Long Live the United States!