Accuracy in Media

This past weekend, the media were doing their usual swooning over Hillary Clinton, as she returned to Iowa to check that box off in her quest for the Democratic Party nomination for the presidency in 2016. But a story that broke this morning stands as a real test to see how clear that path will be for the former Secretary of State.

Clinton has long pointed to the “independent” 2012 Accountability Review Board (ARB) report as the ultimate arbiter of the Benghazi attacks, but newly revealed allegations by a former State Department employee call into question whether the ARB was given the full set of facts by those at State, or if, instead, a massive cover-up was launched to shield those on the 7th Floor from the fallout over Benghazi.

The question is not just whether or not this story by Raymond Maxwell is true, but whether it will prove to be a hurdle for Mrs. Clinton. That depends on the mainstream media’s reaction and how determined Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, is to getting at the heart of the Benghazi scandal. The Select Committee is holding its first public hearing this week to discuss the implementation of the ARB recommendations.

Given the seriousness and relevance of Maxwell’s allegations to this topic, Rep. Gowdy should invite Maxwell to speak before the Committee on Wednesday alongside the already confirmed witnesses Gregg Starr, Mark J. Sullivan, and Todd Keil. Maxwell was “a leader in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, which was charged with collecting emails and documents relevant to the Benghazi probe.”

The timing of this hearing couldn’t be more serendipitous, given the story just published by Sharyl Attkisson, who received Accuracy in Media’s Reed Irvine Award for Investigative Journalism for her work at CBS News. Now, Ms. Attkisson is proving that you don’t need a major broadcast network behind you to break big stories. Writing for The Daily Signal, The Heritage Foundation’s new news service, Attkisson has a major scoop in the form of Maxwell.

The story is this: A former State Department official, a man who was a supporter and donor to Barack Obama, was suspended by the State Department. But before he was suspended, he discovered that “a State Department office director,” one of Clinton’s “closest advisors,” went on a weekend, after-hours adventure in the Foggy Bottom headquarters of State. She told him, “Ray, we are to go through these stacks and pull out anything that might put anybody in the [Near Eastern Affairs] front office or the seventh floor in a bad light.” (The 7th Floor is “shorthand for then-Secretary of State Clinton and her principal advisors,” according to Maxwell.) “Maxwell says when he heard that statement, he couldn’t help but wonder if the ARB—perhaps unknowingly—had received from his bureau a scrubbed set of documents with the most damaging material missing,” reports Attkisson.

We must now ask whether Hillary Clinton instigated or authorized a cover-up of the actions of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, shielding key documents from Accountability Review Board scrutiny.

Given President Bill Clinton’s history, this might actually be the case. In 2002 and 2003, Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s former National Security Adviser, visited the National Security Archives and repeatedly stole “original, uncatalogued, highly classified terrorism documents…by wrapping them around his socks and beneath his pants,” according to an archives staff member. Berger admitted to having destroyed at least five documents, but some suspect he destroyed even more. Did Clinton’s wife encourage the same type of behavior in her staff, as well?

Not surprisingly, Hillary’s sycophants at Media Matters have jumped in to attempt to discredit Maxwell, and Attkisson. That’s what they do. “Maxwell himself is a dubious source,” they argued. “He was placed on administrative leave after the Accountability Review Board’s investigation found a ‘lack of proactive leadership’ and pointed specifically to Maxwell’s department, saying some officials in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs ‘showed a lack of ownership of Benghazi’s security issues.’”

That’s rich, coming from the ARB, which was a sham investigation from the start. As Attkisson pointed out, “Maxwell also criticizes the ARB for failing to interview key people at the White House, State Department and the CIA, including not only Clinton but Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Nides, who managed department resources in Libya; Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs Andrew Shapiro; and White House National Security Council Director for Libya Ben Fishman.”

Those four people should testify under oath before Rep. Gowdy’s committee to determine who it was that actually did fail in terms of “proactive leadership,” and who lacked “ownership of Benghazi’s security issues.”

If Maxwell’s allegations are true, this is dynamite. Let’s put Maxwell under oath, and see if he tells the same story. If so, then let’s bring forth the State Department ombudsman who told Maxwell not to worry and that “It’s not about you; it’s about Hillary and 2016,” and put her under oath, as well.

This is just one more of many potential scandals related to Benghazi, as we at the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi have been documenting. But this one has the potential to derail a run to the White House that many consider inevitable.




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

Comments

  • Pop

    The Barack Hussein Obama II administration (Hillary, Reid, Pelosi included) will go down in history as the most corrupt and lawless administration ever.

  • beaujest

    Hang um High !

  • larry

    Hillary Clinton, once a lying whore, always a lying whore… having a black-muslim fascist for a president is disastrous, but this whore would likely be worse… if you question that, find a copy of her healthcare bill from ’93 and read it… under her plan doctors went to prison for treating an individual without government permission, even if that person paid from their own pocket… read it for yourself…full blown gestapo stuff…. the megalomaniacal bitch has undoubtedly killed to get what she wants and will do it again, and again, and again… while I find accounts of obama’s intellect to be absolutely nothing but urban legend, he was smart enough not to make this whore his vice president… the bitch would have had him killed inside the first six months and he knew it…

  • Ed

    Here here!

  • bongo

    Wow. 1) The amount of typos from my fellow commenters is amazing. 2) What does this all accomplish? Supposing we accept the premise – somebody fucked up at Bengazi. Supposing we accept the second premise – that somebody covered up evidence about how they fucked up at Bengazi. Supposing, after hours and hours of testimony from officials who otherwise (in theory) should be doing their job governing, thousands of dollars in court costs, you obtain perjury convictions for the president and the secretary of state. How will that make our lives better? What will we have accomplished except waste lots of their time and put a ‘ding’ on their record? Or is this the new Republican ethos, just dick around and obstruct governance as a protest against losing the election. Thanks guys. Fuckin’ A, dudes. If you want a scandal, NSA spying is where you should be focusing if you are calling yourselves REPUBLICANS and LIBERTARIANS protecting our RIGHTS and FREEDOMS. But this? A maybe-fuckup-maybe-coverup? With a death toll of 4? Your standards are getting low. This is a waste of your time.

  • bongo

    No, it won’t. It will be remembered for Obamacare (brought my premiums down 200%) and for NSA spying, which Bush started. Sorry.

  • stringman

    You are so right! We should continue to just look the other way while the Obama’s and the Clinton’s and their band of merry misfits keep blundering though one scandal after another while sweeping the horrid results under the nearest rug. Because there’s no way we can investigate more than one matter at a time.

  • Tony Baker

    We’re back to Bush’s fault.

  • Mark Stevanus

    What do you expect from a guy named Bongo? Reminds me of a monkey in an old Reagan movie. I really don’t remember his
    name, but it was something like that.

  • Bertharina Rina

    HOGORINABLOG
    A topnotch WordPress.com site

  • Soxtory

    His name was Bonzo.

  • Soxtory

    Hopefully we will get some truth from these hearings. The Obama and Clinton apparatchiks, however, will not hesitate to lie under oath.

  • Soxtory

    One of the four dead was from my town of Winchester, Massachusetts. It will not be a waste of time if done properly. We are also a solid Democrat town, by the way.

  • Mark Stevanus

    Thanks, I could not remember. Didn’t think I was 100 % correct.

  • bongo

    1) Sarcasm is a prop for feeble arguments. 2) Apostrophes (not “apostrophe’s”) connote possession, a gramatical crime which is all the worse given that 3) you are probably English, as your use of the word “horrid” suggests. More damning is the fact that you do not respond to any of my points. So I won’t respond to (what passes for) yours.

  • bongo

    So what exactly is it that you think is being covered up? There are only 2 possibilities; either A) incompetence or B) the upper echelons wanted the Bengazi embassy destroyed for nefarious purposes. If A), what is the value? Incompetence also gave us “mission accomplished” and recently “junior varsity” statements on insurgency readiness, lost Mosul and most of northern gains. Incompetence already verified, spanning both Bush and Obama administrations. Why do we need another example (during wartime, no less?) Do you really trust this congress will “do it properly”? Have you seen the blind, self-defeating partisanship that has marked their terms so far? How do you think they would handle this? B) is almost impossible, embassy has no strategic value unless you know something I don’t.

  • Pop

    Blow smoke in someone else’s face. I strongly doubt any 200 % ever happened, and if any at all happened then you can thank the working tax payer (your welcome, by the way).

    Funny you did not say that the NSA spying STOPPED after Barack Hussein Obama II took office.

  • stringman

    We could start with the fact that a YouTube video had nothing to do with it. Any fool could see that it was an organized terrorist attack. Move on to the lack of an immediate attempt to thwart the attackers with our overwhelming forces (instead of going to bed or whatever Obama and Clinton were doing that night for nearly 8 hours). Add to that the media sweeping the whole matter under the rug so that the President would not have to discuss it while running for election and you have a good start on the whole ugly picture. And, is it possible for you to stop whining about punctuation and just deal with your lack of understanding of the facts?

  • FastEddy23

    bongo, some one has been beating your head like a drum. If your BummerCare premiums went down, you must have lost your job.

    Those of us who work have all had our premiums go up.

    As for the NSA/CIA spying, that started in the Eisenhower Administration … and He warned us about it. (Fear the Military/Industrial Complex. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY )