The New York Times published a report over the weekend about Benghazi that has witnesses fuming. Maggie’s Notebook and The Pirate’s Cove both covered it in case you missed the Hillary protection whitewash. They’re back to blaming the video and saying al Qaeda wasn’t involved. Now Fox News reports that witnesses who were there are contradicting the NYT’s findings.
Fifteen months after the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, the narrative of the attack continues to be shaped, and reshaped, by politicians and the press.
But a New York Times report published over the weekend has angered sources who were on the ground that night. Those sources, who continue to face threats of losing their jobs, sharply challenged the Times’ findings that there was no involvement from Al Qaeda or any other international terror group and that an anti-Islam film played a role in inciting the initial wave of attacks.
“It was a coordinated attack. It is completely false to say anything else. … It is completely a lie,” one witness to the attack told Fox News.
The controversial Times report has stirred a community that normally remains out of sight and wrestles with how to reveal the truth, without revealing classified information.
What does the NYT care about the truth if it doesn’t protect their beloved Democrat politicians?