Subject: Friends and Family Benghazi Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:42:30 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

Due to the latest round of Benghazi news, we wanted to send our updated
Benghazi talking points as well as some of the key stories.

*Friends and Family Benghazi Roundup*

*11.25.14*

*TALKING POINTS: NEW BENGHAZI REPORT PROVES RIGHT WING WRONG*

*KEY POINTS:*

·       A two-year investigation into the Benghazi tragedy by the
Republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence proved
right-wing conspiracy theorists to be flat wrong and their attacks to be
baseless.

·       The committee’s report was released last Friday by Chairman Mike
Rogers (R-MI), and Ranking Member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD).

·       The report debunks past and ongoing right-wing attacks on Hillary
Clinton and further proves that the right wing is playing politics on the
backs of dead Americans in an attempt to score political points.

·       The report adds to the extensive reporting already completed by the
ten congressional committees involved in investigating Benghazi.

House Judiciary

"Five Chairman" Interim Report on Benghazi Investigation

4/23/2013

House Armed Services

The Security Failures of Benghazi

10/10/2012

House Foreign Affairs

Benghazi and Beyond: What Went Wrong on September 11, 2012 and How to
Prevent it from Happening at other Frontline Posts

11/15/2012

House Intelligence

The Benghazi Talking Points and Michael J. Morell’s Role in Shaping the
Administration’s Narrative

4/2/2014

House Oversight

Reviews of the Benghazi Attack and Unanswered Questions

9/19/2013

Senate HSGA

Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi

12/30/2012

Senate Intelligence

Hearing on the Attacks in Benghazi

11/15/2012

Senate Foreign Relations

Benghazi: The Attacks and the Lessons Learned (HRC Testimony)

1/23/2013

Senate Armed Services

Attack on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya

2/7/2013

Benghazi Select Committee

Benghazi Attack and Diplomatic Security

9/17/2014

·       It concludes that there was no wrongdoing by Obama administration
officials. [AP, 11/21/14
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ecc3a300383445d5a90dd6ca764c9e15/house-intel-panel-debunks-many-benghazi-theories>
]

·       The final report made the following conclusions:

o   There was no intelligence failure before the attack. [CNN, 11/22/14*]*

o   No stand-down order was issued. [CNN, 11/22/14*]*

o   The administration did not intentionally mislead the public about the
details surrounding the attacks. [New York Times, 11/22/14]

·       According to the New York Times, “A report released late Friday
about the fatal 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, left Republicans in the
same position they have been in for two years: with little evidence to
support their most damning critiques of how the Obama administration, and
then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, responded to the attacks.” [New
York Times, *11/22/14*]

·       According to David Brock, “The Republican committee report should
close the case….If the scandal persists into 2016, it will only be for
partisan reasons.” [New York Times, 11/22/14]

*THE FACTS:*

·       *Secretary Clinton took responsibility:* In interviews, testimony and
in her book, Secretary Clinton has taken responsibility repeatedly. She was
determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger,
and more secure.

·       *Secretary Clinton took action:* Secretary Clinton appointed a
nonpartisan, independent Accountability Review Board to review what
happened and began the process of implementing the 29 recommendations put
forth by the ARB before leaving the State Department to strengthen embassy
security.

·       *Secretary Clinton was fully transparent:* Secretary Clinton fully
 and publicly answered questions before Congress. The report of the
Accountability Review Board is just the second to be made public, making it
one of the most transparent internal reviews in State Department history.

·       *The Benghazi tragedy has been investigated exhaustively, costing
taxpayers millions of dollars to repeat the same investigations over again.*
 Ten different congressional committees have participated in investigating
the Benghazi tragedy. They have held more than 50 senior level staff
briefings, 14 public hearings, at least 3 independent/bipartisan reports,
dozens of interviews, and the disclosure of more than 25,000 pages of
documents. The Department of Defense reported
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/pentagon-says-benghazi-probes-cost-millions>
that
these efforts have cost the taxpayers millions of dollars and thousands of
man-hours. The House Select Committee on Benghazi is expected to cost
taxpayers more than $3 million.

*Headlines:*

*New York Times: “G.O.P.-Led Benghazi Panel Bolsters Administration”*

"'The effort to turn the Benghazi tragedy into a political scandal never
had a factual basis,' said David Brock, founder of Correct the Record, a
group that defends Mrs. Clinton in the news media, and author of the e-book
'The Benghazi Hoax.' ... 'The Republican committee report should close the
case,' he added. 'If the scandal persists into 2016, it will only be for
partisan reasons.'"

*AP: House intel panel debunks many Benghazi theories*
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ecc3a300383445d5a90dd6ca764c9e15/house-intel-panel-debunks-many-benghazi-theories>

“A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence
Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in
responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi,
Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.”

*American Bridge 21st Century: House Intel Panel Quietly Releases Benghazi
Report That Clears Obama Administration of Wrongdoing Yet Again
<http://benghazicommittee.com/house-intel-panel-quietly-releases-benghazi-report-that-clears-obama-administration-of-wrongdoing-yet-again/>*

“The Republican-led House Intelligence Committee’s two-year investigation
into Benghazi is the seventh major probe into the attacks to clear the
Obama Administration of wrongdoing. The Committee, chaired by Congressman
Mike Rogers (R-MI), debunked long-held GOP claims on the attacks.”

*FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: MMFA: Fox News Sunday Ignored
Congressional Report Debunking Benghazi Myths *

“Fox News Sunday ignored a new report from the GOP-led House Intelligence
Committee that debunked many of the myths that Fox News has spent the last
two years promoting.”

*FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: Media Matters for America: “Media Lessons
From The Benghazi Charade”*

“The calling cards of anger and denial have been on display since Friday
afternoon when the House Intelligence Committee, led by Republican Rep.
Mike Rogers, released the findings of its two-year investigation into the
2012 terror attack in Benghazi. Becoming the sixth government inquiry to
come to a similar conclusion, the report found nothing to support the
allegations behind Fox News' ongoing Benghazi witch-hunt. And that's where
the anger and denial came in.”

*Articles:*

*New York Times: “G.O.P.-Led Benghazi Panel Bolsters Administration”*

By Michael S. Schmidt

November 22, 2014

WASHINGTON — A report released late Friday about the fatal 2012 attacks in
Benghazi, Libya, left Republicans in the same position they have been in
for two years: with little evidence to support their most damning critiques
of how the Obama administration, and then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham
Clinton, responded to the attacks.

Similar to five other government reports, the one released by the House
Intelligence Committee on Friday said that the administration had not
intentionally misled the public about what occurred during the attacks in
talking points it created for officials to use in television appearances
that turned out to be inaccurate.

It also said that no order was given by the military to “stand down” in
responding to try to save the four Americans killed in the attacks, a claim
that Republicans have made based on the account of a member of the security
team in Benghazi that day.

Coming six months after Speaker John A. Boehner created a separate special
committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks, the report raised questions
about what that panel might uncover that the Intelligence Committee — whose
chairman, Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, is leaving
Congress — and the other investigations missed.

The special committee that Mr. Boehner created is led by Representative
Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, who has a budget of $3.3 million
for the investigation.

Mr. Gowdy, in a written statement, said that his committee had reviewed the
latest findings along with the other reports. “It will aid the select
committee’s comprehensive investigation to determine the full facts of what
happened in Benghazi, Libya, before, during and after the attack and
contribute toward our final, definitive accounting of the attack on behalf
of Congress,” he said.

Democrats have asserted that the special committee was created by
Republicans only to try to discredit Mrs. Clinton, who is expected to seek
the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.

“The effort to turn the Benghazi tragedy into a political scandal never had
a factual basis,” said David Brock, founder of Correct the Record, a group
that defends Mrs. Clinton in the news media, and author of the e-book “The
Benghazi Hoax.”

“The Republican committee report should close the case,” he added. “If the
scandal persists into 2016, it will only be for partisan reasons.”

While the report backed up many of the administration’s longstanding claims
that its response was proper, it agreed with the other reports that
criticized the State Department for having inadequate security at the
compound where the ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, was killed.

“The State Department security personnel, resources and equipment were
unable to counter the terrorist threat that day and required C.I.A.
assistance,” it said.

The panel’s findings reflected well on the intelligence apparatus,
particularly the Central Intelligence Agency. The agency “ensured
sufficient security” for its facilities in Benghazi and “without a
requirement to do so, ably and bravely assisted the State Department on the
night of the attacks,” according to the report.

“Their actions saved lives,” the report said.

The report said the C.I.A. did not have an “intelligence failure” in the
months before the attacks. In fact, the report said, the agency had
increased its security because of intelligence reports showing that attacks
had intensified in the area.

In the course of the investigation, the committee reviewed thousands of
pages of intelligence assessments, cables, emails and other documents, and
it interviewed many senior intelligence officials and people who were on
the ground during the attacks — including eight security personnel who
responded to them, it said.

Republican lawmakers have said that the administration, fearing political
fallout from the attacks — which occurred on Sept. 11, 2012, less than two
months before the presidential elections — tried to mislead the public.

In particular, the Republicans have said that Susan E. Rice, who was the
ambassador to the United Nations at the time, lied on several Sunday
television talk shows when she said the attacks were set off by a protest
over an anti-Muslim video. They claimed that she glossed over whether the
fatalities were the result of “terrorist” attacks by Al Qaeda because that
would have undermined the administration’s narrative that it had all but
defeated the group.

The panel found that in the days after the attacks, there was contradictory
intelligence about what precipitated them and who was behind them.
Ultimately, Ms. Rice’s assertions were wrong, the committee said, but there
was no evidence that the administration was attempting to misconstrue the
facts.

Even today, the report said, the government is still uncertain about much
of what happened that day.

“Much of the early intelligence was conflicting, and two years later,
intelligence gaps remain,” the report said. A mix of individuals,
“including those affiliated” with Al Qaeda, participated in the attacks, it
said, adding, however, that “the intelligence was and remains conflicting
about the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers.”

A man accused of being the ringleader of the attackers was apprehended in a
raid by American commandos in Benghazi in June, and will likely go on trial
in Washington next year on murder charges.

The report also debunked a few accusations against the C.I.A. It said that
the agency had not intimidated or prevented “any officer from speaking to
Congress or otherwise telling their story.” It also said that the agency
had not administered “any unusual polygraph exams” to officers about their
assignment in Benghazi. And it said that the C.I.A. was not collecting arms
in Libya and sending them to rebel groups in Syria.

*AP: House intel panel debunks many Benghazi theories*
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ecc3a300383445d5a90dd6ca764c9e15/house-intel-panel-debunks-many-benghazi-theories>

By KEN DILANIAN
Nov. 21, 2014 5:22 PM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled
House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted
properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in
Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration
appointees.

Debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies,
the investigation of the politically charged incident determined that there
was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a CIA rescue team, no
missed opportunity for a military rescue, and no evidence the CIA was
covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria.

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it
out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then
U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the
attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest.
But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the
wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or
any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled
the American people.

The House Intelligence Committee report was released with little fanfare on
the Friday before Thanksgiving week. Many of its findings echo those of six
previous investigations by various congressional committees and a State
Department panel. The eighth Benghazi investigation is being carried out by
a House Select Committee appointed in May.

The attacks in Benghazi killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, foreign
service officer Sean Smith, and two CIA contractors, Tyrone S. Woods and
Glen Doherty. A Libyan extremist, Ahmed Abu Khatalla, is facing trial on
murder charges after he was captured in Libya and taken to the U.S.

In the aftermath of the attacks, Republicans criticized the Obama
administration and its then-secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who
is expected to run for president in 2016. People in and out of government
have alleged that a CIA response team was ordered to "stand down" after the
State Department compound came under attack, that a military rescue was
nixed, that officials intentionally downplayed the role of al-Qaida figures
in the attack, and that Stevens and the CIA were involved in a secret
operation to spirit weapons out of Libya and into the hands of Syrian
rebels. None of that is true, according to the House Intelligence Committee
report.

The report did find, however, that the State Department facility where
Stevens and Smith were killed was not well-protected, and that State
Department security agents knew they could not defend it from a well-armed
attack. Previous reports have found that requests for security improvements
were not acted upon in Washington.

"We spent thousands of hours asking questions, poring over documents,
reviewing intelligence assessments, reading cables and emails, and held a
total of 20 committee events and hearings," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.,
the committee's chairman, and Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland,
the ranking Democrat, in a joint statement.

"We conducted detailed interviews with senior intelligence officials from
Benghazi and Tripoli as well as eight security personnel on the ground in
Benghazi that night. Based on the testimony and the documents we reviewed,
we concluded that all the CIA officers in Benghazi were heroes. Their
actions saved lives," they said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who serves on the intelligence
panel and the Benghazi select committee, said, "It's my hope that this
report will put to rest many of the questions that have been asked and
answered yet again, and that the Benghazi Select Committee will accept
these findings and instead focus its attention on the State Department's
progress in securing our facilities around the world and standing up our
fast response capabilities."

Some of the harshest charges have been leveled at Rice, now Obama's
national security adviser, who represented the Obama administration on
Sunday talk shows the weekend after the attack. Rice repeated talking
points that wrongly described a protest over a video deemed offensive to
Muslims.

But Rice's comments were based on faulty intelligence from multiple
agencies, according to the report. Analysts received 21 reports that a
protest occurred in Benghazi, the report said —14 from the Open Source
Center, which reviews news reports; one from the CIA; two from the Defense
Department; and four from the National Security Agency.

In the years since, some participants in the attack have said they were
motivated by the video. The attackers were a mix of extremists and hangers
on, the investigation found.

"To this day," the report said, "significant intelligence gaps regarding
the identities, affiliations and motivations of the attackers remain."

*American Bridge 21st Century: House Intel Panel Quietly Releases Benghazi
Report That Clears Obama Administration of Wrongdoing Yet Again
<http://benghazicommittee.com/house-intel-panel-quietly-releases-benghazi-report-that-clears-obama-administration-of-wrongdoing-yet-again/>*

The Republican-led House Intelligence Committee’s two-year investigation
into Benghazi is the seventh major probe into the attacks to clear the
Obama Administration of wrongdoing. The Committee, chaired by Congressman
Mike Rogers (R-MI), debunked long-held GOP claims on the attacks.

According to the Associated Press, “many of [the report’s] findings echo
those of six previous investigations by various congressional committees
and a state department panel.” These latest findings come as the ongoing
Benghazi House Select Committee -  the eighth investigation into the
attacks - costs taxpayers $3.3 million.

Adam Schiff (D-CA), who serves on both the House Intelligence and Benghazi
Select Committees, stated, “It's my hope that this report will put to rest
many of the questions that have been asked and answered yet again, and that
the Benghazi select committee will accept these findings.”

The *report*, released Friday, found:

· There was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama Administration in the
aftermath of the Benghazi attack.

· There was no intelligence failure before the attack.

· No stand-down order was issued and no military assets were withheld.

The $3.3 million Benghazi House Select Committee is expected to meet during
the lame-duck session this fall, but what is left to investigate? Even
Republicans are calling for an end to their party’s witch-huntOn NBC’s *Meet
the Press*, GOP Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) stated, “we ought to move beyond”
Benghazi.

*Seventh Major Benghazi Probe Finds No “Wrongdoing” By Obama Administration*

*House Intelligence Committee Report Concluded After Two Years Of Committee
Investigation There Was “No Wrongdoing By Obama Administration Appointees”
In The 2012 Benghazi Attack . *According to the Associated Press, “A
two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence
Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in
responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi,
Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.”
[Associated Press, *11/21/14*]

*House Intelligence Report: “Appropriate U.S. Personnel Made Reasonable
Tactical Decisions That Night, And The Committee Found No Evidence That
There Was Either A Stand Down Order Or A Denial Of Available Air
Support.”* According
to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
“Appropriate U.S. personnel made reasonable tactical decisions that night,
and the Committee found no evidence that there was either a stand down
order or a denial of available air support.” [U.S. House Intelligence
Permanent Select Committee Report, *11/21/14*]

*House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Finds That There Was No
Intelligence Failure Prior To The Attacks” In Benghazi. *According to a
report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he
Committee finds that there was no intelligence failure prior to the
attacks. In the months prior, the IC provided intelligence about previous
attacks and the increased threat environment in Benghazi, but the IC did
not have specific, tactical warning of theSeptember 11 attacks.” [U.S.
House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, *11/21/14*]

*House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Found Intelligence To Support
CIA’s Initial Assessment That The Attacks Had Evolved Out Of A Protest In
Benghazi.”* According to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee concludes that after the attacks, the
early intelligence assessments and the Administration’s initial public
narrative on the causes and motivations for the attacks were not fully
accurate. There was a stream of contradictory and conflicting intelligence
that came in after the attacks. The Committee found intelligence to support
CIA’s initial assessment that the attacks had evolved out of a protest in
Benghazi; but it also found contrary intelligence, which ultimately proved
to be the correct intelligence. There was no protest.” [U.S. House
Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report, *11/21/14*]

*House Intelligence Report: “The CIA Only Changed Its Initial Assessment
About A Protest…* *Two Days After Ambassador Susan Rice Spoke.”* According
to a report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “The
CIA only changed its initial assessment about a protest on September 24,
2012, when closed caption television footage became available on September
18, 2012 (two days after Ambassador Susan Rice spoke), and after the FBI
began publishing its interviews with U.S. officials on the ground on
September 22, 2012.” [U.S. House Intelligence Permanent Select Committee
Report, *11/21/14*]

*House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Finds That The Intelligence Was
And Remains Conflicting About The Identities, Affiliations, And Motivations
Of The Attackers.” *According to a report from the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee finds that a mixed group of
individuals, including those affiliated with Al-Qa’ida, participated in the
attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, although the Committee finds that
the intelligence was and remains conflicting about the identities,
affiliations, and motivations of the attackers.”  [U.S. House Intelligence
Permanent Select Committee Report, *11/21/14*]

*House Intelligence Report: “The Committee Finds That The Process Used To
Generate The Talking Points…Was Flawed.” *According to a report from the
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, “[T]he Committee finds
that the process used to generate the talking points HPSCI [House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence] asked for—and which were used for
Ambassador Rice’s public appearances—was flawed. HPSCI asked for the
talking points solely to aid Members’ ability to communicate publicly using
the best available intelligence at the time, and mistakes were made in the
process of how those talking points were developed.” [U.S. House
Intelligence Permanent Select Committee Report,*11/21/14*]

*“Many” Of The House Intelligence Report’s Findings “Echo Those Of Six
Previous Investigations By Various Congressional Committees And A State
Department Panel.” *According to the Associated Press, “The House
Intelligence Committee report was released with little fanfare on
the Friday before Thanksgiving week. Many of its findings echo those of six
previous investigations by various congressional committees and a State
Department panel. The eighth Benghazi investigation is being carried out by
a House Select Committee appointed in May.” [Associated Press,*11/21/14*]

*Report’s Implications On Benghazi Select Committee*

*Republican Senator Jeff Flake: “With Regard To Other Things That Were
Addressed By This Report…We Ought To Move Beyond” Benghazi. *According to
the Huffington Post, “Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) thinks it's probably time
for Republicans to drop their fixation on Benghazi. […] Flake said on
Sunday that he thought Republicans needed to move on from the Benghazi
issue. ‘I always thought the biggest problem with Benghazi is how it was
cast by the administration, and the remarks of Susan Rice just really flew
in the face of what we knew was going on,’ he said. ‘But with regard to
other things that were addressed by this report, yes, I've thought that for
a long time we ought to move beyond that.’” [Huffington Post, *12/23/14*]

*Benghazi Select Committee Leader Trey Gowdy: House Intelligence Report
“Will Aid The Select Committee’s Comprehensive Investigation To Determine
The Full Facts Of What Happened In Benghazi.” *According to The New York
Times, “Mr. [Trey] Gowdy, in a written statement, said that his committee
had reviewed the latest findings along with the other reports. ‘It will aid
the select committee’s comprehensive investigation to determine the full
facts of what happened in Benghazi, Libya before, during and after the
attack and contribute toward our final, definitive accounting of the attack
on behalf of Congress,’ he said.” [New York Times, *11/22/14*]

*House Intelligence And Benghazi Select Committee Member Adam Schiff: “It's
My Hope That This Report Will Put To Rest Many Of The Questions That Have
Been Asked And Answered Yet Again, And That The Benghazi Select Committee
Will Accept These Findings.” *According to the Associated Press, “Rep. Adam
Schiff, a California Democrat who serves on the intelligence panel and the
Benghazi select committee, said, ‘It's my hope that this report will put to
rest many of the questions that have been asked and answered yet again, and
that the Benghazi Select Committee will accept these findings and instead
focus its attention on the State Department's progress in securing our
facilities around the world and standing up our fast response
capabilities.’” [Associated Press, *11/21/14*]

*FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: MMFA: Fox News Sunday Ignored
Congressional Report Debunking Benghazi Myths *

By Oliver Willis

November 23, 2014, 5:02 p.m. EST

Fox News Sunday ignored a new report from the GOP-led House Intelligence
Committee that debunked many of the myths that Fox News has spent the last
two years promoting.

On November 21, the Republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence released its reporton the September 2012 attacks on two U.S.
facilities in Benghazi, Libya. Similar to the many preceding investigations
into the attacks -- including the Accountability Review Board and the
bipartisan U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- the report found
that no stand down order was issued during the attacks, there was no
intelligence failure leading up to the attack, and that the talking points
the administration used in the days following the attacks were based on the
CIA's best assessment at the time.

The November 23 edition of Fox News Sunday did not inform viewers of the
report's findings. This stands in stark contrast to Fox's longstanding
campaign to promote myths about the attacks.

Fox has been a tireless promoter of nearly every facet of the Benghazi
hoax. In the 20 months following the attacks, Fox ran over 1,100 segments
on Benghazi and hosted Republicans at a rate of 30:1 over Democrats to
discuss the issue. Meanwhile, the network has routinely ignored and
downplayed evidence refuting its conspiracy theories.

CNN media critic Brian Stelter noted that other Fox programs only provided
cursory coverage of the report on the night of its release and that Fox
never mentioned it the following day. According to Stelter (emphasis added):

STELTER: Boy, has Fox News spent a lot of time over the past two years
focused on the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, and I mean a lot
of time. [...] But when a new Benghazi report came out on Friday, there was
hardly a peep, and maybe that's because the report, which was Republican
led, it was by the House Intelligence committee, debunks many of the myths
that have run rampant on Fox News and in conservative media circles. [...]
So I have to wonder: will Fox will stop aggressively pushing its theories
about Benghazi? Probably not. With its audience largely in the dark about
the latest findings, the myths may, and perhaps will, live on.

On the November 23 edition of Fox News' own MediaBuzz, host Howard Kurtz
noted that it only received "brief" coverage on Fox and that the results of
the two-year long investigation "deserved more coverage from all news
outlets."

*FROM MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: Media Matters for America: “Media Lessons
From The Benghazi Charade”*

By Eric Boehlert

November 24, 2014

[Subtitle:] For Fox News, It's Six Strikes And You're Out

The calling cards of anger and denial have been on display since Friday
afternoon when the House Intelligence Committee, led by Republican Rep.
Mike Rogers, released the findings of its two-year investigation into the
2012 terror attack in Benghazi. Becoming the sixth government inquiry to
come to a similar conclusion, the report found nothing to support the
allegations behind Fox News' ongoing Benghazi witch-hunt. And that's where
the anger and denial came in.

Appearing on CNN, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has staked his
professional reputation on the endless claim of an elaborate White House
cover-up, flashed irritation when he denounced the House report as being
"full of crap."

Meanwhile, Fox News contributor Stephen Hayes did his best to deflate the
supposedly "deeply flawed" Republican report:

*Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes *@stephenfhayes: I'd caution against
reaching firm conclusions based on the #Benghazi report issued by the House
Intel cmte. It's deeply flawed. [11/21/14, *7:57 p.m. EST*]

For Benghazi conspiracy disciples, unanswered questions always remain as
long as devotees say so, and as long as the answers provided by government
(and Republican-led investigations) don't match up their conspiracy
narrative. But apparently if the seventh investigation finds wrongdoing on
the part of the administration, that's the one that will really matter?

Sorry Fox News, but six strikes and you're out.

Still, Benghazi Truthers, like Joel Pollak at Breitbart, soldiered on,
claiming the exhaustive House report was no big deal [emphasis added]:

“The House committee, chaired by Republican Mike Rogers (R-MI), found that
there was no intelligence failure leading up to the attack, and that the
CIA and military personnel present did the best they could. The crucial new
finding is that there was no ‘stand down’ order, as some there have
claimed, and that no further military resources were available.”

The three points Pollack mentioned that were debunked by the House report
represented almost the entire basis of the "scandal" crusade. They were
easily the inspiration for hundreds of Fox News programming hours over the
last two years, and likely thousands of hours of talk radio attacks on
Obama, Hillary Clinton and anyone connected to the administration. (Note
that Fox aired 100 segments on the "stand down" allegation alone during its
evening programs in the 20 months following the attack.)

While Breitbart and other right-wing media players gallantly tried to play
defense (it's just a flesh wound), Fox News simply went into denial as the
cable news channel essentially turned a blind eye to the story: Fox
News Sunday completely ignored the topic. But it wasn't just Fox
News Sunday. CBS' Face The Nation and ABC's This Week also ignored news
about the latest Benghazi debunking; a Republican debunking no less.

There was something fitting about those two omissions, considering CBS and
ABC likely suffered the two worst Benghazi-related black eyes within the
mainstream media when their reporters, Lara Logan and Jonathan Karl
respectively, flew too close to the far-right flame and got very badly
burned. (Note to reporters: When your sources have to make stuff up about
Benghazi, it's a pretty good indication the 'scandal' is lacking.)

And don't forget how Logan played ball with at least one vociferous
Benghazi critic behind the scenes while putting her fatally flawed 60
Minutes report together. According to a May report in New York magazine,
Logan met with Sen. Graham, who helped shape the Benghazi story. Then when
the 60 Minutes segment aired he immediately cheered it on, calling it a
"death blow" to the White House and announced he'd block every White House
appointee until he got more answers about Benghazi.

In other words, the Benghazi lessons to be learned here aren't only for Fox
News. Media Matters has spent the better part of two years detailing how
Beltway reporters, producers and pundits who should've known better have
played along with the contrived conspiracy talking points about the
Democratic president and a far-reaching cover-up. (Is Benghazi to Obama
what Whitewater was to Bill Clinton?)

There's clearly been plenty of Pavolivan behavior on display here:
Republicans ring the Benghazi "scandal" bell and the press presents is as
news. For two years. (See here, here, here, here and here for National
Journal columnist Ron Fournier's contribution to the bogus genre.)

For instance, just last spring major Beltway news outlets appeared to be in
complete agreement that Benghazi represented a major hurdle in Hillary
Clinton's path to the White House, should she choose to pursue the
Democratic nomination. The story was "quickly growing into a potentially
devastating target of opportunity for the GOP," reported the Christian
Science Monitor, while The National Journal claimed Benghazi represented
"perhaps the biggest thing" she'll have to combat on the campaign trail. By
playing along with the flimsy premise, the press simply bolstered the
Republican goal of portraying Benghazi as a pending Democratic doomsday.
(ABC News: "Scandal City.")

The media's proof for that sweeping claim about Benghazi possibly dooming
Hillary? There was none. But Republican sources were saying it was true, so
too many journalists typed it up as analysis.

As for Benghazi conspiracy theorists backing down? Not likely. Recall this
Associated Press report from July 10:

“The testimony of nine military officers undermines contentions by
Republican lawmakers that a ‘stand-down order’ held back military assets
that could have saved the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans killed
at a diplomatic outpost and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya.”

Even after nine U.S. military officers debunked and denied the "stand down"
claim under oath, it wasn't enough to move Fox off its talking point.

Keep in mind that over the last two years Fox News has claimed Obama never
called the Benghazi attack an act of terror, that former CIA director David
Petraeus was forced to resign because of Benghazi, and that the White House
had demanded changes in the original Benghazi talking points. They've
insisted Obama watched Americans die in real time on September 11, 2012 and
refused to send help. That so-called whistleblowers have been blocked from
testifying, along with Benghazi survivors. Also, that Hillary Clinton faked
a concussion in order to avoid testifying about the terror attack. (That
last claim is all you really need to know about the Benghazi charade.)

Why the endless obsession?

Two years ago I highlighted an unhinged Benghazi column from a Boston
Herald conservative, published on the eve of the presidential election that
seemed to perfectly capture the larger-than-life meaning of Benghazi within
the Obama-hating community. According to the conservative writer, Benghazi
confirmed that Obama is "cowardly," "dishonest" and that he lacks
"integrity" as well as "competence." Plus, he supposedly has a "reflexive
impulse to blame, rather than defend, America."

The point is, die-hard Obama haters are always going to say those things
about the president. Benghazi simply gave them a useful framework: He's the
Manchurian Candidate who let Americans die in Benghazi and "sacrificed
American lives for politics."

Benghazi conspiracies have come to represent a vile and ugly chapter in
American politics. It's a chapter built upon hypocrisy and cynical Fox News
ethics. Journalists should keep that in mind the next time the right-wing
media launch a hollow "cover-up" crusade against a Democrat.