http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/22/nbcs-david-gregory-falls-silent-in-the-face-of/199834
NBC's David Gregory pointed a series of questions about Hillary Clinton's role in the 2012 Benghazi attacks to Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), allowing Paul to attack Clinton with the long-debunked smear that she was aware of the need for additional security forces at the Benghazi compound yet denied the requests.
On the June 22 edition of NBC's Meet The Press, host David Gregory posed a series of questions on Hillary Clinton's role in the 2012 attacks on diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, but failed to correct Sen. Paul's false smears that Clinton refused requested security. While discussing the possibility of Clinton running for president in 2016, Gregory asked Sen. Paul about whether "the prosecution of foreign policy," is "the main argument" against Clinton's candidacy. In his response, Paul invoked the debunked myth that Hillary Clinton refused "multiple requests for more security" in the months leading up the attacks.
this is what I meant when I wrote about some at NBC and MSNBC were acting like illegitimate cousins of Fox and Friends, they throw cotton ball questions than let the guest mislead without any challenge or correction they are doing us the viewer a disservice and allowing us to walk away with misinformation, some believing it because the host allowed it silence is confirmation in that venue. he dishonors the history of that show.
Later in the interview, Gregory asked whether Benghazi is "disqualifying" for Clinton's potential 2016 candidacy, again allowing Sen. Paul to claim that Clinton "was not responsive to multiple requests for more security." Paul concluded that the American people "want a commander in chief that will send reinforcements, that will defend the country, and that will provide the adequate security," implying for a third time that Clinton refused security she knew was necessary to the Benghazi compound:
But Sen. Paul's smear is based on an old, discredited right-wing media attempt to blame Hillary Clinton for the deaths of U.S. personnel in the Benghazi attacks that originated with an April 2013 Republican Report. The report claimed that an April 2012 cable, sent under Clinton's name, was a "critical cable" that called for reductions in security in response to to the U.S. ambassador's request for additional security resources. The report's evidence that the cable came from Clinton was that it bore her signature, though as Media Matters noted at the time, "several news outlets reported that it is routine for outgoing messages from the State Department to be sent under the secretary's name without the secretary's direct involvement."
Sen. Paul's claims have been discredited for quite some time -- Clinton's signature was standard for every cable, and does not indicate her direct involvement in the cable. As Foreign Policy magazine pointed out:
It's not clear who in the State Department sent the April 19 response. But as a general rule, "every single cable sent from Washington to the field is sent over the secretary of state's name," a former State Department official noted, adding, "Though they are trying to make this new, it's not. After 30+ hearings and briefings, thousands of pages, this has all been addressed."
In September, House Democrats corrected the Republican report, explaining, "The Committee has now obtained the cable referenced by Chairman Issa, and it includes a pro forma line with former Secretary Clinton's name, similar to millions of other cables sent from the State Department."
Washington Post
fact-checker Glenn Kessler, who spent nine years covering the State Department, wrote that "every cable from an embassy bears the 'signature' of the ambassador -- and every cable from Washington bears the 'signature' of the secretary of state," concluding that "Issa has no basis or evidence to show that Clinton had anything to do with this cable -- any more than she personally approved a cable on proper e-mail etiquette. The odds are extremely long that Clinton ever saw or approved this memo."
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/10/985191/chaffetz-absolutely-funding-embassy-security/
why in all the time they have been trying to pin their tale of Benghazi on the donkeys wasting millions in taxpayer money to pursue a line they knew was incomplete and could never be satisfied when they left the key piece of info out was that it was their fault not Hilary's. this info left out like it never happened the conspiracy to deceive with the entire republican org. knowing it but allowing it to remain buried, who helped push this misinfo Fox that's who. this whole thing is tantamount to getting the hogs to find out who ate the slop.
