Benghazi Blackout: How the Big Three Networks Have Censored or Spun Obama's Deadly Foreign Policy Failure
Table of Contents:
- Executive Summary
- Hillary's 'What Difference at This Point Does It Make?' Hearing Performance Praised
- Panetta Testimony Reveals Obama Was Disengaged During Benghazi, ABC Ignores
- Blistering House Report Places Blame for Benghazi on Obama and Clinton, NBC and ABC Ignore
- Whistleblower: Special Forces Could’ve Responded to Benghazi Attack, Networks Bypass
- Benghazi Whistleblowers Being Threatened, Networks Refuse to Report
- Gregory Hicks Testimony Exposes Obama Administration Cover-Up, Networks Grant Story Only Five Days of Coverage
- E-Mails Prove Obama Administration Scrubbed CIA Talking Points on Benghazi, Networks Report Then Quickly Move On
- Obama Picks Benghazi Scandal Figure Susan Rice to Be National Security Adviser, Networks Yawn
- ABC, CBS and NBC Ignore More Reports about Benghazi Witness Intimidation
- State Department Employees Disciplined Over Benghazi Go Back to Work, Only CBS Reports
- Benghazi Investigative Team Being Pulled Out, Networks Don’t Notice
- Book Claims State Department Was Told Benghazi was a ‘Terrorist Attack’ Minutes After It Started, Only CBS Reports
Wednesday marks the one year anniversary of the 2012 attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead, and sent the Obama administration scrambling for a cover story that the Big Three broadcast networks initially bought and were slow to unravel.
A similar pattern has emerged in 2013. As new information about the administration’s actions before and after the attacks have been revealed through congressional testimony, whistleblowers, and eyewitnesses, the Big Three have responded by censoring, breezing past or spinning politically damaging bombshells.
The following are just some of the findings of this report:
■ Testifying before Congress on January 23 Hillary Clinton dodged questions about her State Department’s bungling of Benghazi. Network anchors toasted the outgoing Secretary of State anyway. ABC’s Diane Sawyer called it “a valedictory that showed her indignation,” while NBC’s Brian Williams took the occasion to congratulate the potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate “as the most admired woman in the world in the Gallup poll, for the 11th year in a row.”
■ On February 7 former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified that Barack Obama was disengaged on the night of the Benghazi attack. Total Big Three Network stories on this stunning admission? Only two. (CBS 1 story, NBC 1 story, ABC 0)
■ On April 29 Fox News aired bombshell testimony from an eyewitness that claimed U.S. special forces could have responded in time to the Benghazi attack. Total Big Three Network stories? 0.
■ On the April 29 edition of FNC's Special Report with Bret Baier, chief Washington correspondent James Rosen reported that Benghazi whistleblowers were being intimidated by the Obama administration. Total Big Three Network stories? 0.
■ The networks finally seemed to get interested in Benghazi when whistleblower Gregory Hicks, the #2 U.S. diplomat in Libya at the time of the attack, appeared before Congress in early May. In testimony the networks began previewing on May 5, Hicks made it clear that it was nonsense for the Obama administration to blame a YouTube video for the carefully coordinated attack by heavily armed al-Qaeda terrorists. That same week, the networks disclosed e-mails proving the administration had scrubbed the false “talking points” in the days after the attack. But by May 18, the networks had essentially dropped the story — again.
■ On July 18 Republican Congressman Frank Wolf went to the House floor to claim survivors of the Benghazi attack, State Department and CIA employees were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements. Total Big Three Network stories? 0.
The degree to which the Big Three networks have censored, briefly noted or spun the ongoing revelations about how the Obama administration blundered its handling of the Benghazi attack reveals how far they will go to insulate this White House from its own self-inflicted scandals. It must be asked, if new reports of a disengaged president during a terrorist attack, whistleblowers exposing a cover-up, and witnesses being intimidated have not been enough to drive the Big Three networks into wall-to-wall coverage, what will?