The Media Was Duped EASILY & PURPOSELY Over & Over By The Benghazi Committee's "BOGUS SCOOPS"

[kpete]

Eichenwald points out that the media have been routinely duped by the committee's "bogus 'scoops.'" In fact, the media play a crucial role in the committee's partisan efforts to target Clinton.As Eichenwald puts it, "the modern McCarthys of the Benghazi committee cannot perform this political theater on their own -- they depend on reporters to aid in the attempts to use government for the purpose of destroying others with bogus 'scoops' ladled out by members of Congress and their staffs":

But, as they have time and again, the Republicans on the Benghazi committee released deceitful information for what was undoubtedly part of a campaign--as Kevin McCarthy of the House Republican leadership has admitted--to drive down Clinton's poll numbers.

...........

The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don't fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government--one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment--has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party's leading candidate for president. Comparisons from America's past are rare. Richard Nixon's attempts to use the IRS to investigate his perceived enemies come to mind. So does Senator Joseph McCarthy's red-baiting during the 1950s, with reckless accusations of treason leveled at members of the State Department, military generals and even the secretary of the Army. But the modern McCarthys of the Benghazi committee cannot perform this political theater on their own--they depend on reporters to aid in the attempts to use government for the purpose of destroying others with bogus "scoops" ladled out by members of Congress and their staffs. These journalists will almost certainly join the legions of shamed reporters of the McCarthy era as it becomes increasingly clear they are enablers of an obscene attempt to undermine the electoral process.

...............

Unlike almost every congressional committee investigation in history, the (Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy) has insisted that much of the relevant questioning be conducted behind closed doors.

...........


The other reason to keep the testimony secret has rapidly become clear: so that they can selectively--and often incorrectly--portray to reporters what was said in the statements.


..........

Other false stories repeatedly found their way into the press. There was the "criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton" article that appeared in The New York Times; once the story was knocked down, the Times sheepishly acknowledged its sources included officials from Congress. (The "Clinton is under criminal investigation" story has continued; she's not.) The Daily Beast falsely reported that Blumenthal testified he was in Libya on the day of the Benghazi attack.

http://www.newsweek.com/benghazi-biopsy-comprehensive-guide-one-americas-worst-political-outrages-385853
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/10/22/newsweeks-kurt-eichenwald-calls-out-media-for-e/206350

[Fred Sanders]

1. The media is now reporting that, they, the media, were duped?

Then how about NOT being duped by the EGazhi and PP smears?? It is the same guys doing the duping!!

Duped...or co-conspirators?

[Bradical79]

12. Probably both

While I have no doubt that various media conglomerates have no problem pushing a narrative for their political allies, I feel like the current climate and standards of journalism in the internet age make any kind of conspiracy unnecesary in a lot of cases.

[leveymg]

2. Your excerpt doesn't give a single, solid example of that "duped." Talk about McCarthyism . . . n/t

[joeybee12]

9. the NY times article

Did you miss that?

[leveymg]

10. Quite the contrary. The matter was referred to the FBI by the IG of the Intel Community after the

IC found "presumed classified" information on Hillery's servers. Technically, that was prima facie evidence of a felony violation of 18 USC Sec. 793, mishandling of classified materials. Only after that was leaked to the NYT did the FBI "clarify" the initial report to say that the Bureau was treating it as an investigation of whether the server had been hacked. The Times was forced to retract the initial report.

The content of the emails was later confirmed to contain presumed classified information, including 17 instances of messages sent by HRC to others.

The original NYT story was, in fact. validated when others found presumed classified materials on the server, which under the 2009 Executive Order 13526, is expressly treated as a threat to national security, and thus falls under mishandling of classified materials laws. Of course, when Obama stated his opinion on 60 Minutes that it didn't -- and since any decision to seek a Grand Jury indictment is a political decision made by the AG -- there is unlikely to be an indictment despite prima facie evidence that HRC committed a felony act that others have gone to prison for.

I can provide cites, links, and reports that confirm all this. Just in case you missed them

[Historic NY]

3. Kurt Eichenwald has been out in front on this investigations from the beginning...

he has called them out or debunked many of the things they (committee) leaked in an effort to drive their message. He maintained a huge presence on twitter, calling them out left and right.

[spanone]

4. duped, my ass. complicit.

[OregonBlue]

5. Yes. Complicit. All the crap they have published that was lies. They only had to talk to Cummins

and his staff to debunk the trash but it was too juicy and juicy sells advertising. They are all yellow rags these days. Even the NYT. Sad.

[malaise]

7. Same shite with Planned Parenthood

That one is even worse.
M$Greedia is playing both sides for some of the Citizens United money.
The vast majority of them are corporate scumbags or their tools/hacks.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Duped?

There was a time when newspapers made it their business to double-check the intention of Congressional hearings.

[mhatrw]

8. Benghazi = CIA blowback

The State Department covered for the CIA. Everybody involved knows this. It's a complete non-issue. It's utterly meaningless. That's why our oligarchs, their water carriers, and the corporate media love to drone on and on and on about it. We can root for our opposing teams to score "points" as if we were watching a sporting event while they keep rigging the game in their favor without our so much as noticing.

[leveymg]

11. Both Petraeus and HRC were the prime movers of the serial regime change operations in Libya & Syria

Within the NSC, these two agencies were activists in favor of the policy of working with Qatar and Turkey moving arms and Jihadis from Libya to Syria. That fact has been widely reported. Hillary did not just go along with it to cover CIA's ass, as you put it.

The manifold failures of this policy are an issue, for those of us who care about the outcomes.

[mhatrw]

13. Yes. There are a lot of legitimate questions about this policy that should be asked.

The Republican charade is asking none of the real questions. That is why the corporate media loves it so much!

Distraction engaged! Partisan and personality politics only!

[librechik]

14. duped? Like they didn't know they were being used to tell lies to hurt Hillary?